Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the sensitivities of pharmacotherapy-related and disease-specific quality of life measures in response to pharmacist-led pharmaceutical care for cancer outpatients: a randomised controlled trial

  • Research Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

No data were previously available regarding the sensitivities of pharmacotherapy-related and disease-specific quality of life measures to pharmacist-led pharmaceutical care (PC).

Aim

The aim was to compare the sensitivities of two health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures, i.e. the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measure of Pharmaceutical Therapy for Quality of Life (PROMPT-QoL) versus the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), in response to pharmacist-led PC for cancer outpatients.

Method

A randomised controlled trial was conducted on cancer outpatients of a tertiary Thai hospital. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to a PC group receiving PC interventions or a usual care (UC) group receiving pharmacist’s standard care. The HRQoL of both groups was assessed using the PROMPT-QoL and the FACT-G before and after intervention. The sensitivities of the two measures were determined using standardised mean differences (SMDs).

Results

A total of 237 patients in two arms (120 PC vs. 117 UC patients) completed the trial. With PC interventions, all eight PROMPT-QoL domains and 3 out of 4 FACT-G domains were significantly improved. The PROMPT-QoL yielded SMDs ranging from 0.24 to 1.68 that were considered moderate-to-high sensitivity, while the FACT-G provided moderate sensitivity with SMDs of 0.31–0.64. The average SMDs of four FACT-G domains was 0.50 and SMD of the total score was 0.80. Eight PROMPT-QoL domains had the average SMD of 0.60 and the total score SMD was 1.40.

Conclusion

The PROMPT-QoL is more sensitive to detect HRQoL when delivering pharmacist-led pharmaceutical care to cancer outpatients.

Trial registration: TCTR20210809008.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Picton C, Wright H. Medicines optimisation: helping patient to make the most of medicines; good practice guidance for healthcare professionals in England. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society; 2013. Available from https://www.rpharms.com/Portals/0/RPS%20document%20library/Open%20access/Policy/helping-patients-make-the-most-of-their-medicines.pdf. Accessed 29.07.2023.

  2. Hepler CD, Strand LM. Opportunities and responsibilities in pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1990;47:533–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cipolle RJ, Strand LM, Morley PC. Pharmaceutical care practice: the patient-centered approach to medication management. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Watanabe JH, McInnis T, Hirsch JD. Cost of prescription drug–related morbidity and mortality. Ann Pharmacother. 2018;52:829–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mohammed MA, Moles RJ, Chen TF. Impact of pharmaceutical care interventions on health-related quality of life outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2016;50:862–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sakthong P, Suksanga P, Sakulbumrungsil R, et al. Development of Patient-reported outcomes measure of pharmaceutical therapy for quality of life (PROMPT-QoL): a novel instrument for medication management. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2015;11:315–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sakthong P, Chinthammit C, Sukarnjanaset P, et al. Psychometric properties of the Patient-reported outcomes measure of pharmaceutical therapy for quality of life (PROMPT-QoL). Value Health RI. 2017;12:41–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sakthong P, Sangthonganotai T. A randomized controlled trial of the impact of pharmacist-led patient-centered pharmaceutical care on patients’ medicine therapy-related quality of life. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2018;14:332–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Colombo LRP, Aguiar PM, Lima TM, et al. The effects of pharmacist interventions on adult outpatients with cancer: a systematic review. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2017;42:414–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fujii H, Ueda Y, Hirose C, et al. Pharmaceutical intervention for adverse events improves quality of life in patients with cancer undergoing outpatient chemotherapy. J Pharm Health Care Sci. 2022;8:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Valença-Feitosa F, Carvalho GAC, Alcantara TS, et al. Identifying health outcomes of pharmaceutical clinical services in patients with cancer: a systematic review. Res Soc Admin Pharm. 2023;19:591–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cella DF, Tulsky DS, Gray G, et al. The Functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT) scale: development and validation of the general measure. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:570–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Trials. 2010;11:32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Sukchinnaboot S. Effect of education and counseling provided by a clinical pharmacist on outpatients with cancer chemotherapy [Master’s thesis]. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5:649–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ratanatharathorn V, Sirirettrakul S, Jirajarus M, et al. Quality of life, functional assessment of cancer therapy-general. J Med Assoc Thai. 2001;84:1430–42.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cohen P. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Hillsdale; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wang Y, Wu H, Xu F. Impact of clinical pharmacy services on KAP and QOL in cancer patients: a single-center experience. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Liekweg A, Westfeld M, Braun M, et al. Pharmaceutical care for patients with breast and ovarian cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2012;20:2669–77.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Karthikeyan K, Sunil VB, Alex SM, et al. A study to assess the impact of pharmaceutical care services to cancer patients in a tertiary care hospital. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2022;28:588–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Krska J, Katusiime B, Corlett SA. Validation of an instrument to measure patients’ experiences of medicine use: the living with medicines questionnaire. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2017;11:671–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Tseng HM, Lee CH, Chen YJ, et al. Developing a measure of medication-related quality of life for people with polypharmacy. Qual Life Res. 2016;25:1295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mohammed MA, Moles RJ, Hilmer SN, et al. Development and validation of an instrument for measuring the burden of medicine on functioning and well-being the medication-related burden quality of life (MRB-QoL) tool. BMJ Open. 2018;8:1–11.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the patients for their participation and the hospital staff for their assistance in data collection process.

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Phyathai Road, Pathumwan, Bangkok, 10330, Thailand

    Phantipa Sakthong

  2. Pharmacy Unit, Samutprakarn Hospital, Samutprakarn Province, Thailand

    Porntip Soipitak

  3. Faculty of Pharmacy, Bangkok Thonburi University, Bangkok, Thailand

    Win Winit-Watjana

Authors
  1. Phantipa Sakthong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Porntip Soipitak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Win Winit-Watjana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phantipa Sakthong.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sakthong, P., Soipitak, P. & Winit-Watjana, W. Comparison of the sensitivities of pharmacotherapy-related and disease-specific quality of life measures in response to pharmacist-led pharmaceutical care for cancer outpatients: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Clin Pharm 46, 463–470 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-023-01692-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-023-01692-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation