Patient-reported outcomes versus proxy-reported outcomes in supportive and palliative care: a summary of recent literature.

IF 16.4 1区化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-06 DOI:10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644

Eva Oldenburger, Julie Devlies, Dylan Callens, Maaike L De Roo

{"title":"Patient-reported outcomes versus proxy-reported outcomes in supportive and palliative care: a summary of recent literature.","authors":"Eva Oldenburger, Julie Devlies, Dylan Callens, Maaike L De Roo","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose of the review: Patient-reported outcomes are one of the most valuable clinical outcome measures. In palliative care, however, they are often difficult to retrieve. Therefore, proxy-reported outcomes are sometimes used as a surrogate. As there have been concerns about the validity of these by-proxy reports, the authors reviewed the most recent literature for the most recent insights in using proxy-reported outcomes.Recent findings: The authors found very little new research on patient versus proxy-reported outcomes in palliative care. The results of the studies the authors found seem to correlate with older evidence concluding that there are many factors influencing a discrepancy between patients' outcomes and how this is perceived by their proxies, such as the well-being paradox, caregiver burden, and the proxies' own mental well-being.Summary: While proxies' opinions and knowledge of the patients' values are important factors to consider, proxy-reported outcomes should be used with caution and viewed as a complementary perspective rather than a true substitute for the individual patient's outcome.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose of the review: Patient-reported outcomes are one of the most valuable clinical outcome measures. In palliative care, however, they are often difficult to retrieve. Therefore, proxy-reported outcomes are sometimes used as a surrogate. As there have been concerns about the validity of these by-proxy reports, the authors reviewed the most recent literature for the most recent insights in using proxy-reported outcomes.

Recent findings: The authors found very little new research on patient versus proxy-reported outcomes in palliative care. The results of the studies the authors found seem to correlate with older evidence concluding that there are many factors influencing a discrepancy between patients' outcomes and how this is perceived by their proxies, such as the well-being paradox, caregiver burden, and the proxies' own mental well-being.

Summary: While proxies' opinions and knowledge of the patients' values are important factors to consider, proxy-reported outcomes should be used with caution and viewed as a complementary perspective rather than a true substitute for the individual patient's outcome.

查看原文本刊更多论文

支持和姑息治疗中患者报告的结果与代理报告的结果：近期文献综述。

综述目的：患者报告的结果是最有价值的临床结果指标之一。然而，在姑息治疗中，它们往往很难恢复。因此，代理报告的结果有时被用作代理。由于人们担心这些代理报告的有效性，作者回顾了最新的文献，以了解使用代理报告结果的最新见解。最近的发现：作者发现很少有关于姑息治疗中患者与代理报告结果的新研究。作者发现的研究结果似乎与旧的证据相关，这些证据得出的结论是，有许多因素会影响患者的结果与其代理人对结果的看法之间的差异，例如幸福悖论、照顾者负担、，以及代理人自身的心理健康状况。总结：虽然代理人的意见和对患者价值观的了解是需要考虑的重要因素，但应谨慎使用代理人报告的结果，并将其视为一种互补的视角，而不是患者个体结果的真正替代品。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合

CiteScore

31.40

自引率

1.10%

发文量

312

审稿时长

2 months

期刊介绍： Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.