Use of patient-reported experience and outcome measures within the colorectal cancer care continuum: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are frequently adopted to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) care, but the use of patient-reported experience measures (PREM) appears to be underdeveloped and not widely validated. This scoping review aims to understand the contexts for deployment of PREMs in CRC care, reliability of measures, gaps in current use of PREMs, and how PREMs are associated with PROMs when deployed together.

METHODS

Four scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus) were systematically searched from January 2011 to December 2023. Observational or interventional studies involving quantitative or mixed methodology with samples consisting CRC patients undergoing screening, treatment, or cancer surveillance and utilizing at least one PREM as an exposure or outcome were included.

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in 10,400 records. Only 13 relevant studies (consisting of 17,105 participants) met the eligibility criteria. Utilization of PREMs was heterogenous across our sample and the CRC care continuum, and about half of the studies (53.8%) evaluated the relationship between PREMs and PROMs. PREM usage across the CRC care continuum largely focused on treatment/survivorship. Better care experience was positively associated with improved patient-reported outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Future work in CRC PREM development should focus on (1) establishing validated measures that aim to either capture disease/treatment-specific granularity or capitalize on applicability across care settings, (2) localizing novel or existing PREMs to consider different cultural contexts in healthcare, and (3) benchmarking associations between PREMs, PROMs, and other outcomes of interest.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Individuals progressing through the CRC care continuum often undergo a multitude of procedures from detection and diagnosis to treatment and surveillance. The establishment of validated PREMs specific to CRC would help to benchmark and further improve the quality of care received-which should translate to better patient-reported outcomes-and serve as process indicators for institutions and providers to maintain rigorous health service delivery standard for CRC survivors.