Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 10/2017

Open Access 01-10-2017 | Original Article

A pilot study of patient-centered outcome assessment using PROMIS for patients undergoing colorectal surgery

Authors: Traci L. Hedrick, Amy M. Harrigan, Robert H. Thiele, Charles M. Friel, Benjamin D. Kozower, George J. Stukenborg

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 10/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Few studies have assessed patient-reported outcomes following colorectal surgery. The absence of this information makes it difficult to inform patients about the near-term effects of surgery, beyond outcomes assessed by traditional clinical measures. This study was designed to provide information about the effects of colorectal surgery on physical, mental, and social well-being outcomes.

Methods

The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Assessment Center was used to collect patient responses prior to surgery and at their routine postoperative visit. Four domains were selected based on patient consultation and clinical experience: depression, pain interference, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and interest in sexual activity. Multilevel random coefficient models were used to assess the change in scores during the follow-up period and to assess the statistical significance of differences in trends over time associated with key clinical measures.

Results

In total, 142 patients were consented, with 107 patients completing pre- and postoperative assessments (75%). Preoperative assessments were typically completed 1 month prior to surgery (mean 29.5 days before, SD = 19.7) and postoperative assessments 1 month after surgery (mean 30.7 days after, SD = 9.2), with a mean of 60.3 days between assessment dates. Patients demonstrated no statistically significant changes in scores for pain interference (−0.18 points, p = 0.80) or the ability to participate in social roles and activities (0.44 points, p = 0.55), but had significant decreases in depression scores between pre- and postoperative assessments (−1.6 points, p = 0.03) and near significant increases in scores for interest in sex (1.5 points, p = 0.06). Pain interference scores for patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increased (3.5 points, p = 0.03). Scores for the interest in sex domain decreased (worsened) for patients with oncologic etiology (−3.7 points, p = 0.03). No other differences in score trends by patient characteristics were large enough to be statistically significant at the p < 0.05 threshold.

Conclusion

These data suggest that the majority of patients quickly return to baseline physical, mental, and social function following colorectal surgery. This information can be used preoperatively to counsel patients about the typical impact of colorectal surgery on quality of life.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Temple L, Fuzesi S, Patil S (2009) The importance of determining quality of life in clinical trials. Surgery 145:622–626CrossRefPubMed Temple L, Fuzesi S, Patil S (2009) The importance of determining quality of life in clinical trials. Surgery 145:622–626CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Basch E, Torda P, Adams K (2013) Standards for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures. JAMA 310:139–140CrossRefPubMed Basch E, Torda P, Adams K (2013) Standards for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures. JAMA 310:139–140CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Smith ML, Coons SJ, Sloan J, Wenzel K, Chauhan C, Eppard W, Frank ES, Lipscomb J, Raymond SA, Spencer M, Tunis S (2012) Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol 30:4249–4255CrossRefPubMed Basch E, Abernethy AP, Mullins CD, Reeve BB, Smith ML, Coons SJ, Sloan J, Wenzel K, Chauhan C, Eppard W, Frank ES, Lipscomb J, Raymond SA, Spencer M, Tunis S (2012) Recommendations for incorporating patient-reported outcomes into clinical comparative effectiveness research in adult oncology. J Clin Oncol 30:4249–4255CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Franklin PD, Lewallen D, Bozic K, Hallstrom B, Jiranek W, Ayers DC (2014) Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in U.S. Total joint replacement registries: rationale, status, and plans. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96(Suppl 1):104–109CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Franklin PD, Lewallen D, Bozic K, Hallstrom B, Jiranek W, Ayers DC (2014) Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in U.S. Total joint replacement registries: rationale, status, and plans. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96(Suppl 1):104–109CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Berliner JL, Brodke DJ, Chan V, SooHoo NF, Bozic KJ (2016) John Charnley award: preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict clinically meaningful improvement in function after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474:321–329CrossRefPubMed Berliner JL, Brodke DJ, Chan V, SooHoo NF, Bozic KJ (2016) John Charnley award: preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict clinically meaningful improvement in function after THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 474:321–329CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Federal Register. Vol. 80, No. 134.Tuesday, July 14, 2015. Proposed rules. Medicare program; Comprehensive care for joint replacement payment model for Acute Care Hospitals Furnishing Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Services. Section III.C.5.b.(2) Federal Register. Vol. 80, No. 134.Tuesday, July 14, 2015. Proposed rules. Medicare program; Comprehensive care for joint replacement payment model for Acute Care Hospitals Furnishing Lower Extremity Joint Replacement Services. Section III.C.5.b.(2)
7.
go back to reference Bilimoria KY, Cella D, Butt Z (2014) Current challenges in using patient-reported outcomes for surgical care and performance measurement: everybody wants to hear from the patient, but are we ready to listen? JAMA Surgery 149:505–506CrossRefPubMed Bilimoria KY, Cella D, Butt Z (2014) Current challenges in using patient-reported outcomes for surgical care and performance measurement: everybody wants to hear from the patient, but are we ready to listen? JAMA Surgery 149:505–506CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference McNair A, Whistance RN, Forsythe RO, Rees J, Jones JE, Pullyblank AM, Avery K, Brookes ST, Thomas MG, Sylvester PA, Russell A, Oliver A, Morton D, Kennedy R, Jayne DG, Huxtable R, Hackett R, Dutton SJ, Coleman MG, Card M, Brown J, Blazeby JM (2015) Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery. Color Dis 17:217–229CrossRef McNair A, Whistance RN, Forsythe RO, Rees J, Jones JE, Pullyblank AM, Avery K, Brookes ST, Thomas MG, Sylvester PA, Russell A, Oliver A, Morton D, Kennedy R, Jayne DG, Huxtable R, Hackett R, Dutton SJ, Coleman MG, Card M, Brown J, Blazeby JM (2015) Synthesis and summary of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery. Color Dis 17:217–229CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Garcia SF, Cella D, Clauser SB, Flynn KE, Lad T, Lai JS, Reeve BB, Smith AW, Stone AA, Weinfurt K (2007) Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative. J Clin Oncol 25:5106–5112CrossRefPubMed Garcia SF, Cella D, Clauser SB, Flynn KE, Lad T, Lai JS, Reeve BB, Smith AW, Stone AA, Weinfurt K (2007) Standardizing patient-reported outcomes assessment in cancer clinical trials: a patient-reported outcomes measurement information system initiative. J Clin Oncol 25:5106–5112CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, Cook K, Devellis R, DeWalt D, Fries JF, Gershon R, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Pilkonis P, Revicki D, Rose M, Weinfurt K, Hays R (2010) The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol 63:1179–1194CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, Cook K, Devellis R, DeWalt D, Fries JF, Gershon R, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Pilkonis P, Revicki D, Rose M, Weinfurt K, Hays R (2010) The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol 63:1179–1194CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Thiele RH, Rea KM, Turrentine FE, Friel CM, Hassinger TE, McMurry TL, Goudreau BJ, Umapathi BA, Kron IL, Sawyer RG, Hedrick TL (2015) Standardization of care: impact of an enhanced recovery protocol on length of stay, complications, and direct costs after colorectal surgery. J Am Coll Surg 220:430–443CrossRefPubMed Thiele RH, Rea KM, Turrentine FE, Friel CM, Hassinger TE, McMurry TL, Goudreau BJ, Umapathi BA, Kron IL, Sawyer RG, Hedrick TL (2015) Standardization of care: impact of an enhanced recovery protocol on length of stay, complications, and direct costs after colorectal surgery. J Am Coll Surg 220:430–443CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Gershon RC, Rothrock N, Hanrahan R, Bass M, Cella D (2010) The use of PROMIS and assessment center to deliver patient-reported outcome measures in clinical research. Journal of applied measurement 11:304–314PubMedPubMedCentral Gershon RC, Rothrock N, Hanrahan R, Bass M, Cella D (2010) The use of PROMIS and assessment center to deliver patient-reported outcome measures in clinical research. Journal of applied measurement 11:304–314PubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Revicki DA, Cella DF (1997) Health status assessment for the twenty-first century: item response theory, item banking and computer adaptive testing. Qual Life Res 6:595–600CrossRefPubMed Revicki DA, Cella DF (1997) Health status assessment for the twenty-first century: item response theory, item banking and computer adaptive testing. Qual Life Res 6:595–600CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Hung M, Stuart AR, Higgins TF, Saltzman CL, Kubiak EN (2014) Computerized adaptive testing using the PROMIS physical function item bank reduces test burden with less ceiling effects compared with the short musculoskeletal function assessment in orthopaedic trauma patients. J Orthop Trauma 28:439–443CrossRefPubMed Hung M, Stuart AR, Higgins TF, Saltzman CL, Kubiak EN (2014) Computerized adaptive testing using the PROMIS physical function item bank reduces test burden with less ceiling effects compared with the short musculoskeletal function assessment in orthopaedic trauma patients. J Orthop Trauma 28:439–443CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference PROMIS Scoring Manuals. Patient reported outcomes measurement information system. Assessment Center. Accessed on 19 Jan 2016 PROMIS Scoring Manuals. Patient reported outcomes measurement information system. Assessment Center. Accessed on 19 Jan 2016
16.
go back to reference Liu H, Cella D, Gershon R, Shen J, Morales LS, Riley W, Hays RD (2010) Representativeness of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system internet panel. J Clin Epidemiol 63:1169–1178CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Liu H, Cella D, Gershon R, Shen J, Morales LS, Riley W, Hays RD (2010) Representativeness of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system internet panel. J Clin Epidemiol 63:1169–1178CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Stukenborg GJ, Blackhall L, Harrison J, Barclay JS, Dillon P, Davis MA, Mallory M, Read P (2014) Cancer patient-reported outcomes assessment using wireless touch screen tablet computers. Qual Life Res 23:1603–1607CrossRefPubMed Stukenborg GJ, Blackhall L, Harrison J, Barclay JS, Dillon P, Davis MA, Mallory M, Read P (2014) Cancer patient-reported outcomes assessment using wireless touch screen tablet computers. Qual Life Res 23:1603–1607CrossRefPubMed
18.
19.
go back to reference Rajeswaran J, Blackstone EH (2015) Patient-reported outcomes and importance of their appropriate statistical analyses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 150:461–462CrossRefPubMed Rajeswaran J, Blackstone EH (2015) Patient-reported outcomes and importance of their appropriate statistical analyses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 150:461–462CrossRefPubMed
20.
22.
go back to reference Cella D, Choi S, Garcia S, Cook KF, Rosenbloom S, Lai J-S, Tatum DS, Gershon R (2014) Setting standards for severity of common symptoms in oncology using the PROMIS item banks and expert judgment. Qual Life Res 23:2651–2661CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cella D, Choi S, Garcia S, Cook KF, Rosenbloom S, Lai J-S, Tatum DS, Gershon R (2014) Setting standards for severity of common symptoms in oncology using the PROMIS item banks and expert judgment. Qual Life Res 23:2651–2661CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Jensen RE, Moinpour CM, Potosky AL, Lobo T, Hahn EA, Hays RD, Cella D, Smith AW, Wu XC, Keegan TH, Paddock LE, Stroup AM, Eton DT (2016) Responsiveness of 8 patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort. Cancer 123:327–335CrossRefPubMed Jensen RE, Moinpour CM, Potosky AL, Lobo T, Hahn EA, Hays RD, Cella D, Smith AW, Wu XC, Keegan TH, Paddock LE, Stroup AM, Eton DT (2016) Responsiveness of 8 patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort. Cancer 123:327–335CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Yost KJ, Eton DT, Garcia SF, Cella D (2011) Minimally important differences were estimated for six patient-reported outcomes measurement information system—cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol 64:507–516CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yost KJ, Eton DT, Garcia SF, Cella D (2011) Minimally important differences were estimated for six patient-reported outcomes measurement information system—cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol 64:507–516CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Hays RD, Spritzer KL, Fries JF, Krishnan E (2015) Responsiveness and minimally important difference for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) 20-item physical functioning short form in a prospective observational study of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 74:104–107CrossRefPubMed Hays RD, Spritzer KL, Fries JF, Krishnan E (2015) Responsiveness and minimally important difference for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) 20-item physical functioning short form in a prospective observational study of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 74:104–107CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Brown SR, Mathew R, Keding A, Marshall HC, Brown JM, Jayne DG (2014) The impact of postoperative complications on long-term quality of life after curative colorectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 259:916–923CrossRefPubMed Brown SR, Mathew R, Keding A, Marshall HC, Brown JM, Jayne DG (2014) The impact of postoperative complications on long-term quality of life after curative colorectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 259:916–923CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P, Longman RJ, Kipling RM, Franks PJ, Sheffield JP, Evans LB, Soulsby M, Bulley SH, Kennedy RH (2006) The influence of an enhanced recovery programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer. Color Dis 8:506–513CrossRef King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P, Longman RJ, Kipling RM, Franks PJ, Sheffield JP, Evans LB, Soulsby M, Bulley SH, Kennedy RH (2006) The influence of an enhanced recovery programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer. Color Dis 8:506–513CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A pilot study of patient-centered outcome assessment using PROMIS for patients undergoing colorectal surgery
Authors
Traci L. Hedrick
Amy M. Harrigan
Robert H. Thiele
Charles M. Friel
Benjamin D. Kozower
George J. Stukenborg
Publication date
01-10-2017
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 10/2017
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3718-4

Other articles of this Issue 10/2017

Supportive Care in Cancer 10/2017 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine