Abstract

BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used by clinical quality registries to assess patients’ perspectives of care outcomes and quality of life. PROMs can be assessed through a self-administered survey or by a third party. Use of mixed mode approaches where PROMs are completed using a single or combination of administration method is emerging. The aim of this study is to identify the most cost-effective efficient approach to collecting PROMs among three modes (telephone, postal service/mail and email) in a population-based clinical quality registry monitoring survivorship after a diagnosis of prostate cancer. This is important to assist the registry in achieving representative PROMs capture using the most cost-effective technique and in developing cost projections for national scale-up.Methods/designThis study will adopt an equivalence randomised controlled design. Participants are men diagnosed with and/or treated for prostate cancer (PCa) participating in PCOR-VIC and meet the criteria for 12-month follow-up. Participants will be individually randomized to three independent groups: telephone, mail/postal, or email to complete the 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) survey. It is estimated each group will have 229 respondents. We will compare the proportion of completed surveys across the three groups.The economic evaluation will be undertaken from the perspective of the data collection centre and consider all operating costs (personnel, supplies, training, operation and maintenance). Cost data will be captured using an Activity Based Costs method. To estimate the most cost-effective approach, we will calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A cost projection model will be developed based on most cost-effective approach for nationwide scale-up of the PROMs tool for follow-up of PCa patients in Australia.DiscussionThis study will identify the most cost-effective approach for collecting PROMs from men with PCa, and enable estimation of costs for national implementation of the PCa PROMs survey. The findings will be of interest to other registries embarking on PROMs data collection.Trial registrationACTRN12615001369516 (Registered on December 16, 2015)

Highlights

  • Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used by clinical quality registries to assess patients’ perspectives of care outcomes and quality of life

  • The aim of this study is to provide evidence on which method of PROMs follow up data collection is more cost-effective

  • Findings of this study will help us in understanding the cost for national implementation of the prostate cancer quality of life questionnaire in Australia

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used by clinical quality registries to assess patients’ perspectives of care outcomes and quality of life. The aim of this study is to identify the most cost-effective efficient approach to collecting PROMs among three modes (telephone, postal service/mail and email) in a population-based clinical quality registry monitoring survivorship after a diagnosis of prostate cancer. This is important to assist the registry in achieving representative PROMs capture using the most cost-effective technique and in developing cost projections for national scale-up. Self-administration may include surveys that patients complete on paper or electronically (e.g. via links provided in an email address to an online form or through Applications (apps) that patients can download Tools administered by another person may include those completed on paper or electronically with assistance or those administered over the telephone [6, 7]. Length and content of the survey and incentives will impact the response rates and the cost of data collection [12]

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call