Patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators associated with the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cancer care: a systematic review

• Published in: Supportive care in cancer Vol. 29; no. 2; pp. 573 - 593
• Main Authors: Graupner, Caitlin, Kimman, Merel L., Mul, Suzanne, Slok, Annerika H. M., Claessens, Danny, Kleijnen, Jos, Dirksen, Carmen D., Breukink, Stéphanie O.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.02.2021; Springer; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cancer; Cancer patients; Clinical outcomes; Feedback; Health Personnel - psychology; Humans; Medical personnel; Medical research; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Medicine, Experimental; Neoplasms - psychology; Neoplasms - therapy; Nursing; Nursing Research; Oncology; Pain Medicine; Patient outcomes; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Patient Satisfaction; Proms (Parties); Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rehabilitation Medicine; Review; Review Article; Systematic review; Patient-reported outcomes; PROM; Patient-reported outcome measures; Cancer
• ISSN: 0941-4355; 1433-7339; 1433-7339
• DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05695-4

Purpose In current cancer care, there is a growing debate about the value of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in daily clinical follow-up. A systematic review of the literature was conducted to assess the evidence of the effectiveness of the routine use of PROMs in daily cancer care in terms of patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators and to identify the effect of giving feedback about PROM findings to patients and/or health care professionals (HCPs). Methods A systematic search was performed. Studies were eligible for inclusion when they (1) used a PROM as an intervention, with or without feedback to patients and/or HCPs, compared with not using a PROM, and (2) used a PROM as an intervention with feedback to patients and/or HCPs, compared with using a PROM without giving feedback to patients and/or HCPs. Results After screening of 8341 references, 22 original studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies found a positive effect on survival, symptoms, HRQoL and patient satisfaction. In general, using feedback to patient and/or HCPs about the PROM results led to better symptom control, HRQoL, patient satisfaction and patient-doctor communication. The majority of included studies had insufficient power to detect significant differences in the outcomes assessed. Conclusion This review shows that predominantly positive findings were found in the use of a PROM in daily cancer care. Additionally, more positive effects were seen when feedback is provided to patient and/or health care professionals, and it is thus highly recommended that this is always done.