TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient- and Caregiver-Reported Assessment Tools for Palliative Care
T2 - Summary of the 2017 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Technical Brief
AU - Aslakson, Rebecca A.
AU - Dy, Sydney M.
AU - Wilson, Renee F.
AU - Waldfogel, Julie
AU - Zhang, Allen
AU - Isenberg, Sarina R.
AU - Blair, Alex
AU - Sixon, Joshua
AU - Lorenz, Karl A.
AU - Robinson, Karen A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine
PY - 2017/12
Y1 - 2017/12
N2 - Context Assessment tools are data collection instruments that are completed by or with patients or caregivers and which collect data at the individual patient or caregiver level. Objectives The objectives of this study are to 1) summarize palliative care assessment tools completed by or with patients or caregivers and 2) identify needs for future tool development and evaluation. Methods We completed 1) a systematic review of systematic reviews; 2) a supplemental search of previous reviews and Web sites, and/or 3) a targeted search for primary articles when no tools existed in a domain. Paired investigators screened search results, assessed risk of bias, and abstracted data. We organized tools by domains from the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Palliative Care and selected the most relevant, recent, and highest quality systematic review for each domain. Results We included 10 systematic reviews and identified 152 tools (97 from systematic reviews and 55 from supplemental sources). Key gaps included no systematic review for pain and few tools assessing structural, cultural, spiritual, or ethical/legal domains, or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. Psychometric information was available for many tools, but few studies evaluated responsiveness (sensitivity to change) and no studies compared tools. Conclusion Few to no tools address the spiritual, ethical, or cultural domains or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. While some data exist on psychometric properties of tools, the responsiveness of different tools to change and/or comparisons between tools have not been evaluated. Future research should focus on developing or testing tools that address domains for which few tools exist, evaluating responsiveness, and comparing tools.
AB - Context Assessment tools are data collection instruments that are completed by or with patients or caregivers and which collect data at the individual patient or caregiver level. Objectives The objectives of this study are to 1) summarize palliative care assessment tools completed by or with patients or caregivers and 2) identify needs for future tool development and evaluation. Methods We completed 1) a systematic review of systematic reviews; 2) a supplemental search of previous reviews and Web sites, and/or 3) a targeted search for primary articles when no tools existed in a domain. Paired investigators screened search results, assessed risk of bias, and abstracted data. We organized tools by domains from the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Palliative Care and selected the most relevant, recent, and highest quality systematic review for each domain. Results We included 10 systematic reviews and identified 152 tools (97 from systematic reviews and 55 from supplemental sources). Key gaps included no systematic review for pain and few tools assessing structural, cultural, spiritual, or ethical/legal domains, or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. Psychometric information was available for many tools, but few studies evaluated responsiveness (sensitivity to change) and no studies compared tools. Conclusion Few to no tools address the spiritual, ethical, or cultural domains or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. While some data exist on psychometric properties of tools, the responsiveness of different tools to change and/or comparisons between tools have not been evaluated. Future research should focus on developing or testing tools that address domains for which few tools exist, evaluating responsiveness, and comparing tools.
KW - Patient-reported outcomes
KW - assessment tools
KW - family-reported outcomes
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85032370836&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85032370836&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.04.022
DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.04.022
M3 - Article
C2 - 28818633
AN - SCOPUS:85032370836
SN - 0885-3924
VL - 54
SP - 961-972.e16
JO - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
JF - Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
IS - 6
ER -