Cancer-related fatigue: clinical practice versus practice guidelines

Purpose This study investigated adherence to treatment guidelines on cancer-related anaemia and fatigue (CRA/CRF) and factors influencing the choice of intervention. Methods In this prospective, observational study, 136 cancer patients being treated with chemotherapy in a large community hospital completed a questionnaire at consecutive outpatient visits assessing fatigue (the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Fatigue) and fatigue-related counselling and advice received. Data on administration of chemotherapy and use of epoetin or blood transfusions were abstracted from the medical records. Results Fifty-three percent of patients with severe anaemia (Hb<10 g/dl) and 6% of patients with less severe anaemia (Hb levels 10-12 g/dl) received treatment (epoetin and/or blood transfusions). Half of the patients with less severe anaemia reported clinically relevant levels of fatigue. More than 50% of all patients received fatigue-related counselling, primarily at the start of chemotherapy. Most counselling was directed at energy conservation. Fatigue was not associated significantly with the use of epoetin or blood transfusion. Patients receiving palliative treatment (17%), male patients (16%) and patients with a low Hb level (<6.2 g/dl, 38%) were treated significantly more often with epoetin. Conclusions In daily clinical practice, guidelines concerning the use of epoetin or blood transfusion in severe CRA are adhered to in about half of the cases. In patients with less severe anaemia, the level of fatigue did not play a significant role in the use of epoetin. According to current guidelines, counselling on CRF should be directed primarily at activity enhancement. However, only a minority of patients receive such counselling

Strategies for incorporating patient-reported outcomes in the care of people with chronic kidney disease (PRO kidney): a protocol for a realist synthesis

Background: Patient-reported outcomes and experience measures (jointly referred to here as PROs) are internationally recognized as a means for patients to provide information about their quality of life, symptoms, and experiences with care. Although increasingly recognized as key to improving the quality of healthcare at individual (e.g., patients, caregivers, and providers) and aggregate (e.g., government, policy/system-wide decision-making) levels, there are important knowledge gaps in our understanding of how PROs are, and can be, used across different settings, particularly in nephrology to enhance person-centered care. This knowledge is needed for developing strategies to guide optimal use of PROs in nephrology care. Currently, no strategies exist. The purpose of this review is to address this knowledge gap by answering the following realist question: How can PROs be used to enhance person centered nephrology care, both at individual and aggregate levels? Methodology: Realist synthesis is an explanatory approach to data synthesis that aims to explain how context and mechanisms influence the outcome of an intervention. An initial program theory will be developed through the systematic search of the published literature in bibliographic databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCOhost CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus) on existing theories explaining how PROs are used in healthcare settings. This initial program theory will then be tested and refined through the process of realist synthesis, using context-mechanism-outcome configurations. A kidney-specific program theory will then be created to address the utilization of PROs in nephrology across individual and aggregate levels to augment person-centered care. Searching will be iterative and refined as data is extracted and analyzed using a pilot testedcontext + mechanism = outcome heuristic. Throughout, we will consult methodological experts, research team practitioners, and the Patient Advisory Committee to help refine the theories. Last, we will develop and disseminate knowledge translation products widely to knowledge user groups. Discussion: The utilization of PROs remains a challenge in nephrology. The findings from this synthesis will provide a framework to guide both policy makers and practitioners on how to enhance person-centered care through successful utilization of PROs across individual and aggregate levels in nephrology