放疗科临床常规收集患者报告结果的可行性。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Ingrid Fagerström Kristensen, Anton Linnér, Martin Nilsson, Viktor Rogowski, Per Munck Af Rosenschöld, Mats Jerkeman
{"title":"放疗科临床常规收集患者报告结果的可行性。","authors":"Ingrid Fagerström Kristensen, Anton Linnér, Martin Nilsson, Viktor Rogowski, Per Munck Af Rosenschöld, Mats Jerkeman","doi":"10.2340/ao.v65.45546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide valuable real-world data on quality of life (QoL) and treatment tolerability, complementing clinical outcomes. This study evaluated the feasibility of launching a semi-automated, department-wide PROM collection program at a large tertiary radiotherapy centre.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients ≥ 18 years referred for radiotherapy were invited to participate. Exclusion criteria were inability to provide informed consent, severe cognitive conditions, or language barriers. PROMs were collected using a web-based application (\"Blå Appen\") at baseline, end-of-treatment, and follow-up intervals, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire (Version 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period (January 2022 to April 2025), 12,472 patients underwent treatment in the department. A total of 4,764 provided informed consent for study participation, where 3,699 (77.6%) remained after exclusion due to data loss or data inconsistency. Among these, 3,056 patients (82.6%) provided at least one usable PROM questionnaire at baseline. Participants were younger (median age 69 years vs. 71 years). Overall, global health status was relatively high at baseline and remained stable or slightly improved at one-year follow-up. To further investigate clinically significant changes in QoL over time, we evaluated the proportion of patients in each diagnostic category who experienced a change of > 10 points in selected QLQ-C30 scales between baseline and follow-up. Breast cancer patients had the highest rates of meaningful improvement and the lowest rates of major deterioration. In contrast, prostate cancer patients were more prone to significant declines in QoL scales over time.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This prospective study demonstrates that department-wide collection of PROM is feasible. Using a digital platform, we achieved a high initial response rate and successfully engaged patients across a broad range of cancers. The routine PROM collection provided valuable insights into patients' quality of life and symptom burden during and after treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":7110,"journal":{"name":"Acta Oncologica","volume":"65 ","pages":"326-332"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13113208/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility of patient-reported outcomes collection in clinical routine at a radiotherapy department.\",\"authors\":\"Ingrid Fagerström Kristensen, Anton Linnér, Martin Nilsson, Viktor Rogowski, Per Munck Af Rosenschöld, Mats Jerkeman\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/ao.v65.45546\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide valuable real-world data on quality of life (QoL) and treatment tolerability, complementing clinical outcomes. This study evaluated the feasibility of launching a semi-automated, department-wide PROM collection program at a large tertiary radiotherapy centre.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients ≥ 18 years referred for radiotherapy were invited to participate. Exclusion criteria were inability to provide informed consent, severe cognitive conditions, or language barriers. PROMs were collected using a web-based application (\\\"Blå Appen\\\") at baseline, end-of-treatment, and follow-up intervals, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire (Version 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period (January 2022 to April 2025), 12,472 patients underwent treatment in the department. A total of 4,764 provided informed consent for study participation, where 3,699 (77.6%) remained after exclusion due to data loss or data inconsistency. Among these, 3,056 patients (82.6%) provided at least one usable PROM questionnaire at baseline. Participants were younger (median age 69 years vs. 71 years). Overall, global health status was relatively high at baseline and remained stable or slightly improved at one-year follow-up. To further investigate clinically significant changes in QoL over time, we evaluated the proportion of patients in each diagnostic category who experienced a change of > 10 points in selected QLQ-C30 scales between baseline and follow-up. Breast cancer patients had the highest rates of meaningful improvement and the lowest rates of major deterioration. In contrast, prostate cancer patients were more prone to significant declines in QoL scales over time.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This prospective study demonstrates that department-wide collection of PROM is feasible. Using a digital platform, we achieved a high initial response rate and successfully engaged patients across a broad range of cancers. The routine PROM collection provided valuable insights into patients' quality of life and symptom burden during and after treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7110,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Oncologica\",\"volume\":\"65 \",\"pages\":\"326-332\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13113208/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Oncologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/ao.v65.45546\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Oncologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/ao.v65.45546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:常规收集患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)可以提供关于生活质量(QoL)和治疗耐受性的有价值的真实数据,补充临床结果。本研究评估了在大型三级放射治疗中心开展半自动化、全部门PROM收集计划的可行性。患者和方法:入选年龄≥18岁的放疗患者。排除标准为无法提供知情同意、严重认知障碍或语言障碍。在基线、治疗结束和随访期间,使用基于网络的应用程序(“blappen”)收集prom,使用EORTC QLQ-C30问卷(版本3)。结果:研究期间(2022年1月至2025年4月),12472例患者在该科接受治疗。共有4,764人提供了参与研究的知情同意,其中3,699人(77.6%)因数据丢失或数据不一致而被排除。其中,3056例患者(82.6%)在基线时提供了至少一份可用的PROM问卷。参与者更年轻(中位年龄69岁vs. 71岁)。总体而言,全球健康状况在基线时相对较高,在一年随访时保持稳定或略有改善。为了进一步研究生活质量随时间的临床显著变化,我们评估了每个诊断类别中在基线和随访期间选定的QLQ-C30量表中经历bb10分变化的患者的比例。乳腺癌患者有意义的改善率最高,严重恶化率最低。相比之下,随着时间的推移,前列腺癌患者的生活质量量表更容易显著下降。解释:这项前瞻性研究表明,全系收集PROM是可行的。通过使用数字平台,我们取得了很高的初始反应率,并成功地吸引了各种癌症的患者。常规PROM收集提供了宝贵的见解患者的生活质量和症状负担期间和治疗后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feasibility of patient-reported outcomes collection in clinical routine at a radiotherapy department.

Background and purpose: Routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide valuable real-world data on quality of life (QoL) and treatment tolerability, complementing clinical outcomes. This study evaluated the feasibility of launching a semi-automated, department-wide PROM collection program at a large tertiary radiotherapy centre.

Patients and methods: Patients ≥ 18 years referred for radiotherapy were invited to participate. Exclusion criteria were inability to provide informed consent, severe cognitive conditions, or language barriers. PROMs were collected using a web-based application ("Blå Appen") at baseline, end-of-treatment, and follow-up intervals, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire (Version 3).

Results: During the study period (January 2022 to April 2025), 12,472 patients underwent treatment in the department. A total of 4,764 provided informed consent for study participation, where 3,699 (77.6%) remained after exclusion due to data loss or data inconsistency. Among these, 3,056 patients (82.6%) provided at least one usable PROM questionnaire at baseline. Participants were younger (median age 69 years vs. 71 years). Overall, global health status was relatively high at baseline and remained stable or slightly improved at one-year follow-up. To further investigate clinically significant changes in QoL over time, we evaluated the proportion of patients in each diagnostic category who experienced a change of > 10 points in selected QLQ-C30 scales between baseline and follow-up. Breast cancer patients had the highest rates of meaningful improvement and the lowest rates of major deterioration. In contrast, prostate cancer patients were more prone to significant declines in QoL scales over time.

Interpretation: This prospective study demonstrates that department-wide collection of PROM is feasible. Using a digital platform, we achieved a high initial response rate and successfully engaged patients across a broad range of cancers. The routine PROM collection provided valuable insights into patients' quality of life and symptom burden during and after treatment.

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
Acta Oncologica
Acta Oncologica 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
301
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Acta Oncologica is a journal for the clinical oncologist and accepts articles within all fields of clinical cancer research. Articles on tumour pathology, experimental oncology, radiobiology, cancer epidemiology and medical radio physics are also welcome, especially if they have a clinical aim or interest. Scientific articles on cancer nursing and psychological or social aspects of cancer are also welcomed. Extensive material may be published as Supplements, for which special conditions apply.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书