Search

Background This study compares classical test theory and item response theory frameworks to determine reliable change. Reliable change followed by anchoring to the change in categorically distinct responses on a criterion measure is a useful method to detect meaningful change on a target measure. Methods Adult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers. Baseline and follow-up assessments at 6 weeks were administered. We investigated short forms derived from PROMIS® item banks on anxiety, depression, fatigue, pain intensity, pain interference, and sleep disturbance. We detected reliable change using reliable change index (RCI). We derived the T-scores corresponding to the RCI calculated under IRT and CTT frameworks using PROMIS® short forms. For changes that were reliable, meaningful change was identified using patient-reported change in PRO-CTCAE by at least one level. For both CTT and IRT approaches, we applied one-sided tests to detect reliable improvement or worsening using RCI. We compared the percentages of patients with reliable change and reliable/meaningful change. Results The amount of change in T score corresponding to RCICTT of 1.65 ranged from 5.1 to 9.2 depending on domains. The amount of change corresponding to RCIIRT of 1.65 varied across the score range, and the minimum change ranged from 3.0 to 8.2 depending on domains. Across domains, the RCICTT and RCIIRT classified 80% to 98% of the patients consistently. When there was disagreement, the RCIIRT tended to identify more patients as having reliably changed compared to RCICTT if scores at both timepoints were in the range of 43 to 78 in anxiety, 45 to 70 in depression, 38 to 80 in fatigue, 35 to 78 in sleep disturbance, and 48 to 74 in pain interference, due to smaller standard errors in these ranges using the IRT method. The CTT method found more changes compared to IRT for the pain intensity domain that was shorter in length. Using RCICTT, 22% to 66% had reliable change in either direction depending on domains, and among these patients, 62% to 83% had meaningful change. Using RCIIRT, 37% to 68% had reliable change in either direction, and among these patients, 62% to 81% had meaningful change. Conclusion Applying the two-step criteria demonstrated in this study, we determined how much change is needed to declare reliable change at different levels of baseline scores. We offer reference values for percentage of patients who meaningfully change for investigators using the PROMIS instruments in oncology.

Background In clinical trials and clinical practice, patient-reported outcomes are almost always assessed using multiple patient-reported outcome measures at the same time. This raises concerns about whether patient responses are affected by the order in which the patient-reported outcome measures are administered. Methods This questionnaire-based study of order effects included adult cancer patients from five cancer centers. Patients were randomly assigned to complete questionnaires via paper booklets, interactive voice response system, or tablet web survey. Linear Analogue Self-Assessment, Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System assessment tools were each used to measure general health, physical function, social function, emotional distress/anxiety, emotional distress/depression, fatigue, sleep, and pain. The order in which the three tools, and domains within tools, were presented to patients was randomized. Rates of missing data, scale scores, and Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were compared by the order in which they were assessed. Analyses included Cochran–Armitage trend tests and mixed models adjusted for performance score, age, sex, cancer type, and curative intent. Results A total of 1830 patients provided baseline patient-reported outcome assessments. There were no significant trends in rates of missing values by whether a scale was assessed earlier or later. The largest order effect for scale scores was due to a large mean score at one assessment time point. The largest difference in Cronbach’s alpha between the versions for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scales was 0.106. Conclusion The well-being of a cancer patient has many different aspects such as pain, fatigue, depression, and anxiety. These are assessed using a variety of surveys often collected at the same time. This study shows that the order in which the different aspects are collected from the patient is not important.

Background: People experiencing homelessness (PEH) who also have problem drug use, have complex medical/social needs, with barriers to accessing services and treatments. Their treatment burden ( workload of self-management and impact on well-being) remains unexplored. Aim: This study uses a validated questionnaire, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS), to investigate treatment burden in PEH with a recent non-fatal overdose. Design and Setting: PETS questionnaire collected as part of a pilot Randomised Control Trial (RCT) undertaken in Glasgow, Scotland, the main outcome is whether this pilot RCT should progress to a definitive RCT. Methods: An adapted 52-item, 12-domain PETS used to measure treatment burden of treatment. Greater treatment burden indicated by higher PETS scores. Results: Of 128 participants, 123 completed PETS; mean age=42.1 (SD=8.6); 71.5 % male, and 99.2% white ethnicity. Most (91.2%) had >5 chronic conditions with an average of 8.5 conditions. Mean PETS scores were highest in domains focusing on the impact of self-management on well-being: physical/mental exhaustion (Mean=79.5, SD=3.2); and role-social activity limitations (Mean=64, SD=3.4). Scores were higher than those observed in studies of non-homeless patients. Conclusions: In a socially marginalised patient group at high risk of drug overdose, the PETS showed a very high level of treatment burden and highlights the profound impact of self-management work on well-being and daily activities. Treatment burden is an important person-centered outcome to help compare the effectiveness of interventions in PEH and merits inclusion in future trials as an outcome measure.

Minji K Lee,1 Jennifer L St Sauver,1,2 Roger T Anderson,3 Mark Linzer,4 David T Eton1,2 1Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 2Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 3Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA; 4Hennepin Healthcare, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USACorrespondence: Minji K LeeRobert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Harwick Building, Second Floor, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USATel +1 507 284 1310Email Lee.Minji@mayo.eduDavid T Eton Email eton.david@mayo.eduPurpose: To examine the factor structure and differential item functioning (DIF) of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS version 2.0), a measure of treatment burden.Patients and Methods: Version 2.0 of the PETS has 60 items, extending the previously-validated 48-item version 1.0 by three domains (nine items) and three additional items in an existing domain. We conducted confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) on survey responses of 439 community-dwelling adults living with multiple chronic conditions who completed PETS version 2.0, using R packages, “lavaan” and “semTools.” We tested fit of second-order factors to explore simplifying the reporting of PETS scores. We examined DIF for the two second-order factors with “lordif” R package, testing groups by gender, education, and health literacy, using the McFadden pseudo R2 change criterion of ≥ 0.02 to flag items with DIF. Cronbach’s alpha and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to determine the reliability of PETS domains.Results: The first-order CFA model featuring 12 multi-item domains had an excellent fit (Comparative Fit Index [CFI]=0.989), as did the second-order CFA model (CFI=0.987), specifying two superordinate factors of treatment burden (workload and impact). Items in the workload and impact second-order factors did not show any DIF across gender, education, and health literacy groups as shown by McFadden pseudo R2 changes < 0.02. Cronbach’s alphas for all multi-item domain scales were ≥ 0.80, and ICCs of ten scales were ≥ 0.70, meeting the threshold for adequate test–retest reliability.Conclusion: Findings support the construct validity and reliability of PETS version 2.0. The fit of a factor model featuring superordinate (ie, second-order) factors of workload and impact supports index scoring that will simplify reporting of PETS scores. DIF analyses indicate that items from these indices can be interpreted in the same way, regardless of gender, education, or health literacy.Keywords: factor structure, patient-reported outcomes, multi-morbidity, psychometric testing, questionnaire, validation

Background In primary care there is a need for more quality measures of person-centered outcomes, especially ones applicable to patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). The aim of this study was to derive and validate a short-form version of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS), an established measure of treatment burden, to help fill the gap in quality measurement. Methods Patient interviews (30) and provider surveys (30) were used to winnow items from the PETS (60 items) to a subset targeting person-centered care quality. Results were reviewed by a panel of healthcare providers and health-services researchers who finalized a pilot version. The Brief PETS was tested in surveys of 200 clinic and 200 community-dwelling MCC patients. Surveys containing the Brief PETS and additional measures (e.g., health status, medication adherence, quality of care, demographics) were administered at baseline and follow-up. Correlations and t-tests were used to assess validity, including responsiveness to change of the Brief PETS. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated on mean differences. Results Winnowing and panel review resulted in a 34-item Brief PETS pilot measure that was tested in the combined sample of 400 (mean age = 57.9 years, 50% female, 48% white, median number of conditions = 5). Reliability of most scales was acceptable (alpha > 0.70). Brief PETS scores were associated with age, income, health status, and quality of chronic illness care at baseline (P P P Conclusions The Brief PETS (final version: 32 items) is a reliable and valid tool for assessing person-centered care quality related to treatment burden. It holds promise as a means of giving voice to patient concerns about the complexity of disease management.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to test the known-groups validity and responsiveness to change of the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS, vs. 2.0), a measure of treatment burden. METHODS: The PETS and other standard measures were mailed at baseline and 12-month follow-up to adults living with multiple chronic conditions in southeast Minnesota (USA). A sample of 365 people (mean age = 62.1 years) completed both surveys. Baseline, 12-month, and changes in PETS burden scores were examined. Clinical anchors used to test validity included number of diagnoses (2-4 vs. 5+), mental health diagnosis (yes/no), medication adherence and health literacy (suboptimal/optimal), and changes in self-efficacy, global physical and global mental health (worsening/improving). Independent samples t-tests were used to compare scores. RESULTS: PETS scales showed good internal consistency (alphas ≥ 0.80). There were few differences across number of diagnoses, but having a mental health diagnosis was associated with higher baseline PETS burden scores (Ps < .05). Suboptimal medication adherence and health literacy over time were associated with worse 12-month PETS burden scores (Ps < .05). Compared with improvements, declines over time in self-efficacy, global physical health, and global mental health were each associated with worsening change scores on PETS impact summary, medical expenses, and bother due to medication reliance and medication side effects (Ps < .05). CONCLUSION: Among multi-morbid adults, the PETS demonstrated evidence of known-groups validity and responsiveness to change across both objective (e.g., mental health diagnoses) and subjective anchors (e.g., changes in self-efficacy, global physical and mental health).

Background The study tests the effects of data collection modes on patient responses associated with the multi-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System (PROMIS®), and single-item measures such as Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) measures. Methods Adult cancer patients were recruited from five cancer centers and administered measures of anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain intensity, pain interference, ability to participate in social roles and activities, global mental and physical health, and physical function. Patients were randomized to complete the measures on paper (595), interactive voice response (IVR, 596) system, or tablet computer (589). We evaluated differential item functioning (DIF) by method of data collection using the R software package, lordif. For constructs that showed no DIF, we concluded equivalence across modes if the equivalence margin, defined as ± 0.20 × pooled SD, completely surrounds 95% confidence intervals (CI's) for difference in mean score. If the 95% CI fell totally outside the equivalence margin, we concluded systematic score difference by modes. If the 95% CI partly overlaps the equivalence margin, we concluded neither equivalence nor difference. Results For all constructs, no DIF of any kind was found for the three modes. The scores on paper and tablet were more comparable than between IVR and other modes but none of the 95% CI’s were completely outside the equivalence margins, in which we established neither equivalence nor difference. Percentages of missing values were comparable for paper and tablet modes. Percentages of missing values were higher for IVR (2.3% to 6.5% depending on measures) compared to paper and tablet modes (0.7% to 3.3% depending on measures and modes), which was attributed to random technical difficulties experienced in some centers. Conclusion Across all mode comparisons, there were some measures with CI’s not completely contained within the margin of small effect. Two visual modes agreed more than visual-auditory pairs. IVR may induce differences in scores unrelated to constructs being measured in comparison with paper and tablet. The users of the surveys should consider using IVR only when paper and computer administration is not feasible.

INTRODUCTION: New hypertension guidelines in the United States may require more people to take multiple medications or implement lifestyle changes. Increased treatment burden may be an unintended consequence and lead to worse health outcomes. Our study examined whether treatment burden is associated with factors related to self-management in those with hypertension. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional mailed survey of patients from two medical centers in Minnesota. Participants with 2 or more medical conditions completed the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS), a validated treatment burden questionnaire, as well as measures of confidence in self-management ability, health literacy, healthcare-related financial difficulties, and perception of provider interpersonal skills. We used Partial correlation analyses, controlling for age, sex, race, and education, to test relationships among study variables. RESULTS: Of 254 respondents who had a diagnosis of hypertension, mean age was 67, 54% were female, and 74% were non-Hispanic White. People with hypertension who reported having lower confidence in self-management ability, lower health literacy, more financial difficulties, and healthcare providers with poorer interpersonal skills, reported higher treatment burden scores (PETS scales correlation magnitude range 0.09–0.62, p < 0.05 on all but four). The strongest associations were observed for medical information and physical/mental exhaustion with self-management (correlation magnitudes from 0.25 to 0.54, p

David T Eton,1,2 Roger T Anderson,3 Wendy F Cohn,3 Erin M Kennedy,3 Jennifer L St. Sauver,1,2 Bayly J Bucknell,1 Kathryn J Ruddy4 1Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 2Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 3Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA; 4Department of Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for poor health-related quality of life (HRQL) in multi-morbid adult cancer survivors and explore whether perceived treatment and self-management burden mediate any of these relationships.Methods: Ninety-one multi-morbid cancer survivors (median age: 65 years) completed surveys at baseline and 6 months. Demographic, psychosocial, and health care-related factors were assessed as were perceived treatment burden and general HRQL (physical and mental health). Data on medical diagnoses and cancer treatment were extracted from the medical record. Bivariate correlations screened for associations between predictors and outcomes, with significant predictors entered into multivariable linear regressions to identify unique risk factors for greater treatment burden and poorer HRQL. Follow-up regressions examined whether treatment burden mediated any of the risk factor–outcome relationships.Results: Factors that correlated with higher baseline treatment burden included: having more diagnoses, less formal education, having seen more physicians in the past 6 months, having a mental health diagnosis, not having a set routine for one’s self-management, low health literacy, low self-efficacy for self-management, and low social support (Ps

Background Kidney transplant recipients face a lifelong regimen of medications, health monitoring and medical appointments. This work involved in managing one’s health and its impact on well-being are referred to as treatment burden. Excessive treatment burden can adversely impact adherence and quality of life. The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual framework of treatment burden after kidney transplantation. Qualitative interviews were conducted with kidney transplant recipients (n = 27) from three Mayo Clinic transplant centers. A semi-structured interview guide originally developed in patients with chronic conditions and tailored to the context of kidney transplantation was utilized. Themes of treatment burden after kidney transplantation were confirmed in two focus groups (n = 16). Results Analyses confirmed three main themes of treatment burden after kidney transplantation: 1) work patients must do to care for their health (e.g., attending medical appointments, taking medications), 2) challenges/stressors that exacerbate felt burden (e.g., financial concerns, health system obstacles) 3) impacts of burden (e.g., role/social activity limitations). Conclusions Patients describe a significant amount of work involved in caring for their kidney transplants. This work is exacerbated by individual, interpersonal and system-related factors. The framework will be used as a foundation for a patient-reported measure of treatment burden to promote better care after kidney transplantation.

Background The purpose of this study was to investigate whether patient-reported knee function and health status before and after primary total knee replacement (TKR) at an academic medical center differs among patients from diverse geographic regions. Methods We assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as measured by the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) in 2855 TKR patients at preprimary and one year postprimary TKR procedure between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014. We compared the demographic characteristics, response rates, and changes in OKS, EQ-5D, and EQ visual analog scale among local, regional, and national patient groups. Patient- or hospital-related predictors of the postoperative scores were identified after controlling for preoperative scores on the PRO measures. Results Local patients had more comorbid conditions. Groups were similar in clinical outcomes such as length of stay at hospital, complication, and reoperation rates. Local, regional, and national patients had similar response rates and reported a similar level of knee function and health-related quality of life before and after TKR. Eighty nine percent had clinically important improvement on OKS, 69% on EQ-5D index, and 28% EQ visual analog scale, and there were no differences among groups in the proportions of clinically meaningful change. Better postoperative PRO scores were associated with older age, shorter hospital stay, fewer comorbidities, nonsmoking status, fewer complications, and private health insurance. Conclusion Some patient characteristics such as comorbidities were greater in the local patient cohort versus the national cohort. Nevertheless, clinical outcomes and PROs were comparable across all geographic tiers.

David T Eton,1,2 Jennifer L Ridgeway,1,2 Mark Linzer,3 Deborah H Boehm,4 Elizabeth A Rogers,5 Kathleen J Yost,1,2 Lila J Finney Rutten,1,2 Jennifer L St Sauver,1,2 Sara Poplau,4 Roger T Anderson6 1Department of Health Sciences Research, 2Robert D and Patricia E Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, 3Division of General Internal Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, 4Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, 5Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, 6Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA Purpose: Having multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) can lead to appreciable treatment and self-management burden. Healthcare provider relational quality (HPRQ) – the communicative and interpersonal skill of the provider – may mitigate treatment burden and promote self-management. The objectives of this study were to 1) identify the associations between HPRQ, treatment burden, and psychosocial outcomes in adults with MCCs, and 2) determine if certain indicators of HPRQ are more strongly associated than others with these outcomes.Patients and methods: This is a cross-sectional survey study of 332 people with MCCs. Patients completed a 7-item measure of HPRQ and measures of treatment and self-management burden, chronic condition distress, self-efficacy, provider satisfaction, medication adherence, and physical and mental health. Associations between HPRQ, treatment burden, and psychosocial outcomes were determined using correlational analyses and independent samples t-tests, which were repeated in item-level analyses to explore which indicators of HPRQ were most strongly associated with the outcomes.Results: Most respondents (69%) were diagnosed with ≥3 chronic conditions. Better HPRQ was found to be associated with less treatment and self-management burden and better psychosocial outcomes (P

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are generic or condition-specific, are used for a number of reasons, including clinical care, clinical trials, and in national-level efforts to monitor the quality of health care delivery. Creating PROMs that meet different purposes without overburdening patients, healthcare systems, providers, and data systems is paramount. The objective of this study was to test a generalizable method to incorporate condition-specific issues into generic PROM measures as a first step to producing PROMs that efficiently provide a standardized score. This paper outlines the method and preliminary findings focused on a PROM for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA-K). We used a mixed-methods approach and PROMIS® measures to test development of a combined generic and OA-K-specific PROM. Qualitative methods included patient focus groups and provider interviews to identify impacts of OA-K important to patients. We then conducted a thematic analysis and an item gap analysis: identified areas covered by existing generic PROMIS measures, identified “gap” areas not covered, compared gap areas to legacy instruments to verify relevance, and developed new items to address gaps. We then performed cognitive testing on new items and drafted an OA-K-specific instrument based on findings. We identified 52 existing PROMIS items and developed 24 new items across 14 domains. We developed a process for creating condition-specific instruments that bridge gaps in existing generic measures. If successful, the methodology will create instruments that efficiently gather the patient’s perspective while allowing health systems, researchers, and other interested parties to monitor and compare outcomes over time, conditions, and populations.

Background Gains in cancer detection and treatment have meant that more patients are now living with both cancer and other chronic health conditions, which may become burdensome. We used the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-Management (PETS) framework to study challenges in self-management and its impact on health among survivors of women’s cancers who are caring for other chronic health conditions. Methods Applicability of the PETS domains among survivors of women’s cancers with comorbidities was assessed in focus groups to create the study survey. Women surviving primary breast, cervical, ovarian, or endometrial/uterine cancer treated between 6 months and 3 years prior at two large healthcare systems in Virginia were mailed study invitation letters to complete a telephone-based survey. The survey included questions on cancer treatment history, comorbid conditions prior to cancer, treatment and self-management experiences, health literacy, financial security, and items on self-management activities, self-management difficulties and self-management impact (i.e., role/social activity limitations and physical/mental exhaustion). Additionally, general health was assessed with items from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Hierarchical regression models and path analysis were used to examine correlates of self-management impact on general physical health (GPH) and mental health (GMH). Results Of 1448 patients contacted by mail, 274 (26%) returned an interest form providing their consent to be contacted. Of these, 183 completed the survey. Reasons for non-completion included ineligibility (42), unable to be reached (33) and refusal (6). The majority were survivors of breast (58%) or endometrial/uterine cancer (28%), and 45% resided in non-urban locations. After adjusting for age, race, and cancer type, survivors with higher self-management difficulty reported higher self-management impact, which was associated with lower perceived general health. Reports of higher self-management impact was associated with being single or unmarried, white race, fulltime employed, higher financial insecurity, lower health literacy and more comorbidities. In path analysis, self-management impact was a significant mediator in the association of comorbidity and financial insecurity on GPH and GMH. Conclusions Among survivors of women’s cancer, pre-diagnosis comorbidity, health literacy, and financial security are associated with psychosocial impact of self-management and general physical and mental health in the 6 month to 3-year period after cancer treatment has ended. The impact of self-management on psychosocial functioning is an important factor among cancer survivors caring for multiple chronic health conditions. This study provides evidence on the importance of assessing cancer survivors’ self-management difficulties such as in future interventions to promote health and wellness.

David T Eton,1,2 Jennifer L Ridgeway,1,2 Jason S Egginton,1,2 Kristina Tiedje,3 Mark Linzer,4,5 Deborah H Boehm,4 Sara Poplau,6 Djenane Ramalho de Oliveira,7 Laura Odell,8 Victor M Montori,1,9 Carl R May,10 Roger T Anderson11 1Division of Health Care Policy and Research, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 2Robert D and Patricia E Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 3Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon, France; 4Division of General Internal Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA; 5University of Minnesota Medical School, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA; 6Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation, Minneapolis, MN, USA; 7Department of Social Pharmacy, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil; 8Pharmacy Services, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 9Knowledge and Evaluation Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 10Faculty of Health Sciences and NIHR CLAHRC Wessex, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; 11School of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA Purpose: The workload of health care and its impact on patient functioning and well-being is known as treatment burden. The purpose of this study was to finalize a conceptual framework of treatment burden that will be used to inform a new patient-reported measure of this construct. Patients and methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 chronically ill patients from a large academic medical center (n=32) and an urban safety-net hospital (n=18). We coded themes identifying treatment burden, with the themes harmonized through discussion between multiple coders. Four focus groups, each with five to eight participants with chronic illness, were subsequently held to confirm the thematic structure that emerged from the interviews. Results: Most interviewed patients (98%) were coping with multiple chronic conditions. A preliminary conceptual framework using data from the first 32 interviews was evaluated and was modified using narrative data from 18 additional interviews with a racially and socioeconomically diverse sample of patients. The final framework features three overarching themes with associated subthemes. These themes included: 1) work patients must do to care for their health (eg, taking medications, keeping medical appointments, monitoring health); 2) challenges/stressors that exacerbate perceived burden (eg, financial, interpersonal, provider obstacles); and 3) impacts of burden (eg, role limitations, mental exhaustion). All themes and subthemes were subsequently confirmed in focus groups. Conclusion: The final conceptual framework can be used as a foundation for building a patient self-report measure to systematically study treatment burden for research and analytical purposes, as well as to promote meaningful clinic-based dialogue between patients and providers about the challenges inherent in maintaining complex self-management of health. Keywords: treatment burden, conceptual framework, adherence, questionnaire, self-management, multi-morbidity

Background. Extensi ve family coping research has been conducted among breast cancer, prostate cancer and melanoma with lesser emphasis on the coping experiences of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and their family members. Objective. T o examine ways in which patients and their family members cope with the diagnosis of CRC. Methods. A total of 73 par ticipants (21 patients, 52 family members) from 23 families described their experiences during and after a CRC diagnosis, including their coping experiences with the diagnosis. Data from semi-structured interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. The data were analyzed utilizing content analysis with inductive coding methods. Results. Eight major themes were identified: positi ve reframing, holding on to a sense of normalcy, religion and spirituality, joining a group, creating awareness of CRC, lifestyle change, seeking information and alternative treatments. Maintaining an emotional sense of normalcy through positive thinking, engaging in activities to take one’s mind off the diagnosis and believing that there is a higher authority which has control over the diagnosis and life were vital for the patients and their family members. Patients and family members used similar coping strategies. Conclusion. Findings from this study have implications for under standing how families blend emotion-based and problem-focused coping strategies in the face of a CRC diagnosis. Further developing evidence-based interventions that target coping and well-being in cancer patients and extending them to family members is necessary and holds great promise for providers who care for patients with familial cancers.

Objectives To examine the concordance between clinicians and men diagnosed with prostate cancer on a clinician-derived pathophysiological classification of the following self-reported urinary complications: storage (irritative), voiding (obstructive), and leakage/incontinence. Materials and methods Fourteen urology experts classified 37 urinary function questionnaire items into 3 primary conceptual dimensions (e.g., storage [irritative], voiding [obstructive] and urinary leakage/incontinence) that would best reflect each item's content. In addition, 218 patient participants provided responses to the 37 items. Using classifications by experts to develop the conceptual framework, the structure was tested using confirmatory factor analyses with patient data. Results Expert consensus was achieved in the classification of 31 out of 37 items. Using the 3-factor conceptual framework and patient data, the fit indices for the overall correlated factor model suggested an acceptable overall model fit. The analyses of the separate domains showed acceptable fit for the storage/irritative domain and the leaking/incontinence domain. The dimensionality of the voiding/obstructive domain was too difficult to estimate. Conclusions Our analysis found items that conceptually and psychometrically support 2 constructs (leaking/incontinence and storage/irritative). The consistency of this support between the groups suggests a clinical relevance that is useful in treating patients. We have conceptual support for a third hypothesis (voiding/obstructive), although there were too few items to assess this psychometrically. Relative motivating factors of bother and urinary complaints were not addressed and remain an unmet need in this field.

ObjectivesTreatment burden is the workload of healthcare for people with long-term conditions (LTC) and its impact on well-being. A method of measurement is required to identify those experiencing high burden and to measure intervention efficacy. Our aim was to identify, examine and appraise validated patient-reported measures (PRMs) of treatment burden in stroke. Here, stroke serves as an exemplar LTC of older adults.DesignA systematic review of published studies that describe the development and validation of PRMs measuring treatment burden in stroke survivors.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO electronic databases.Eligibility criteriaStudies published between January 2000 and 12 April 2019 inclusive, in English language. No restrictions were set based on clinical setting or geographical location.Data extraction and synthesisScreening, data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. Content of the PRMs was compared with a published taxonomy of treatment burden. Quality appraisal was conducted using International Society for Quality of Life Research standards.ResultsFrom 3993 articles, 6 relevant PRMs were identified: 3 were stroke specific: The Satisfaction with Stroke Care questionnaire; The Stroke Patient-Reported Outcome Measure and The Barriers to Physical Activity after Stroke scale. Three were generic but validated in stroke: The WHO Quality of Life-100; The Patient’s Questionnaire on Participation in Discharge Planning and The Chao Perception of Continuity scale. None comprehensively measured treatment burden. Examples of omitted burdens included developing coping strategies, managing finances and returning to driving. The most notable issue regarding quality appraisal was that three PRMs lacked any underpinning qualitative research relevant to the sample.ConclusionThere is a need to develop a comprehensive PRM of treatment burden for use in stroke, with potential for use in other older populations.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a new comprehensive patient-reported measure of treatment burden-the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS). METHODS: A conceptual framework was used to derive the PETS with items reviewed and cognitively tested with patients. A survey battery, including a pilot version of the PETS, was mailed to 838 multi-morbid patients from two healthcare institutions for validation. RESULTS: A total of 332 multi-morbid patients returned completed surveys. Diagnostics supported deletion and consolidation of some items and domains. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a domain model for scaling comprised of 9 factors: medical information, medications, medical appointments, monitoring health, interpersonal challenges, medical/healthcare expenses, difficulty with healthcare services, role/social activity limitations, and physical/mental exhaustion. Scales showed good internal consistency (α range 0.79-0.95). Higher PETS scores, indicative of greater treatment burden, were correlated with more distress, less satisfaction with medications, lower self-efficacy, worse physical and mental health, and lower convenience of healthcare (Ps

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was a National Institutes of Health-funded initiative to develop measures of symptoms and function. Responsiveness is the degree to which a measure can detect underlying changes over time. The objective of the current study was to document the responsiveness of 8 PROMIS measures in a large, population-based cancer cohort.The Measuring Your Health study recruited 2968 patients who were diagnosed with 1 of 7 cancers between 2010 and 2012 through 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. Participants completed a baseline survey (6-13 months after diagnosis) and a 6-month follow-up survey. Changes in 8 PROMIS scores were compared with global ratings of transition, changes in performance status, and clinical events.Measures were responsive to 6-month declines and improvements in performance status with small to large effect sizes (ES) (Cohen d = 0.34-0.71; P .01). Mean changes and effect sizes were larger for participants who reported declines compared with those who reported improvements. Small-to-medium ES were observed in patients who reported being "a little" worse (d = 0.31-0.56), and medium-to-large ES were observed in those who reported being "a lot" worse (d = 0.53-0.72). Hospitalized participants reported significant score increases, resulting in worsening of pain (d = 0.51), fatigue (d = 0.35), and depression (d = 0.57; all P .01). Cancer recurrence and progression were associated with smaller increases in pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance (d = 0.22-0.27).The current results indicated that all 8 PROMIS measures were sensitive to patient-perceived worsening and improvement and to major clinical events. These findings will be able to inform the design and interpretation of future research studies and clinical initiatives administering PROMIS measures. Cancer 2017;123:327-335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Background Childhood diseases, such as atopic dermatitis, have a negative impact on quality of life (QoL) of parents. How pediatric psoriasis affects a parent's QoL is unknown. Objective To explore the impact of childhood psoriasis on the lives of the parents. Methods Semistructured interviews were conducted with 31 parents of children with psoriasis. Narrative data were analyzed and a conceptual framework of the effects of childhood psoriasis on parents was developed. Results All parents reported that their child's psoriasis caused a substantial, negative impact on their own QoL. A conceptual framework showed a negative impact on health and self-care, emotional well-being, family and social function, personal well-being, and life pursuits. Emotional well-being was the most affected domain. Limitations It was not possible to correlate psoriasis severity with parental QoL. Conclusion Childhood psoriasis alters the QoL of parents in multiple ways. Information from this study can be used to develop a QoL instrument to explore treatment and support strategies for families affected by pediatric psoriasis.

Objective We combined anchor- and distribution-based methods to establish minimally important differences (MIDs) for six Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. Study Design and Setting Participants completed 6 PROMIS-Cancer scales and 23 anchor measures at an initial ( n =101) assessment and a follow-up ( n =88) assessment 6–12 weeks later. Three a priori criteria were used to identify usable cross-sectional and longitudinal anchor-based MID estimates. The mean standard error of measurement was also computed for each scale. The focus of the analysis was on item response theory-based MIDs estimated on a T -score scale. Raw score MIDs were estimated for comparison purposes. Results Many cross-sectional (64%) and longitudinal (73%) T -score anchor-based MID estimates were excluded because they did not meet a priori criteria. The following are the recommended T -score MID ranges: 17-item Fatigue (2.5–4.5), 7-item Fatigue (3.0–5.0), 10-item Pain Interference (4.0–6.0), 10-item Physical Functioning (4.0–6.0), 9-item Emotional Distress-Anxiety (3.0–4.5), and 10-item Emotional Distress-Depression (3.0–4.5). Effect sizes corresponding to these MIDs averaged between 0.40 and 0.63. Conclusions This study is the first to address MIDs for PROMIS measures. Studies are currently being conducted to confirm these MIDs in other patient populations and to determine whether these MIDs vary by patients' level of functioning.

Objective A conceptual framework for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is a structured representation of outcome concepts and issues. Our aim was to develop a conceptual framework of PROs for hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) to support measurement clarity. Methods Relevant outcome issues were identified from review of recent clinical trials. This provided content for an interview with 15 metastatic HRPC patients and a survey of 10 practitioners. All participants were asked about the relevance and importance of 26 outcomes and were allowed to nominate new outcomes. Practitioners were also asked to determine which outcomes endorsed by patients were attributable to the disease (symptoms) versus treatment (side effects). Analyses of archived clinical trial data were used to verify and augment the interview and survey results. Results Patients endorsed 11 concerns as relevant and important to HRPC including general pain, bone pain, urinary problems, fatigue, appetite loss, constipation, erectile dysfunction, peripheral neuropathy, diarrhea, PSA anxiety, and changes in self image. Practitioner judgments helped classify each concern into one of four categories, disease symptom, treatment side effect, both symptom and side effect, or psychological concern. Additionally, patients endorsed (and practitioners confirmed) the relevance and importance of several general domains of quality of life. Analyses of archived data confirmed the importance of these issues and suggested two additional concerns. Conclusion Findings were used to propose a conceptual framework of PROs for metastatic HRPC. Such frameworks can be used to help specify targets for assessment in clinical studies such as treatment trials.

Objective To compare Cohen's guidelines for small (0.2), medium (0.5), and large (0.8) effect sizes with empirical estimates for a cancer-specific health-related quality-of-life questionnaire (HRQOL), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G). Methods Seventy-one papers satisfied inclusion criteria for meta-analysis. Blinded to the HRQOL results, three “experts” (with expertise in interpreting the FACT-G questionnaire and managing cancer patients), predicted the relative magnitude of HRQOL mean differences. Size classes (small, medium, large) were defined in terms of relevance to clinical decision making. The experts worked independently and based their predictions on patient characteristics and clinical circumstances. Their judgments were linked with FACT-G results and inverse-variance–weighted mean effect sizes calculated for each size class. Results At least two experts were perfectly concordant and up to one was discordant by at most one size category for 833 of the mean differences; for these, weighted kappas were generally in the “substantial” range (0.60–0.79). Of these mean differences, 617 were cross-sectional; small, medium, and large mean effect sizes were physical well-being 0.42, 0.87, 1.6; functional well-being 0.37, 0.71, 1.6; emotional well-being 0.32, 0.40, no large differences; and social well-being 0.14, 0.23, no large differences. Two hundred and sixteen longitudinal mean differences yielded small and medium effect sizes: physical well-being 0.26, 0.34; functional well-being 0.14, 0.28; emotional well-being 0.27, 0.23; and social well-being 0.08, 0.01. There was virtually no evidence for large longitudinal effects. Conclusion These results provide specific, evidence-based alternatives to Cohen's generic guidelines, for use in sample-size calculations for the FACT-G and interpretation of the clinical significance of effects measured with FACT-G.

Because bone metastases cause significant pain, we developed a questionnaire to evaluate its nature, severity, and impact. This 16-item questionnaire is the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Bone Pain (FACT-BP). We also developed a 13/18-item questionnaire, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Treatment Satisfaction-Bone Treatment Convenience and Satisfaction Questionnaire (FACIT-TS-BTCSQ), to evaluate patients' expectations and acceptance of bone-specific therapies. We evaluated the performance of these scales in two clinical trials. In both trials, we enrolled patients with metastatic breast cancer, who had progressive bone metastases despite first-line therapy with pamidronate or clodronate. We administered intravenous zoledronic acid to 31 patients in one trial and oral ibandronate to 30 patients in the other. Patients completed the FACT-BP questionnaire and FACIT-TS-BTCSQ at baseline, then at Weeks 4, 8, and 12. The FACT-BP scale showed good internal consistency reliability [Cronbach's alpha (alpha)=0.93-0.96]. There was evidence of construct validity, and known-group validity was supported by score shifts in the anticipated direction (Cohen's d effect size=0.36). The FACT-BP score reflected clinical change as evidenced by differences in performance status. This cross-sectional anchor-based criterion suggested reasonable clinically important differences (effect size=0.36). The FACIT-TS-BTCSQ showed good internal consistency reliability for treatment expectation (alpha=0.87) and treatment experience (alpha's=0.89-0.92). The FACT-BP scale is meaningful and appears appropriate for broader use. The assessment of satisfaction (FACIT-TS-BTCSQ) raised questions that will require further research.

Objective To determine clinically meaningful changes (CMCs) for the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Prostate (FACT–P). Methods We obtained data from a Phase III trial of atrasentan in metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer patients (n = 809). We determined anchor-based differences using Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS), bone alkaline phosphatase (BAP), hemoglobin, time to disease progression (TTP), adverse events (AE), and survival. One-third and one-half standard deviation and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used as distribution-based criteria for CMCs. Comparison across baseline FACT–P domains and derived scales [FACT–P total score, Trial Outcome Index (TOI) score, prostate cancer subscale (PCS) score, pain-related score, and FACT Advanced Prostate Symptom Index (FAPSI)] were conducted for KPS, BAP, and hemoglobin using Student's t tests. Twelve-week change scores were compared for TTP, AE, and survival using ANCOVA. Results CMCs were estimated as 6 to 10 for FACT–P total score, 5 to 9 for FACT–P TOI score, 2 to 3 for FACT–P PCS, 1 to 2 for the 4 PCS pain-related questions, and 2 to 3 for FAPSI. CMCs were also estimated using distribution-based criteria. Kappa statistics were computed to determine the degree of correspondence between the recommended guideline of 1.0 SEM and empirically derived standards. Most of the kappas for health-related quality of life domains and SEM standards had "substantial" to "almost perfect" concordance. Conclusions The significant relationship between clinical and quality of life data provides support for the use of CMCs to increase interpretability of FACT–P scores.

We previously developed a multidomain, self-report outcome measure relevant to a wide range of complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapies. We report the results of a pilot study to validate the measure.Fifty-two patients (60% female, mean age, 53 years) seeking services from CAM providers completed a battery of measures prior to a scheduled visit. The battery included the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule, items from the Brief Pain and Fatigue Inventories, ratings of global quality of life (QOL) and change in physical health, and our pilot measure consisting of six hypothesized subscales (pain, fatigue, physical/functional ability, personal control, existential issues, and general QOL). Internal reliability, item convergence and discrimination, construct, and concurrent validity were assessed.Pilot measure domains appeared to be internally reliable with five of six alpha coefficients exceeding 0.70. Multitrait scaling analyses demonstrated that most items converged on the domains that they were hypothesized to represent, although item discrimination was demonstrated for the pain domain only. Correlations with standardized assessments of pain, fatigue, and global QOL showed evidence of construct validity. All domain scores differentiated patients classified high versus low in global QOL (P.01) and four (pain, fatigue, physical/functional ability, and general QOL) differentiated patients who perceived recent changes in their physical health (improvement vs decline; P.05).These results provide preliminary psychometric data for a pilot measure of CAM outcomes, though further testing is warranted.

We tested the reliability and validity of a brief symptom index for use with patients in the advanced stages of lung cancer. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy--Lung Symptom Index-12 (FLSI-12) is a brief self-report measure that combines seven items addressing symptoms common in advanced-stage lung cancer with five symptoms or concerns that are relevant to most people with advanced-stage cancer. The index was administered prospectively to 92 advanced-stage lung cancer patients beginning at the initiation of chemotherapy and for 12 consecutive weeks. Reliability, convergent and concurrent validities, and responsiveness to change were determined and a minimally important difference (MID) was estimated. The index had good internal consistency (all Cronbach's alpha's>0.70), moderate to high item-to-total correlations (93% rho's> or =0.30), and correlated highly with a measure of overall quality of life (rho's> or =0.50). Baseline scores differentiated patients with better versus worse clinical features (p's

Background: To test the reliability, sensitivity to change in biomarkers associated with disease progression and response to treatment, and clinical meaningfulness of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep) in patients with hepatobiliary carcinoma. Patients and methods: One hundred and fifty-eight patients diagnosed with hepatobiliary carcinoma were prospectively studied. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) was assessed at baseline (prior to treatment), 3-month follow-up (n = 55) and 6-month follow-up (n = 27). Results: The internal consistency of all the scales of the FACT-Hep were adequate at all time points (>0.75). The FACT-Hep was found to be sensitive to changes in clinical indicators (alkaline phosphate, alpha-fetoprotein, hemoglobin and survival) that reflect disease progression and response to treatment. Combined results from distribution-based and cross-sectional anchor-based analyses provide the following minimally important difference (MID) estimates: FACT-General (FACT-G) subscales = 2–3; FACT-G = 6–7; Hepatobiliary Cancer Subscale = 5–6; FACT-Hep = 8–9; Trial Outcome Index = 7–8; and FACT-Hepatobiliary Symptom Index = 2–3 points. Conclusions: The FACT-Hep is a reliable instrument that is responsive to clinical indicators of disease progression and response to treatment. The MID estimates can aid interpretation of HRQL data and facilitate sample size

The authors examined whether 3 individual difference variables--self-esteem, self-efficacy, and depressive symptoms--interacted with psychoeducational group interventions for men with prostate cancer (n = 250) to predict general and prostate-specific quality of life. Men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer were randomly assigned to an education intervention, an education plus group discussion intervention, or usual care and followed for 12 months. Eight groups of 10 to 12 men were convened in each condition. Men who began the study with lower self-esteem, lower prostate-specific self-efficacy, and higher depressive symptoms benefited the most from the interventions. Of these 3 moderator variables, the most consistent results emerged for self-esteem. That is, the benefits of the intervention were strongest for men with low self-esteem.

BACKGROUND. To develop and validate a quality of life subscale for patients with esophageal cancer to be used with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy—General (FACT-G). METHODS. Prospective cohort study of patients with esophageal cancer treated with surgery alone or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery evaluating the validity, internal consistency, and responsiveness to change of the FACT-Esophageal (FACT-E) when comparing it with the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ 30) and esophageal (OES 24) as well as clinical factors. RESULTS. The FACT-E demonstrated very good convergent and divergent validity when compared with the EORTC QLQ30 and OES 24 and clinical variables. Internal consistency was also good with coefficient α >0.70 for all subscales and individual items. Stability coefficients were >0.80. Changes in clinical status were reflected in changes in FACT-E scores demonstrating responsiveness to change, particularly in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before surgery. CONCLUSIONS. The FACT-E met or exceeded all standards for validity, providing an option to measure health-related quality of life for different treatment strategies for esophageal cancer. Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society.

Objective To estimate minimally important differences (MIDs) on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Colorectal (FACT-C) instrument using anchor- and distribution-based methods. Study Design and Setting Preliminary MIDs were generated for FACT-C scores based on published results for two samples (n = 60 and n = 63) from the FACT-C validation study. Preliminary MIDs were confirmed using data from a Phase II randomized controlled clinical trial (n = 104) and a population-based observational study (n = 568). MIDs were estimated for the colorectal cancer subscale (CCS); the FACT-C Trial Outcome Index (TOI-C), which is the sum of the CCS, physical well-being, and functional well-being subscales; and the FACT-C total score. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses were used. Results MIDs were stable across the different patient samples. The recommended MIDs ranged from 2 to 3 points for the CCS, 4 to 6 points for the TOI-C, and 5 to 8 points for the FACT-C total score. Conclusions MIDs can enhance the interpretability of FACT-C scores, and they can be used to provide a basis for sample size estimation and to determine clinical benefit in combination with other measures of efficacy. General guidelines for estimating MIDs for other FACT instruments are suggested.

Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important endpoint in cancer clinical trials and in cancer treatment in general; however, the meaningfulness of HRQOL scores may not be apparent to clinicians or researchers. Minimally important differences (MIDs) can enhance the interpretability of HRQOL scores by identifying differences likely to be meaningful to patients and clinicians. This article’s objective is to describe and provide examples of approaches we have used to identify MIDs for instruments in the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) measurement system. Distribution- and anchor-based approaches are described and illustrated. We also discuss the importance of assessing the appropriateness of anchors, and we provide suggestions for combining results into a single range of plausible MIDs. MIDs for FACIT instruments established to date are summarized, and general guidelines that can be used to estimate MIDs for other FACIT instruments are provided. Applications of MIDs in research are illustrated.

We assessed the reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change of the 6-item Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast Symptom Index (FBSI) in a sample of 615 metastatic breast cancer patients. The FBSI is a brief, clinically relevant, and psychometrically sound instrument that can be used to measure symptoms in patients with breast cancer.

This article discusses quality of life in lung cancer: the validity and cross-cultural applicability of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung scale.

To determine distribution- and anchor-based minimal important difference (MID) estimates for four scores from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B): the breast cancer subscale (BCS), Trial Outcome Index (TOI), FACT-G (the general version), and FACT-B.We used data from a Phase III clinical trial in metastatic breast cancer (ECOG study 1193; n=739) and a prospective observational study of pain in metastatic breast cancer (n=129). One third and one half of the standard deviation and 1 standard error of measurement were used as distribution-based criteria. Clinical indicators used to determine anchor-based differences included ECOG performance status, current pain, and response to treatment.FACT-B scores were responsive to performance status and pain anchors, but not to treatment response. By combining the results of distribution- and anchor-based methods, MID estimates were obtained: BCS=2-3 points, TOI=5-6 points, FACT-G=5-6 points, and FACT-B=7-8 points.Distribution- and anchor-based estimates of the MID do show convergence. These estimates can be used in combination with other measures of efficacy to determine meaningful benefit and provide a basis for sample size estimation in clinical trials.

We measured perceptions of wives’ attempts to encourage appropriate health behavior among men with prostate cancer, a phenomenon known as ‘social control.’ We examined social control for health-enhancing behaviors (e.g., exercise), health-restorative behaviors (e.g., sleep), and health-compromising behaviors (e.g., smoking). We interviewed 80 married men with prostate cancer shortly after treatment, 2 months later, and 8 months later. Social control was distinct from social support and social conflict. There was no evidence that spouse social control was effective in producing positive changes in health behavior. In fact, health-restorative and health-compromising social control were associated with poorhealth behavior. There were no relations between social control and changes in health behavior over time. Spouse social control was associated with greater psychological distress, especially health-restorative and health-compromising social control. There was some evidence that social control undermined personal control beliefs over time. Future research should consider examining differences in the way that social control is conveyed, so that we may better understand its relations to health behavior and well-being.

Purpose: To determine the ability of longitudinal patient-reported health (PRH) scores to enhance prediction of clinical outcomes beyond baseline scores. Patients and Methods: In 573 advanced non–small-cell lung cancer patients enrolled in a phase III clinical trial, we used baseline and 6-week follow-up PRH scores to predict best response to treatment, disease progression, and survival. Using regression analyses, we tested the predictive ability of the five subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung (physical, functional, social/family, emotional well-being, and the lung cancer subscale) as well as the trial outcome index (TOI) aggregate score. Results: After clinical factors were controlled for, baseline physical well-being (PWB) and TOI scores predicted all three clinical outcomes. A higher baseline PWB score was associated with a better response to treatment (odds ratio, 1.09; P < .001) and lower risk of death (risk ratio, 0.95; P < .001). Higher baseline TOI score was associated with a lower risk of disease progression (risk ratio, 0.98; P < .001). These two baseline predictors (PWB and TOI) were then used along with 6-week change scores to classify patients into four groups: low baseline-declined, low baseline-improved, high baseline-declined, and high baseline-improved. Patients with low baseline-declined PWB scores showed the worst responses to treatment and survived the shortest duration. Patients with low baseline-declined TOI scores had the shortest time to progression. Conclusion: The physical aspects of baseline PRH and PRH change during chemotherapy are significant predictors of clinical outcomes in lung cancer. This has implications for patient stratification in clinical trials and may aid decision-making in clinical practice.

With the established effectiveness of diverse treatments for prostate cancer, identification of the physical and psychosocial consequences of the disease and various treatments becomes critical. We review the literature on the effects of prostate cancer and its treatment on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Studies show that prostate cancer and its treatment affect both disease-specific HRQoL (i.e. urinary, sexual, and bowel function) as well as general HRQoL (i.e. energy/vitality, performance in physical and social roles). Yet, these effects appear to differ across stage of disease and type of treatment. We outline evidence from three sources: (1) studies that compare men with the disease with an age-matched sample of men without the disease, (2) studies that assess men with the disease across time, and (3) cross-sectional studies that highlight predictors of HRQoL. Future research directions are discussed.