Case study 5.  New systems for patient self-reporting improve care and quality of life for cancer patients
Submitting Institution
University of LeedsUnit of Assessment
Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and PharmacySummary Impact Type
HealthResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Nursing, Public Health and Health Services
Summary of the impact
    Researchers at the University of Leeds have designed and developed new
      approaches and technologies for cancer patients to self-assess their
      symptoms and quality of life. The work focused on electronic methods for
      collecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), developing PROMs for
      neglected areas of patient care, and running trials of these techniques.
      These approaches produced sizeable patient benefits including improved
      symptom control and better quality-of-life. These findings have influenced
      clinical guidelines in the UK and Canada, NHS policy and the endorsement
      of PROMs in the Health and Social Care Act (2012). Electronic PROMs
      systems based on the Leeds research have been implemented locally,
      nationally and internationally, making measurable improvements to patient
      welfare and health, such as a reported significant increase in completion
      of chemotherapy treatment.
    Underpinning research
    The diagnosis of cancer leaves patients having to shoulder a huge burden
      and they face an uncertain future. Before the mid-1990s cancer clinicians
      typically focused their attention on survival, rather than their patients'
      quality of life. In 1996, researchers from the University of Leeds set out
      to see whether cancer patient care could be improved by using routine
      patient-centred assessment of their clinical symptoms, as well as
      psychosocial issues and their quality of life. The team wanted to know if
      patient self-reporting could make the detection, recording and management
      of the disease and treatment-related problems more effective. Could the
      introduction of self-reporting into cancer services enhance patient
      quality of life and satisfaction with care, as well as inform and support
      more effective service evaluation? With funding from the NHS [grant a], a
      program of research was launched to develop and evaluate systems and
      questionnaires to collect PROMs and assess their implementation in
      practice. The team developed an electronic system for patient
      self-reports, overcoming logistical challenges of large volume real-time
      data collection in clinical practice. The research focused on (i)
      technical development, (ii) clinical implementation and (iii) the
      assessment of the social impact of cancer, detailed below.
    Technical development
    In 1996, Peter Selby (Professor of Cancer Medicine,
      1989-present), David Forman (Professor of Cancer Epidemiology,
      1994-2010) and colleagues from Leeds developed a stand-alone computer
      touchscreen system to deliver standard questionnaires to assess quality of
      life in cancer patients [grant a]. Evaluations of the touchscreen system,
      which were run in Leeds and in collaboration with Ann Cull (University of
      Edinburgh) and Ann Gould (Scottish Cancer Intelligence Unit) in an
      Edinburgh hospital, demonstrated its feasibility, acceptability and
      reliability in the clinical setting; the researchers also demonstrated the
      validity of the system and the score equivalence of paper versus
      electronic questionnaires [1-2]. Over five years the system was enhanced
      with funding from the Imperial Cancer Research Fund and Cancer Research
      UK. A version was integrated into the electronic patient records system of
      the Leeds Cancer Centre. An online standalone version was developed
      between 2010 and 2013 [grants b, c, d, e].
    More recent developments and evaluation research have shown how a secure
      web-based questionnaire system allows clinicians to monitor patients.
      Studies have also shown how self-reported data can be linked to national
      cancer registration systems, helping clinicians to perform epidemiological
      outcome assessments [grant d] [3].
    Clinical implementation
    Between 1999 and 2008 Galina Velikova (initially Clinical
      Research Fellow, now Professor of Psychosocial and Medical Oncology,
      1996-present), Julia Brown (initially Director of Clinical Trials
      Research Unit, now Professor of Cancer Trials Research, 2006-present) and
      Peter Selby evaluated the impact of regular patient reporting on
      symptoms and quality of life. A proof-of-principle randomised controlled
      trial showed for the first time that providing regular patient
      self-reported data to oncologists improved patient quality of life,
      focused doctor-patient communication, achieved better symptom control and
      reduced distress, without lengthening clinic visits [4].
    Assessment of the social impact of cancer
    Cancer patients experience problems with everyday issues (domestic life,
      family care, finance, employment, relationships, etc.). Prior to the work
      of Leeds in this area there were no concise questionnaires for assessing
      the effects of having cancer on daily life. With funding from Cancer
      Research UK, Penny Wright (then Research Assistant, now Associate
      Professor, 1996-present) and Selby began developing the Social
      Difficulties Inventory (SDI-21) in 2000. Evaluations of this
      self-reporting instrument showed it was reliable and valid, and
      importantly had clinically meaningful interpretation of responses/scores
      [5,6]. Between 2007-2009, Wright and Dan Stark (Senior
      Lecturer in Cancer Medicine, Leeds, 2003-present) translated and evaluated
      SDI-21 with patients of South-Asian origin from Leeds and Bradford
      Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (under the care of Chris Bradley),
      showing that it was culturally and linguistically acceptable [grant h].
    References to the research
    
1. Velikova G, Wright EP, Smith AB, Cull A, Gould A, Forman D,
      Perren T, Stead M, Brown J, Selby PJ (1999). Automated
      collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer
      touch-screen questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17(3):998-1007
      http://jco.ascopubs.org/content/17/3/998.short
      [SCOPUS citation: 196 (24/06/13)]
     
2. Wright EP, Selby PJ, Crawford M, Gillibrand A, Johnston C,
      Perren TJ, Rush R, Smith A, Velikova G, Watson K, Gould A, Cull A
      (2003). Feasibility and Compliance of Automated Measurement of Quality of
      Life in Oncology Practice. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21(2):374-382.
      DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.11.044
     
3. Ashley L, Jones H, Thomas J, Forman D, Newsham A, Morris E, Johnson O,
      Velikova G, Wright P (2011). Integrating cancer survivors'
      experiences into UK cancer registries: design and development of the ePOCS
      system (electronic Patient-reported Outcomes from Cancer Survivors).
      British Journal of Cancer, 105 Suppl 1:S74-81. DOI:
      10.1038/bjc.2011.424
      This study has won awards at three conferences (UKACR
        & NCIN Conference 2010; Biennial Cancer Survivorship Research
        Conference 2012; British Psychosocial Oncology Society 2013). It is
        included in a systematic review (Thong, M. S. Y., F. Mols, et
        al. (2013). "Population-based cancer registries for quality-of-life
        research: A work-in-progress resource for survivorship studies?" Cancer
      119 Suppl 11: 2109-2123).
     
4. Velikova G, Booth L, Smith AB, Brown PM, Lynch P, Brown JM,
      Selby PJ (2004). Measuring quality of life in routine oncology
      practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomized
      controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22(4):714-24.
DOI:10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078
      [SCOPUS citation: 339 (24/06/13)].
      This study won the International Society for Quality of Life
          Research (ISOQOL) paper of the year award(2004). It is
        included in a systematic review (Valderas, J. M., A. Kotzeva, et al.
        (2008). "The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical
        practice: a systematic review of the literature." Quality of
        Life Research 17(2):179-193).
     
5. Wright EP, Kiely M, Johnston C, Smith AB, Cull A, Selby PJ
      (2005). Development and evaluation of an instrument to assess social
      difficulties in routine oncology practice. Quality of Life Research,
      14(2):373-86. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-004-5332-4 [SCOPUS citation:23
      (23/-6/13)]
     
6. Wright P, Smith A, Roberts K, Selby P, Velikova G.
      Screening for social difficulties in cancer patients: clinical utility of
      the Social Difficulties Inventory. British Journal of Cancer.
      2007; 97: 1063-70. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604006 [SCOPUS citation:
      11 (24/-6/13)].
      The SDI-21 is included in a systematic review (Muzzatti,
        B. and M. A. Annunziata (2012).
      "Assessing the social impact of cancer: a review of available tools." Supportive
        Care in Cancer 20(10): 2249-2257).
    Note: All Leeds researchers in bold. Publications available on
      request from the HEI.
    The inclusion of the research in peer-reviewed, high-impact publications
      (J Clin Oncol), and the publication of a range of clinical [4,6]
      and methodological [1,2,3,4] papers, are indicative of the quality and
      originality of the work.
    Research grants
    a. Selby P. NHS Executive.1996-1999. £324,150.
    b. Selby P. Imperial Cancer Research Fund Programme. 1999-2002.
      ≈£375,000.
    c. Selby P. Cancer Research UK. (Two awards) 2001-2008. ~£1M.
    d. Wright P. Macmillan Cancer Support. Title- Survivors of adult
      cancer: a feasibility cohort study 2010-2012. £409,131.
    e. Velikova G. NIHR (National Institute for Health Research)
      Programme Development grant. Title-Towards safer delivery and monitoring
      of cancer treatments. Electronic patient self-Reporting of
      Adverse-events: Patient Information and aDvice
      (eRAPID) (Grant ref: RP-PG-1209-10031). Dec 2010- Dec 2012. £99,986.
    f. Velikova G. Cancer Research UK Clinician Scientist grant.
      Implementation of quality of life assessment in the care of individual
      cancer patients through strategies for changing clinical practice (Ref
      C7775/A2941). 2003-2008. £591,928.
    g. Velikova G. Cancer Research UK programme grant. Title-Routine
      assessment of symptoms, functioning, social difficulties and quality of
      life of cancer patients to improve the process and outcomes of care (Ref
      C7775/A7424). 2007-2013. £1,682,500.
    h. Bradley C and Wright P. NIHR RfPB. Title- The social impact of
      cancer on people of south Asian origin: patient interview study (Ref
      PB-PG-0706-10284).2007-2009; £80,472.
    Details of the impact
    Contributing to clinical practice guidelines
      The Leeds research has influenced clinical guidelines internationally.
      For example, the trial demonstrating patient benefits from routine
      measurement of quality of life using automated measurement significantly
      contributed to clinical practice guidelines published in 2011 by the
      International Society for Quality of Life Research [A]. The SDI-21 was
      referenced in pan-Canadian clinical practice guidelines published in 2009
      by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Cancer Journey Action Group)
      and the Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology (information on
      downloads available only from Canadian Partnership Against Cancer
      2012-June 2013 = 45) [B]. The National Cancer Survivorship Initiative
      Vision, published in 2010 referenced SDI-21 as a questionnaire for
      assessing the quality of life of cancer survivors [C] (Google analytics
      unique page views www.ncsi.org.uk:
      PAGE: /?s=vision+document 01/02/10-14/08/13: 59,688 document downloads)
      [C].
    Change in policy
      NHS policy and the Health and Social Care Act 2012: The Health and
      Social Care Act 2012 endorses the use of PROMs to put patients at the
      centre of the NHS. Sir Michael Richards, National Cancer Director
      (1999-2013) said: "Health services must become more patient centred.
        We urgently require methods to measure this aspect of care. Leeds
        researchers have provided us, not only with technologies for this
        purpose but also evaluated their measurements in a positive randomised
        controlled trial. This was very influential in development of policy and
        the incorporation of Patient Reported Outcome Measures as a central
        theme within the NHS" [D]. Since 2010 Velikova and Wright
      have been members of a Department of Health/Macmillan National Cancer
      Survivorship Initiative advisory group on metrics. This group reviews
      research on PROMs; it made recommendations on which PROMs should be
      included in the pilot and full NHS PROMs survey (see later).
    Changes in practice
      Adoption of electronic self-reporting tools in clinical practice:
      In 2012, the Leeds Cancer Centre and the Yorkshire Cancer Network
      pioneered electronic Holistic Needs Assessment within routine patient
      care; the self-reported data are integrated into electronic patient
      records. This facility allows nurses to assess quality of life issues,
      leading to an agreed care plan in discussion with patients. The web-based
      questionnaire system is undergoing quality assurance testing prior to
      application for kite marking for use as a medical device.
    In 2012 Electronic Holistic Needs Assessment (eHNA) was piloted by the
      Department of Health/Macmillan National Cancer Survivorship Initiative at
      four sites in England. A larger scale rollout is currently underway at 25
      sites using a new prototype system in 2013. This software implements the
      2007 National Cancer Action Team's guidelines, which, were strongly
      influenced by Leeds research into the social impact of cancer. The eHNA
      tool included the Leeds-developed SDI-21 as one of the assessment measures
      [E]. Velikova and Wright are both members of the eHNA
      steering committee as experts in such electronic systems. The Leeds team
      provides on-going advice regarding electronic assessment to the eHNA
      project [E].
    The SDI-21, one of three validated questionnaires, has been used in national
        evaluations of the quality of life of cancer patients and survivors:
      in 2011 it was used to collect data for the Department of Health national
      pilot PROMs survey of 4,992 cancer survivors [F]; it is also being
      used in the full national PROMs survey of 50,000 cancer patients during
      2013. Internationally, the SDI-21 is being used in routine cancer
      practice in Canada as part of an electronic Distress Assessment and
      Response Tool (DART) for assessing, monitoring and supporting cancer
      outpatients. Between October 2009 to December 2012 47,661 DART assessments
      were undertaken with 13,672 assessments including the SDI-21. The use of
      DART has led to significant improvements in patient well-being (see below)
      [G].
    Velikova provided professional advice leading to the adoption of
      the Leeds approach in a new clinical programme for lung-heart transplant
      patients monitoring in Edmonton (Alberta, Canada) [H]. Clinicians
      developed specific guidelines on the use of PROMs to individualize patient
      care and the monitoring has become standard practice. By 2010, 172
      lung-heart transplant patients participated, 98% were happy to complete
      the assessments regularly; 91% of clinicians endorsed the use of PROMs in
      routine practice [H]. Velikova's work and professional advice
      significantly influenced the decision to launch the Patient Outcomes
      Program to promote patient-centred care at Cancer Treatment Centers of
      America (CTCA) at Midwestern Regional Medical Center (Zion, IL, USA;
      private cancer hospitals in USA) [I]. The current quality of life database
      of CTCA consists of 12,000 patients; the data are being used by the
      clinical teams providing supportive care to patients on cancer treatment
      [I].
    Changes in health outcomes
      Enhancement of the patient experience, improved well-being and clinical
        outcomes: In Canada the evaluation of DART has provided evidence of
      improved patient well-being (measured by reductions in SDI-21 scores over
      four consecutive outpatient appointments) [G]. SDI-21 items are strong
      predictors of suicidal thoughts [J]; use of the tool alerts clinicians to
      patients with these ideas so they can offer appropriate support to prevent
      harm. Overall, DART enhanced the patient experience with measured
      improvement of patient's perception of treatment and support. A
      differential benefit of DART was demonstrated for low income patients
      (p=0.046). Clinical outcomes also improve with the use of DART. Clinician
      assessment of high distress scores was associated with an increase in
      patient's ability to complete chemotherapy from 50% to 85%. This
      improvement in compliance was achieved with no change in health service
      burden (clinic length or workload). Staff felt DART improved systematic
      inquiry about concerns. Most patients (88%) felt DART improved
      communication of symptoms and concerns with the health care team [G].
    Sources to corroborate the impact 
    A. User's Guide to Implementing Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in
      Clinical Practice. Version: November 11, 2011. Produced on behalf of the
      International Society for Quality of Life Research. Available at 
        http://www.isoqol.org/research/isoqol-publications
    B. Howell, D., Currie, S., Mayo, S., Jones, G., Boyle, M., Hack, T.,
      Green, E., Hoffman, L., Simpson, J., Collacutt, V., McLeod, D., and
      Digout, C. A Pan-Canadian Clinical Practice Guideline: Assessment of
      Psychosocial Health Care Needs of the Adult Cancer Patient, Toronto:
      Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Cancer Journey Action Group) and the
      Canadian Association of Psychosocial Oncology, May 2009. Available at
      http://www.partnershipagainstcancer.ca/wp-content/uploads/2.4.0.1.4.6-AdultAssesmentGuideline122109.pdf
    C. Department of Health. Macmillan Cancer Support. NHS Improvement
      (2010). National Cancer Survivorship Initiative Vision. London, Crown.
      Available at http://www.ncsi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/NCSI-Vision-Document.pdf
    D. Individual corroboration: the National Clinical Director for Cancer,
      Department of Health, 2013.
    E. Individual corroboration: Chief Executive, Macmillan Cancer Support
      and co-director National Cancer Survivorship Initiative, 2013.
    F. Department of Health - Quality Health (2012). Quality of Life of
      Cancer Survivors in England: report on a pilot survey using Patient
      Reported Outcome Measures (PROMS). London, National Institute for Health
      Research. Available at
      https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/127273/9284-TSO-2900701-PROMS.pdf.pdf
    G. Individual corroboration: Physician lead for DART, Psychosocial
      Oncology and Palliative Care, University Health Network - Princess
      Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada, 2013.
    H. Individual corroboration: Senior researcher, Lung Transplant
      programme, Edmonton, Canada, 2013.
    I. Individual corroboration: Vice president of Outcomes Research at
      Cancer Treatment Centers of America at Midwestern Regional Medical Center,
      Zion, IL, USA regarding the contribution of the Leeds approach to
      electronic assessments in clinical practice in North America, 2013.
    J. Y. Leung, M. Li, G. Devins, C. Zimmermann, C. Lo, G. Rodin. Routine
      Screening for Suicidal Intention in Patients with Cancer. Psycho-Oncology,
      in press. DOI: 10.1002/pon.3319. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23878040