Advertisement

Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes

  • Anja Frei
  • Milo Puhan
Chapter

Abstract

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), from specific symptoms to health-related quality life, have been important outcome measures in pulmonary rehabilitation for a long time and paved the way for their use in clinical research in general. The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire and the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire are the most commonly used instruments in trials of pulmonary rehabilitation. While the development process of PROs received less attention than the validation of PROs, recent developments including guidance from regulatory agencies emphasize the need of a thorough development process including patient input as a basis for the validity, reliability and responsiveness of PROs. The selection of a PRO instrument is greatly facilitated if the systematic approach, presented here, with predefined criteria about the content, measurement properties and practical aspects is followed.

References

  1. 1.
    US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. 2009. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed 24 Oct 2016.
  2. 2.
    Petty TL, et al. A comprehensive care program for chronic airway obstruction. Methods and preliminary evaluation of symptomatic and functional improvement. Ann Intern Med. 1969;70(6):1109–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McGavin CR, et al. Physical rehabilitation for the chronic bronchitic: results of a controlled trial of exercises in the home. Thorax. 1977;32(3):307–11.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McCarthy B, et al. Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2:CD003793.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Puhan MA, et al. Pulmonary rehabilitation following exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;1:CD005305.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guyatt GH, et al. A measure of quality of life for clinical trials in chronic lung disease. Thorax. 1987;42(10):773–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones PW, et al. A self-complete measure of health status for chronic airflow limitation. The St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1992;145(6):1321–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118(8):622–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Celli BR, et al. The body-mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity index in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(10):1005–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Puhan MA, et al. Expansion of the prognostic assessment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the updated BODE index and the ADO index. Lancet. 2009;374(9691):704–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Emery M-P, Perrier L-L, Acquadro C. Patient-reported outcome and quality of life instruments database (PROQOLID): frequently asked questions. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cazzola M, et al. A review of the most common patient-reported outcomes in COPD—revisiting current knowledge and estimating future challenges. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:725–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ekström M, Sundh J, Larsson K. Patient reported outcome measures in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: which to use? Expert Rev Respir Med. 2016;10(3):351–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jones P, et al. Beyond FEV1 in COPD: a review of patient-reported outcomes and their measurement. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2012;7:697–709.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schünemann HJ, et al. A comparison of the original chronic respiratory questionnaire with a standardized version. Chest. 2003;124(4):1421–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fletcher CM, et al. The significance of respiratory symptoms and the diagnosis of chronic bronchitis in a working population. Br Med J. 1959;2(5147):257–66.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mahler DA, Wells CK. Evaluation of clinical methods for rating dyspnea. Chest. 1988;93(3):580–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eakin EG, et al. Reliability and validity of dyspnea measures in patients with obstructive lung disease. Int J Behav Med. 1995;2(2):118–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mahler DA, et al. The measurement of dyspnea. Contents, interobserver agreement, and physiologic correlates of two new clinical indexes. Chest. 1984;85(6):751–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leidy NK, et al. Development of the EXAcerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT): a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure. Value Health. 2010;13(8):965–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leidy NK, et al. The breathlessness, cough, and sputum scale: the development of empirically based guidelines for interpretation. Chest. 2003;124(6):2182–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67(6):361–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    van der Molen T, et al. Development, validity and responsiveness of the Clinical COPD questionnaire. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jones PW, et al. Development and first validation of the COPD assessment test. Eur Respir J. 2009;34(3):648–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tarlov AR, et al. The medical outcomes study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA. 1989;262(7):925–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Puhan MA, et al. Relative responsiveness of the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire and four other health-related quality of life instruments for patients with chronic lung disease. Respir Med. 2007;101(2):308–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    The EuroQol Group. EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10109801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Puhan MA, et al. Measurement of agreement on health-related quality of life changes in response to respiratory rehabilitation by patients and physicians—a prospective study. Respir Med. 2004;98(12):1195–202.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bottomley A, Jones D, Claassens L. Patient-reported outcomes: assessment and current perspectives of the guidelines of the Food and Drug Administration and the reflection paper of the European Medicines Agency. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(3):347–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    European Medicines Agency. Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP). Reflection paper on the regulatory guidance for the use of health-related quality of life (HRQL) measures in the evaluation of medicinal products. 2005. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2014/06/WC500168852.pdf. Accessed 24 Oct 2016.
  31. 31.
    Patrick DL, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 1—eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health. 2011a;14(8):967–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Patrick DL, et al. Content validity—establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: part 2—assessing respondent understanding. Value Health. 2011b;14(8):978–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rothman ML, et al. Patient-reported outcomes: conceptual issues. Value Health. 2007;10:S66–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Garcia-Aymerich J, et al. Regular physical activity reduces hospital admission and mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population based cohort study. Thorax. 2006;61(9):772–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dobbels F, et al. The PROactive innovative conceptual framework on physical activity. Eur Respir J. 2014;44(5):1223–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gimeno-Santos E, et al. The PROactive instruments to measure physical activity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eur Respir J. 2015;46(4):988–1000.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Williams K, et al. Patient-reported physical activity questionnaires: a systematic review of content and format. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012;10:28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Frei A, et al. A comprehensive systematic review of the development process of 104 patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for physical activity in chronically ill and elderly people. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Gimeno-Santos E, et al. Validity of instruments to measure physical activity may be questionable due to a lack of conceptual frameworks: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Van Remoortel H, Giavedoni S, et al. Validity of activity monitors in health and chronic disease: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012a;9:84.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rabinovich RA, et al. Validity of physical activity monitors during daily life in patients with COPD. Eur Respir J. 2013;42(5):1205–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Van Remoortel H, Raste Y, et al. Validity of six activity monitors in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a comparison with indirect calorimetry. PLoS One. 2012b;7(6):e39198.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Weldam SWM, et al. Evaluation of Quality of Life instruments for use in COPD care and research: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2013;50(5):688–707.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Terwee CB, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Revicki D, et al. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(2):102–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Limsuwat C, et al. Pulmonary rehabilitation improves only some domains of health-related quality of life measured by the Short Form-36 questionnaire. Ann Thorac Med. 2014;9(3):144–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smid DE, et al. Responsiveness and MCID estimates for CAT, CCQ, and HADS in patients with COPD undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation: a prospective analysis. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18(1):53–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Epidemiology, Biostatistics und Prevention Institute (EBPI), University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations