Cargando…
The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training
AIMS: To explore cancer trial coordinators' roles and challenges in administering patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, and establish what PRO-specific training and guidance they received and needed. METHODS: Eligible cancer trial coordinators experienced with PRO assessment from appro...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29696221 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.11.009 |
_version_ | 1783314147936567296 |
---|---|
author | Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca Calvert, Melanie Kyte, Derek Stockler, Martin King, Madeleine T. |
author_facet | Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca Calvert, Melanie Kyte, Derek Stockler, Martin King, Madeleine T. |
author_sort | Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS: To explore cancer trial coordinators' roles and challenges in administering patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, and establish what PRO-specific training and guidance they received and needed. METHODS: Eligible cancer trial coordinators experienced with PRO assessment from approved Australian sites participated in an audio-recorded, semi-structured interview (transcribed verbatim). Recruitment continued until data saturation. Transcripts underwent content analysis. RESULTS: Twenty coordinators participated (professional training: nursing (n = 12), science/research (n = 4), both (n = 4)). PRO administration formed a minor component of most (85%) coordinators' roles. PRO administration challenges included managing ‘English second language’ participants, participants' companions who attempted to complete questionnaires, burdensome questionnaires, and balancing their duty of care against trial requirements. Coordinators reported inconsistencies in PRO administration, which appeared to arise as a result of confusion and inconsistent or contradictory PRO training. Inconsistencies concerned whether/when they explained the purpose of PRO assessment, which participants they approached to complete PROs, and whether they used PRO trial data to inform care. Coordinators received PRO training from various sources; most commonly study-specific start-up meetings (45%) or from colleagues (30%). Two received no PRO-specific training. Despite the challenges reported, many (55%) felt they did not need further PRO training. CONCLUSION: Trial coordinators receive inconsistent PRO-specific training and are often unclear how to prioritise different aspects of data quality when faced with everyday challenges, leading to inconsistent methods, missing data, poor quality data, and even bias. Agreement on how coordinators should prioritise the requirements of PRO studies is a necessary pre-requisite for the development of much-needed, consensus-based PRO administration guidelines. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5898562 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58985622018-04-25 The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca Calvert, Melanie Kyte, Derek Stockler, Martin King, Madeleine T. Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article AIMS: To explore cancer trial coordinators' roles and challenges in administering patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires, and establish what PRO-specific training and guidance they received and needed. METHODS: Eligible cancer trial coordinators experienced with PRO assessment from approved Australian sites participated in an audio-recorded, semi-structured interview (transcribed verbatim). Recruitment continued until data saturation. Transcripts underwent content analysis. RESULTS: Twenty coordinators participated (professional training: nursing (n = 12), science/research (n = 4), both (n = 4)). PRO administration formed a minor component of most (85%) coordinators' roles. PRO administration challenges included managing ‘English second language’ participants, participants' companions who attempted to complete questionnaires, burdensome questionnaires, and balancing their duty of care against trial requirements. Coordinators reported inconsistencies in PRO administration, which appeared to arise as a result of confusion and inconsistent or contradictory PRO training. Inconsistencies concerned whether/when they explained the purpose of PRO assessment, which participants they approached to complete PROs, and whether they used PRO trial data to inform care. Coordinators received PRO training from various sources; most commonly study-specific start-up meetings (45%) or from colleagues (30%). Two received no PRO-specific training. Despite the challenges reported, many (55%) felt they did not need further PRO training. CONCLUSION: Trial coordinators receive inconsistent PRO-specific training and are often unclear how to prioritise different aspects of data quality when faced with everyday challenges, leading to inconsistent methods, missing data, poor quality data, and even bias. Agreement on how coordinators should prioritise the requirements of PRO studies is a necessary pre-requisite for the development of much-needed, consensus-based PRO administration guidelines. Elsevier 2017-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5898562/ /pubmed/29696221 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.11.009 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mercieca-Bebber, Rebecca Calvert, Melanie Kyte, Derek Stockler, Martin King, Madeleine T. The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title | The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title_full | The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title_fullStr | The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title_full_unstemmed | The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title_short | The administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: Interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
title_sort | administration of patient-reported outcome questionnaires in cancer trials: interviews with trial coordinators regarding their roles, experiences, challenges and training |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5898562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29696221 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2017.11.009 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT merciecabebberrebecca theadministrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT calvertmelanie theadministrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT kytederek theadministrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT stocklermartin theadministrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT kingmadeleinet theadministrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT merciecabebberrebecca administrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT calvertmelanie administrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT kytederek administrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT stocklermartin administrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining AT kingmadeleinet administrationofpatientreportedoutcomequestionnairesincancertrialsinterviewswithtrialcoordinatorsregardingtheirrolesexperienceschallengesandtraining |