PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: This study aims to investigate the potential benefits of integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine clinical practice for patients undergoing active anticancer treatment.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of randomized controlled trials involving cancer patients undergoing active anticancer treatment, spanning various cancer types and stages. The review covered four electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) up to September 2022. Key inclusion criteria focused on the incorporation of PROs as a routine intervention. Bias assessment followed the Cochrane collaboration\'s criteria, while the synthesis of results utilized effect size measurements (Cohen\'s d). The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: Out of 1549 initially screened records, 16 published randomized controlled trials encompassing 5300 patients met the inclusion criteria. The interventions involved 18 different PROs measurements, with prominent tools being EORTC QLQ-C30 (utilized in four trials) and PRO-CTCAE (utilized in four trials). Measured endpoints included overall quality of life (12 trials), physical health (11 trials), mental health (7 trials), and social health (5 trials). Overall, the study revealed a limited number of statistically significant findings, with predominantly small to moderate effect sizes associated with the interventions.
UNASSIGNED: The findings suggest that the routine integration of PROs into clinical practice does not yield definitive advantages in terms of PROs. It is apparent that further efforts are necessary to ascertain the impact of these interventions on patient health.
UNASSIGNED: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022365456).
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a comprehensive systematic review of randomized controlled trials involving cancer patients undergoing active anticancer treatment, spanning various cancer types and stages. The review covered four electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) up to September 2022. Key inclusion criteria focused on the incorporation of PROs as a routine intervention. Bias assessment followed the Cochrane collaboration\'s criteria, while the synthesis of results utilized effect size measurements (Cohen\'s d). The study adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: Out of 1549 initially screened records, 16 published randomized controlled trials encompassing 5300 patients met the inclusion criteria. The interventions involved 18 different PROs measurements, with prominent tools being EORTC QLQ-C30 (utilized in four trials) and PRO-CTCAE (utilized in four trials). Measured endpoints included overall quality of life (12 trials), physical health (11 trials), mental health (7 trials), and social health (5 trials). Overall, the study revealed a limited number of statistically significant findings, with predominantly small to moderate effect sizes associated with the interventions.
UNASSIGNED: The findings suggest that the routine integration of PROs into clinical practice does not yield definitive advantages in terms of PROs. It is apparent that further efforts are necessary to ascertain the impact of these interventions on patient health.
UNASSIGNED: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42022365456).
摘要：
■本研究旨在研究将患者报告的结果（PRO）整合到常规临床实践中对接受积极抗癌治疗的患者的潜在益处。
■我们对接受积极抗癌治疗的癌症患者的随机对照试验进行了全面的系统评价，跨越各种癌症类型和阶段。审查涵盖了四个电子数据库(Medline，EMBASE,科克伦图书馆,和CINAHL）截至2022年9月。关键的纳入标准侧重于将PRO纳入常规干预措施。偏差评估遵循Cochrane协作的标准，而结果的合成利用了效应大小测量(科恩的d)。该研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目。
■在最初筛选的1549条记录中，包含5300名患者的16项已发表的随机对照试验符合纳入标准。干预措施涉及18种不同的PRO测量，突出的工具是EORTCQLQ-C30（在四个试验中使用）和PRO-CTCAE（在四个试验中使用）。测量终点包括总体生活质量(12项试验)，身体健康（11项试验），心理健康（7项试验），和社会健康（5项试验）。总的来说,这项研究揭示了有限数量的统计上显著的发现，与干预措施相关的效应大小主要是小到中等。
■研究结果表明，将PRO常规整合到临床实践中并不能在PRO方面产生明确的优势。显然，需要进一步努力来确定这些干预措施对患者健康的影响。
■审查方案已在PROSPERO上注册（ID：CRD4202236556）。
■我们对接受积极抗癌治疗的癌症患者的随机对照试验进行了全面的系统评价，跨越各种癌症类型和阶段。审查涵盖了四个电子数据库(Medline，EMBASE,科克伦图书馆,和CINAHL）截至2022年9月。关键的纳入标准侧重于将PRO纳入常规干预措施。偏差评估遵循Cochrane协作的标准，而结果的合成利用了效应大小测量(科恩的d)。该研究遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目。
■在最初筛选的1549条记录中，包含5300名患者的16项已发表的随机对照试验符合纳入标准。干预措施涉及18种不同的PRO测量，突出的工具是EORTCQLQ-C30（在四个试验中使用）和PRO-CTCAE（在四个试验中使用）。测量终点包括总体生活质量(12项试验)，身体健康（11项试验），心理健康（7项试验），和社会健康（5项试验）。总的来说,这项研究揭示了有限数量的统计上显著的发现，与干预措施相关的效应大小主要是小到中等。
■研究结果表明，将PRO常规整合到临床实践中并不能在PRO方面产生明确的优势。显然，需要进一步努力来确定这些干预措施对患者健康的影响。
■审查方案已在PROSPERO上注册（ID：CRD4202236556）。
