Search

PurposePatient-reported outcome (PRO) data from clinical trials can promote valuable patient-clinician communication and aid the decision-making process regarding treatment options. Despite these benefits, both patients and doctors face challenges in interpreting PRO scores. The purpose of this study was to identify best practices for presenting PRO results expressed as proportions of patients with changes from baseline (improved/stable/worsened) for use in patient educational materials and decision aids.MethodsWe electronically surveyed adult cancer patients/survivors, oncology clinicians, and PRO researchers, and conducted one-on-one cognitive interviews with patients/survivors and clinicians. Participants saw clinical trial data comparing two treatments as proportions changed using three different formats: pie charts, bar graphs, icon arrays. Interpretation accuracy, clarity, and format preference were analyzed quantitatively and online survey comments and interviews, qualitatively.ResultsThe internet sample included 629 patients, 139 clinicians, and 249 researchers; 10 patients and 5 clinicians completed interviews. Bar graphs were less accurately interpreted than pie charts (OR 0.39; p

BackgroundLong-term treatment with supplemental oxygen has unknown efficacy in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and resting or exercise-induced moderate desaturation.MethodsWe originally designed the trial to test whether long-term treatment with supplemental oxygen would result in a longer time to death than no use of supplemental oxygen among patients who had stable COPD with moderate resting desaturation (oxyhemoglobin saturation as measured by pulse oximetry [Spo2], 89 to 93%). After 7 months and the randomization of 34 patients, the trial was redesigned to also include patients who had stable COPD with moderate exercise-induced desaturation (during the 6-minute walk test, Spo2 ≥80% for ≥5 minutes and

BACKGROUND: Continuous oxygen therapy is not recommended for emphysema patients who are not hypoxemic at rest, although it is often prescribed. Little is known regarding the clinical characteristics and survival of nonhypoxemic emphysema patients using continuous oxygen. Analysis of data from the National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT) offers insight into this population. METHODS: We analyzed demographic and clinical characteristics of 1,215 participants of NETT, stratifying by resting Pao(2) and reported oxygen use. Eight-year survival was evaluated in individuals randomized to medical therapy. RESULTS: At enrollment, 33.8% (n = 260) of participants nonhypoxemic at rest reported continuous oxygen use. When compared to nonhypoxemic individuals not using oxygen (n = 226), those using continuous oxygen had worse dyspnea, lower quality of life, more frequent exercise desaturation, and higher case-fatality rate. After adjusting for age, body mass index, and FEV, percentage of predicted, the presence of exercise desaturation accounted for the differential mortality seen between these group. CONCLUSIONS: In the NETT, the use of continuous oxygen in resting nonhypoxemic emphysema patients was associated with worse disease severity and survival. The differential survival observed could nearly all be accounted for by the higher prevalence of exercise desaturation in those using continuous oxygen, suggesting that it is not a harmful effect of oxygen therapy contributing to mortality. It remains unclear whether continuous oxygen therapy improves survival in normoxic patients with exercise desaturation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00000606.