Advertisement

User-centered design of quality of life reports for clinical care of patients with prostate cancer

Published:December 16, 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2013.12.007

      Background

      Primary treatment of localized prostate cancer can result in bothersome urinary, sexual, and bowel symptoms. Yet clinical application of health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) questionnaires is rare. We employed user-centered design to develop graphic dashboards of questionnaire responses from patients with prostate cancer to facilitate clinical integration of HRQOL measurement.

      Methods

      We interviewed 50 prostate cancer patients and 50 providers, assessed literacy with validated instruments (Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine short form, Subjective Numeracy Scale, Graphical Literacy Scale), and presented participants with prototype dashboards that display prostate cancer-specific HRQOL with graphic elements derived from patient focus groups. We assessed dashboard comprehension and preferences in table, bar, line, and pictograph formats with patient scores contextualized with HRQOL scores of similar patients serving as a comparison group.

      Results

      Health literacy (mean score, 6.8/7) and numeracy (mean score, 4.5/6) of patient participants was high. Patients favored the bar chart (mean rank, 1.8 [P = .12] vs line graph [P < .01] vs table and pictograph); providers demonstrated similar preference for table, bar, and line formats (ranked first by 30%, 34%, and 34% of providers, respectively). Providers expressed unsolicited concerns over presentation of comparison group scores (n = 19; 38%) and impact on clinic efficiency (n = 16; 32%).

      Conclusion

      Based on preferences of prostate cancer patients and providers, we developed the design concept of a dynamic HRQOL dashboard that permits a base patient-centered report in bar chart format that can be toggled to other formats and include error bars that frame comparison group scores. Inclusion of lower literacy patients may yield different preferences.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Gore J.L.
        • Kwan L.
        • Lee S.P.
        • Reiter R.E.
        • Litwin M.S.
        Survivorship beyond convalescence: 48-month quality-of-life outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009; 101: 888-892
        • Litwin M.S.
        • Hays R.D.
        • Fink A.
        • Ganz P.A.
        • Leake B.
        • Leach G.E.
        • et al.
        Quality-of-life outcomes in men treated for localized prostate cancer.
        JAMA. 1995; 273: 129-135
        • Sanda M.G.
        • Dunn R.L.
        • Michalski J.
        • Sandler H.M.
        • Northouse L.
        • Hembroff L.
        • et al.
        Quality of life and satisfaction with outcome among prostate-cancer survivors.
        N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 1250-1261
        • Stanford J.L.
        • Feng Z.
        • Hamilton A.S.
        • Gilliland F.D.
        • Stephenson R.A.
        • Eley J.W.
        • et al.
        Urinary and sexual function after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study.
        JAMA. 2000; 283: 354-360
        • Hartzler A.
        • Olson K.A.
        • Dalkin B.
        • Gore J.L.
        Enhancing communication after treatment: what cancer patients want from a quality of life dashboard.
        AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011; 2011: 1795
        • Litwin M.S.
        Prostate cancer patient outcomes and choice of providers: development of an infrastructure for quality assessment.
        Rand, Santa Monica, CA2000
        • Spencer B.A.
        • Steinberg M.
        • Malin J.
        • Adams J.
        • Litwin M.S.
        Quality-of-care indicators for early-stage prostate cancer.
        J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 1928-1936
        • Davison B.J.
        • Degner L.F.
        Empowerment of men newly diagnosed with prostate cancer.
        Cancer Nurs. 1997; 20: 187-196
        • Berry D.L.
        • Blumenstein B.A.
        • Halpenny B.
        • Wolpin S.
        • Fann J.R.
        • Austin-Seymour M.
        • et al.
        Enhancing patient-provider communication with the electronic self-report assessment for cancer: a randomized trial.
        J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 1029-1035
        • Carlson L.E.
        • Groff S.L.
        • Maciejewski O.
        • Bultz B.D.
        Screening for distress in lung and breast cancer outpatients: a randomized controlled trial.
        J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28: 4884-4891
        • Ruland C.M.
        • Holte H.H.
        • Roislien J.
        • Heaven C.
        • Hamilton G.A.
        • Kristiansen J.
        • et al.
        Effects of a computer-supported interactive tailored patient assessment tool on patient care, symptom distress, and patients' need for symptom management support: a randomized clinical trial.
        J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2010; 17: 403-410
        • Wolpin S.
        • Stewart M.
        A deliberate and rigorous approach to development of patient-centered technologies.
        Semin Oncol Nurs. 2011; 27: 183-191
        • Kinzie M.B.
        • Cohn W.F.
        • Julian M.F.
        • Knaus W.A.
        A user-centered model for web site design: needs assessment, user interface design, and rapid prototyping.
        J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2002; 9: 320-330
        • Hartzler A.O.K.
        • Dalkin B.
        • Gore J.
        Enhancing Communication After Treatment: What Cancer Patients Want from a Quality of Life Dashboard.
        AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2011; 2011: 1795
        • Wong D.L.
        • Baker C.M.
        Pain in children: comparison of assessment scales.
        Pediatr Nurs. 1988; 14: 9-17
        • Houts P.S.
        • Witmer J.T.
        • Egeth H.E.
        • Loscalzo M.J.
        • Zabora J.R.
        Using pictographs to enhance recall of spoken medical instructions II.
        Patient Educ Couns. 2001; 43: 231-242
        • Arozullah A.M.
        • Yarnold P.R.
        • Bennett C.L.
        • Soltysik R.C.
        • Wolf M.S.
        • Ferreira R.M.
        • et al.
        Development and validation of a short-form, rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine.
        Med Care. 2007; 45: 1026-1033
        • Davis T.C.
        • Crouch M.A.
        • Long S.W.
        • Jackson R.H.
        • Bates P.
        • George R.B.
        • et al.
        Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients.
        Fam Med. 1991; 23: 433-435
        • Slosson R.L.
        • Nicholson C.L.
        • Hibpshman T.H.
        Slosson Intelligence Test (SIT-R) for children and adults.
        Slosson Educational Publications, East Aurora, NY1991
        • Parker R.M.
        • Baker D.W.
        • Williams M.V.
        • Nurss J.R.
        The test of functional health literacy in adults: a new instrument for measuring patients' literacy skills.
        J Gen Intern Med. 1995; 10: 537-541
        • Fagerlin A.
        • Zikmund-Fisher B.J.
        • Ubel P.A.
        • Jankovic A.
        • Derry H.A.
        • Smith D.M.
        Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.
        Med Decis Making. 2007; 27: 672-680
        • Lipkus I.M.
        • Hollands J.G.
        The visual communication of risk.
        J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1999; : 149-163
        • Galesic M.
        • Garcia-Retamero R.
        Graph literacy: a cross-cultural comparison.
        Med Decis Making. 2011; 31: 444-457
        • Wei J.T.
        • Dunn R.L.
        • Litwin M.S.
        • Sandler H.M.
        • Sanda M.G.
        Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer.
        Urology. 2000; 56: 899-905
        • Penson D.F.
        The effect of erectile dysfunction on quality of life following treatment for localized prostate cancer.
        Rev Urol. 2001; 3: 113-119
        • Beyer H.
        • Holtzblatt K.
        Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems.
        Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco1998 (xxiii, 472)
        • Feldman-Stewart D.
        • Brundage M.D.
        • Zotov V.
        Further insight into the perception of quantitative information: judgments of gist in treatment decisions.
        Med Decis Making. 2007; 27: 34-43
      1. Schield M. Percentage graphs in USA Today Snapshots Online 2006;2364-71. Available from: http://www.statlit.org/pdf/2006SchieldASA.pdf.

        • Brundage M.
        • Feldman-Stewart D.
        • Leis A.
        • Bezjak A.
        • Degner L.
        • Velji K.
        • et al.
        Communicating quality of life information to cancer patients: a study of six presentation formats.
        J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 6949-6956
        • McCaffery K.J.
        • Dixon A.
        • Hayen A.
        • Jansen J.
        • Smith S.
        • Simpson J.M.
        The influence of graphic display format on the interpretations of quantitative risk information among adults with lower education and literacy: a randomized experimental study.
        Med Decis Making. 2012; 32: 532-544
        • Hawley S.T.
        • Zikmund-Fisher B.
        • Ubel P.
        • Jancovic A.
        • Lucas T.
        • Fagerlin A.
        The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices.
        Patient Educ Couns. 2008; 73: 448-455