Patient and Caregiver Prioritization of Palliative and End-of-Life Cancer Care Quality Measures

• Published in: Journal of general internal medicine : JGIM 2022-05, Vol.37 (6), p.1429-1435
• Main Authors: O’Hanlon, Claire E., Giannitrapani, Karleen F., Lindvall, Charlotta, Gamboa, Raziel C., Canning, Mark, Asch, Steven M., Garrido, Melissa M., Walling, Anne M., Lorenz, Karl A.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cancer; Caregivers; Clinical medicine; Death; Design modifications; Humans; Internal Medicine; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neoplasms - therapy; Nominations; Original Research; Pain; Palliation; Palliative care; Palliative Care - methods; Patients; Priorities; Quality assessment; Quality Indicators, Health Care; Terminal Care
• ISSN: 0884-8734; 1525-1497
• DOI: 10.1007/s11606-021-07041-8

Background Development and prioritization of quality measures typically relies on experts in clinical medicine, but patients and their caregivers may have different perspectives on quality measurement priorities. Objective To inform priorities for health system implementation of palliative cancer and end-of-life care quality measures by eliciting perspectives of patients and caregivers. Design Using modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Panel methods and materials tailored for knowledgeable lay participants, we convened a panel to rate cancer palliative care process quality measure concepts before and after a 1-day, in-person meeting. Participants Nine patients and caregivers with experience living with or caring for patients with cancer. Main Measures Panelists rated each concept on importance for providing patient- and family-centered care on a nine-point scale and each panelist nominated five highest priority measure concepts (“top 5”). Key Results Cancer patient and caregiver panelists rated all measure concepts presented as highly important to patient- and family- centered care (median rating ≥ 7) in pre-panel (mean rating range, 6.9–8.8) and post-panel ratings (mean rating range, 7.2–8.9). Forced choice nominations of the “top 5” helped distinguish similarly rated measure concepts. Measure concepts nominated into the “top 5” by three or more panelists included two measure concepts of communication (goals of care discussions and discussion of prognosis), one measure concept on providing comprehensive assessments of patients, and three on symptoms including pain management plans, improvement in pain, and depression management plans. Patients and caregivers nominated one additional measure concept (pain screening) back into consideration, bringing the total number of measure concepts under consideration to 21. Conclusions Input from cancer patients and caregivers helped identify quality measurement priorities for health system implementation. Forced choice nominations were useful to discriminate concepts with the highest perceived importance. Our approach serves as a model for incorporating patient and caregiver priorities in quality measure development and implementation.