Perceptions of Response Burden Associated with Completion of Patient-Reported Outcome Assessments in Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Patient response burden is often raised as a human subject concern in consideration of the length or complexity of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments used in oncology. OBJECTIVES: To quantify patient response burden and identify its predictive factors. METHODS: Data were collected presurgically during a prospective trial that used a comprehensive symptom and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) PRO assessment. A subset of patients also completed HRQOL interviews. Response burden was captured using an internally developed six-item instrument. Demographic and clinical characteristics as well as HRQOL scores were examined as potential predictors using hierarchical regression. Response burden was used to predict participant dropout at the first follow-up interval. RESULTS: A total of 275 patients (mean age 67.5 years; 23.6% female) completed surveys (n = 126) or surveys in addition to interviews (n = 149). Patients experienced low response burden (mean 12.19 ± 11.65). Repetitive questions were identified by 60 patients (21.8%), whereas 31.6% indicated that additional information should be gathered; 35 patients (12.7%) identified repetitive questions and expressed a desire for additional items. Low self-reported cognitive function was a significant predictor of higher response burden (ß = -0.20; t(270) = -3.38; P = 0.01; model-adjusted R2 = 0.04). Response burden was not a significant predictor of study dropout. CONCLUSIONS: Despite completing a large battery of PRO measures and interviews, patients reported minimal response burden, with nearly one-third expressing that more questions should have been asked. Patients with lower cognitive function are more likely to report higher response burden when completing PRO measures. Further examination of patient characteristics related to response burden may reveal useful pathways for tailoring patient-centered interventions.

Patient-Reported Physical Function Measures in Cancer Clinical Trials.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to monitor treatment-related symptoms and physical function decrements in cancer clinical trials. As more patients enter survivorship, it is important to capture PRO physical function throughout trials to help restore pretreatment levels of function. We completed a systematic review of PRO physical function measures used in cancer clinical trials and evaluated their psychometric properties on the basis of guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration. Five databases were searched through October 2015: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Health and Psychosocial Instruments, and Cochrane. From an initial total of 10,233 articles, we identified 108 trials that captured PRO physical function. Within these trials, approximately 67% used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and 25% used the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36. Both the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 instruments generically satisfy most Food and Drug Administration requirements, although neither sought direct patient input as part of item development. The newer Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System physical function short form may be a brief, viable alternative. Clinicians should carefully consider the psychometric properties of these measures when incorporating PRO instrumentation into clinical trial design to provide a more comprehensive understanding of patient function.