患者、临床医生和指南制定者认为,现实世界中患者报告的毒性症状监测对指南和护理的益处和局限性

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY
Cancer Medicine Pub Date : 2025-04-17 DOI:10.1002/cam4.70880
Y. Smit, L. Verweij, A. Currie, J. J. W. M. Janssen, E. F. M. Posthuma, A. Dekker, R. P. M. G. Hermens, N. M. A. Blijlevens
{"title":"患者、临床医生和指南制定者认为,现实世界中患者报告的毒性症状监测对指南和护理的益处和局限性","authors":"Y. Smit,&nbsp;L. Verweij,&nbsp;A. Currie,&nbsp;J. J. W. M. Janssen,&nbsp;E. F. M. Posthuma,&nbsp;A. Dekker,&nbsp;R. P. M. G. Hermens,&nbsp;N. M. A. Blijlevens","doi":"10.1002/cam4.70880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Toxicity monitoring should be modernized to include real-world patient-reported data. However, little is known about how stakeholders view the incorporation of real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms into guidelines. This gap hinders the development of a sustained learning healthcare environment and limits the incorporation of this data into daily care.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This qualitative study, reported according to COREQ, involved interviews with 29 plus 10 chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients and 18 CML clinicians, including eight hematologists/guideline developers. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and independently coded in Atlas.ti. A framework, adapted from systematically sourced literature, was used for coding. Codes were assessed as either beneficial or limiting. An expert panel of all CML guideline developers completed and prioritized the identified knowledge gaps through a RAND-modified Delphi procedure.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-one benefits and limitations of systematically monitoring patient-reported toxicity symptoms in the real world were identified. Compared to an existing framework, novel benefits centered around the use of aggregated data: Participants viewed real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms as a way to systematically include patients' toxicity symptoms in the guidelines; personalize guideline advice; and fill knowledge gaps. The expert panel agreed on 14 knowledge gaps in chronic myeloid leukemia care that could be addressed through such data. Novel limitations focused on the suitability, acceptance, and applicability of toxicity symptom monitoring in routine clinical practice. Participants felt that this monitoring does not establish a causal link between medication and symptoms, and it has no added value over open conversation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The benefits and limitations of adopting patient-reported real-world toxicity symptom monitoring need to be leveraged and addressed to ensure maximum value and uptake. Guideline developers viewed aggregated data as beneficial. The identified knowledge gaps provide concrete points of action for CML guideline development.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":139,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Medicine","volume":"14 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70880","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefits and Limitations of Real-World Patient-Reported Toxicity Symptom Monitoring for Guidelines and Care, as Perceived by Patients, Clinicians, and Guideline Developers\",\"authors\":\"Y. Smit,&nbsp;L. Verweij,&nbsp;A. Currie,&nbsp;J. J. W. M. Janssen,&nbsp;E. F. M. Posthuma,&nbsp;A. Dekker,&nbsp;R. P. M. G. Hermens,&nbsp;N. M. A. Blijlevens\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cam4.70880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Toxicity monitoring should be modernized to include real-world patient-reported data. However, little is known about how stakeholders view the incorporation of real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms into guidelines. This gap hinders the development of a sustained learning healthcare environment and limits the incorporation of this data into daily care.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This qualitative study, reported according to COREQ, involved interviews with 29 plus 10 chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients and 18 CML clinicians, including eight hematologists/guideline developers. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and independently coded in Atlas.ti. A framework, adapted from systematically sourced literature, was used for coding. Codes were assessed as either beneficial or limiting. An expert panel of all CML guideline developers completed and prioritized the identified knowledge gaps through a RAND-modified Delphi procedure.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Thirty-one benefits and limitations of systematically monitoring patient-reported toxicity symptoms in the real world were identified. Compared to an existing framework, novel benefits centered around the use of aggregated data: Participants viewed real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms as a way to systematically include patients' toxicity symptoms in the guidelines; personalize guideline advice; and fill knowledge gaps. The expert panel agreed on 14 knowledge gaps in chronic myeloid leukemia care that could be addressed through such data. Novel limitations focused on the suitability, acceptance, and applicability of toxicity symptom monitoring in routine clinical practice. Participants felt that this monitoring does not establish a causal link between medication and symptoms, and it has no added value over open conversation.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The benefits and limitations of adopting patient-reported real-world toxicity symptom monitoring need to be leveraged and addressed to ensure maximum value and uptake. Guideline developers viewed aggregated data as beneficial. The identified knowledge gaps provide concrete points of action for CML guideline development.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cam4.70880\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70880\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cam4.70880","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景毒性监测应现代化,以包括真实世界患者报告的数据。然而,对于利益相关者如何看待将现实世界患者报告的毒性症状纳入指南,知之甚少。这一差距阻碍了持续学习型医疗保健环境的发展,并限制了将这些数据纳入日常护理。方法本定性研究,根据COREQ报告,涉及采访29 + 10名慢性髓性白血病(CML)患者和18名CML临床医生,包括8名血液学家/指南制定者。采访录音,转录,并在Atlas.ti独立编码。一个框架,改编自系统来源的文献,用于编码。对编码进行了有益或限制的评估。由所有CML指南开发者组成的专家小组通过rand修改的德尔菲程序完成并优先考虑已确定的知识差距。结果在现实世界中,系统监测患者报告的毒性症状的31个好处和局限性被确定。与现有框架相比,新的益处集中在汇总数据的使用上:参与者将真实世界患者报告的毒性症状视为系统地将患者毒性症状纳入指南的一种方式;个性化指导意见;填补知识空白。专家小组就慢性髓性白血病治疗的14个知识缺口达成一致,这些空白可以通过这些数据来解决。新的局限性集中在常规临床实践中毒性症状监测的适用性,接受性和适用性。与会者认为,这种监测并没有建立药物和症状之间的因果关系,也没有比公开谈话更有价值的东西。结论:采用患者报告的真实世界毒性症状监测的益处和局限性需要加以利用和解决,以确保最大的价值和吸收。指南开发者认为汇总数据是有益的。确定的知识差距为CML指南的制定提供了具体的行动点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Benefits and Limitations of Real-World Patient-Reported Toxicity Symptom Monitoring for Guidelines and Care, as Perceived by Patients, Clinicians, and Guideline Developers

Benefits and Limitations of Real-World Patient-Reported Toxicity Symptom Monitoring for Guidelines and Care, as Perceived by Patients, Clinicians, and Guideline Developers

Background

Toxicity monitoring should be modernized to include real-world patient-reported data. However, little is known about how stakeholders view the incorporation of real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms into guidelines. This gap hinders the development of a sustained learning healthcare environment and limits the incorporation of this data into daily care.

Methods

This qualitative study, reported according to COREQ, involved interviews with 29 plus 10 chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients and 18 CML clinicians, including eight hematologists/guideline developers. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and independently coded in Atlas.ti. A framework, adapted from systematically sourced literature, was used for coding. Codes were assessed as either beneficial or limiting. An expert panel of all CML guideline developers completed and prioritized the identified knowledge gaps through a RAND-modified Delphi procedure.

Results

Thirty-one benefits and limitations of systematically monitoring patient-reported toxicity symptoms in the real world were identified. Compared to an existing framework, novel benefits centered around the use of aggregated data: Participants viewed real-world patient-reported toxicity symptoms as a way to systematically include patients' toxicity symptoms in the guidelines; personalize guideline advice; and fill knowledge gaps. The expert panel agreed on 14 knowledge gaps in chronic myeloid leukemia care that could be addressed through such data. Novel limitations focused on the suitability, acceptance, and applicability of toxicity symptom monitoring in routine clinical practice. Participants felt that this monitoring does not establish a causal link between medication and symptoms, and it has no added value over open conversation.

Conclusions

The benefits and limitations of adopting patient-reported real-world toxicity symptom monitoring need to be leveraged and addressed to ensure maximum value and uptake. Guideline developers viewed aggregated data as beneficial. The identified knowledge gaps provide concrete points of action for CML guideline development.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer Medicine
Cancer Medicine ONCOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
907
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Cancer Medicine is a peer-reviewed, open access, interdisciplinary journal providing rapid publication of research from global biomedical researchers across the cancer sciences. The journal will consider submissions from all oncologic specialties, including, but not limited to, the following areas: Clinical Cancer Research Translational research ∙ clinical trials ∙ chemotherapy ∙ radiation therapy ∙ surgical therapy ∙ clinical observations ∙ clinical guidelines ∙ genetic consultation ∙ ethical considerations Cancer Biology: Molecular biology ∙ cellular biology ∙ molecular genetics ∙ genomics ∙ immunology ∙ epigenetics ∙ metabolic studies ∙ proteomics ∙ cytopathology ∙ carcinogenesis ∙ drug discovery and delivery. Cancer Prevention: Behavioral science ∙ psychosocial studies ∙ screening ∙ nutrition ∙ epidemiology and prevention ∙ community outreach. Bioinformatics: Gene expressions profiles ∙ gene regulation networks ∙ genome bioinformatics ∙ pathwayanalysis ∙ prognostic biomarkers. Cancer Medicine publishes original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and research methods papers, along with invited editorials and commentaries. Original research papers must report well-conducted research with conclusions supported by the data presented in the paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信