Measuring Outcomes in Oncology Treatment: The Importance of Patient-Centered Outcomes
Section snippets
Patient Satisfaction
Patient satisfaction is the emotional or cognitive evaluation of a health encounter by a patient as defined by a set of events or experiences. This may be defined by the essential components of the encounter itself (ie, services rendered), or the manner or context in which they are delivered. These definitions highlight the fact that satisfaction is a highly subjective outcome to measure, but important nonetheless. In health care, too often it is forgotten that the patient is a consumer and his
Measures
Patient-centered outcomes can be classified into two major categories: generic or disease-specific measures. There are advantages and disadvantages to each type of measure that must be considered. Generic measures are comprehensive and assess the overall impact, independent of specific disease type, treatment, or patient population. Condition-specific measures tend to be more sensitive tools that are designed to capture symptoms that are specific to a given medical condition and the direct
Summary
Patient-centered outcomes research has become an integral part of clinical oncologic research. Since the mid 1980s, there has been a clear paradigm shift toward patient-centered definitions of what constitutes quality healthcare and successful treatment. In surgical oncology, a cure is not always possible. Patient-centered outcomes, however, provide the tools to ensure the highest quality care is provided to prolong life in a meaningful manner as judged by patients.
References (28)
- et al.
Determinants of patient satisfaction in oncology settings from European and Asian countries: preliminary results based on the EORTC IN-PATSAT32 questionnaire
Eur J Cancer
(2007) - et al.
Methodology for measuring health states–II: scaling methods
J Clin Epidemiol
(1989) - et al.
Measuring patient preference and surgeon choice
Surgery
(2008) - et al.
Methodology for measuring health states—III: population and context effects
J Clin Epidemiol
(1989) - et al.
Patient, clinician, and population perspectives on determining the clinical significance of quality-of-life scores
Mayo Clin Proc
(2002) - et al.
Quality-of-life evaluation in oncological clinical trials—the EORTC model. The EORTC Quality of Life Study Group
Eur J Cancer
(2000) Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century
(2001)Approaching the outcomes question
- et al.
International perspective on health-related quality-of-life research in cancer clinical trials: the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer experience
J Clin Oncol
(2007) - et al.
Satisfaction