Outcome Quality After Colorectal Cancer Resection in German Certified Bowel Cancer Centres-Patient-Reported and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND In this observational study, patient-reported outcomes and short-term clinical outcome parameters in patients with colorectal cancer were studied 12 months after the start of treatment. Outcomes were also compared across German Certified Colorectal Cancer Centres. METHODS Data were collected from 4239 patients with colorectal cancer who had undergone elective tumor resection in one of 102 colorectal cancer centers and had responded to a quality-of-life questionnaire before treatment (EORTC QLQ-C30 and -CR29). 3142 (74.1%) of these patients completed a post-treatment questionnaire 12 months later. Correlation analyses were calculated and case-mix adjusted comparisons across centers were made for selected patient-reported outcomes, anastomotic insufficiency, and 30-day-mortality. RESULTS At 12 months, mild improvements were seen in mean quality-of-life scores (66 vs. 62 points), constipation (16 vs. 19), and abdominal pain (15 vs. 17). Worsening was seen in physical function (75 vs. 82) and pain (22 vs. 19). Better patient-reported outcomes at 12 months were associated with better scores before treatment. Better results in at least three of the five scores were associated with male sex, higher educational level, higher age, and private health insurance. Major worsening of fecal incontinence was seen among patients with rectal cancer without a stoma. The largest differences across centers were found with respect to physical function. Anastomotic insufficiency was found in 4.3% of colon cancer patients and 8.2% of rectal cancer patients. 1.9% of patients died within 30 days after their resection. CONCLUSION Clinicians can use these findings to identify patients at higher risk for poorer patient-reported outcomes. The differences among cancer centers that were found imply that measures for quality improvement would be desirable.

[1]  E. Basch,et al.  The role of patient-reported outcome measures in the continuum of cancer clinical care: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline. , 2022, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[2]  T. Knoll,et al.  Variation across operating sites in urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy in localized and locally advanced prostate cancer , 2022, World Journal of Urology.

[3]  F. Mols,et al.  Evaluating the longitudinal effect of colorectal surgery on health‐related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer , 2021, Journal of surgical oncology.

[4]  T. Seufferlein,et al.  Which EORTC QLQ-C30 and -CR29 scores are relevant for clinicians for therapy planning and decisions? , 2021, coloproctology.

[5]  C. Kowalski,et al.  [Correction: Consulting Ethics Committees about a Multicenter Observational Study in Germany - A Report on Effort and Costs]. , 2021, Das Gesundheitswesen.

[6]  W. Maier,et al.  Small‐area analysis on socioeconomic inequalities in cancer survival for 25 cancer sites in Germany , 2021, International journal of cancer.

[7]  C. Germer,et al.  Mortality and complication management after surgery for colorectal cancer depending on the DKG minimum amounts for hospital volume. , 2020, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[8]  C. Kowalski,et al.  „Patient-reported outcome measures“ , 2020, Forum.

[9]  B. Beyer,et al.  A multicenter paper-based and web-based system for collecting patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing local treatment for prostate cancer: first experiences , 2020, Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

[10]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Thresholds for clinical importance were established to improve interpretation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 in clinical practice and research. , 2020, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[11]  Ronald C. Chen,et al.  Factors influencing prostate cancer treatment decisions for African American and white men , 2019, Cancer.

[12]  J. Weitz,et al.  Evidence-based quality standards improve prognosis in colon cancer care. , 2018, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[13]  E. Consten,et al.  Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy and Rectal Surgery on Health‐related Quality of Life in Patients With Rectal Cancer During the First 2 Years After Diagnosis , 2018, Clinical colorectal cancer.

[14]  P. Stratford,et al.  Impact of Risk Adjustment on Provider Ranking for Patients With Low Back Pain Receiving Physical Therapy , 2018, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[15]  Stef van Buuren,et al.  Flexible Imputation of Missing Data, Second Edition , 2018 .

[16]  U. Nimptsch,et al.  Hospital volume and mortality for 25 types of inpatient treatment in German hospitals: observational study using complete national data from 2009 to 2014 , 2017, BMJ Open.

[17]  C. Letellier,et al.  Randomized Trial Comparing a Web-Mediated Follow-up With Routine Surveillance in Lung Cancer Patients , 2017, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[18]  M. Kris,et al.  Overall Survival Results of a Trial Assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes for Symptom Monitoring During Routine Cancer Treatment , 2017, JAMA.

[19]  T. Manser,et al.  [Memorandum III, Part 3: Quality of Care and Patient Safety Research Methods]. , 2017, Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)).

[20]  N. Devlin,et al.  Inter-provider comparison of patient-reported outcomes: developing an adjustment to account for differences in patient case mix. , 2015, Health economics.

[21]  E. Basch,et al.  Standards for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures. , 2013, JAMA.

[22]  J. Wyatt,et al.  Direct improvement of quality of life using a tailored quality of life diagnosis and therapy pathway: randomised trial in 200 women with breast cancer , 2012, British Journal of Cancer.

[23]  P. Fayers,et al.  Clinical and psychometric validation of the EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaire module to assess health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. , 2009, European journal of cancer.

[24]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Research in action: using positive deviance to improve quality of health care , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[25]  E. Farin,et al.  [The quality assurance programme of the statutory health insurance funds in medical rehabilitation: results and further developments]. , 2009, Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)).

[26]  D. Neuberg,et al.  A combination of distribution- and anchor-based approaches determined minimally important differences (MIDs) for four endpoints in a breast cancer scale. , 2004, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[27]  D. Osoba,et al.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. , 1993, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.