View clinical trials related to PROM.
Filter by:The surgical management of rectal cancer includes a Total Mesorectal Exicison (TME). TME can be performed by open, laparoscopic, robotic or transanal approaches, as long as the oncological principles for the resection are achieved. Unfortunately, up to 90% of these patients will present a change in bowel habit, ranging from an increased frequency of bowel movements to the degree of fecal incontinence or evacuation dysfunction. Of these patients, 25-50% will have a severe alteration in the quality of life. This wide spectrum of symptoms has been called "low anterior resection syndrome" (LARS). Other collateral damage is the change in sexual and urinary function, due to hypogastric plexus injury. There is a significant lack of multicenter prospective studies that provide evidence, and that reveal the functional results and quality of life of these techniques available to date for the management of rectal cancer. The study is set up as a prospective multicentre observational study. Inclusion criteria are: 1) patients over 18 years old, 2) diagnosed with rectal cancer located below the peritoneal reflection, defined by pereoperative MRI, 3) undergoing Open, laparoscopic, robotic or Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) approaches, 4) with/withou derivative stoma and 5) with/without neoadjuvant treatment. Exclusion criteria are: 1) Upper rectal cancer, located above the peritoneal reflection, 2) previous radical prostatectomy, 3) previous pelvic radiotherapy, 4) rectal resection without primary anastomosis, 5) intraoperative findings of peritoneal carcinomatosis, 6) stage IV disease, 7) multivisceral or en-bloc resection, which includes uterus, prostate, vagina or bladder, 8) rectal resection due to a benign condition, 9) rectal resection due to a recurrence of rectal cancer (previous anterior resection or another pimary neoplasm), 10) rectal resection following a 'watch & wait' program, 11) emergency surgery, 12) previous derivative colostomy 13) inflammatory bowel disease. Accepting an alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.2 in a two-sided test, 45 subjects are necessary in first group and 45 in the second to recognize as statistically significant a difference greater than or equal to 2 units. The common standard deviation is assumed to be 3. It has been anticipated a drop-out rate of 20% Primary outcomes are LARS and Vaizey score. Secondary outcomes included are QLQ C30 and CR29, sexual function questionnaire (female/male), urinary function questionnaire and postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification) Data will be collected in an online secure and protected repository (Castor edc). The planned study period is 2 years (September 2021 - September 2023). It is essential to have a validated instrument that allows us to assess sphincter function and the different aspects of quality of life in operated patients, since increased survival in this pathology has led to greater importance in the evaluation functional outcome and quality of life; Furthermore, there are recent studies that speak of the direct relationship between these factors.
Observational assessment through patient interviews of relational, structural and organisational aspects related to the humanisation of health care. These data will be related to health outcomes such as pain, sleep quality, anxiety levels, adverse events (pressure injuries, falls, and mortality), satisfaction with the care received, and experience in communication processes with health professionals. Data will also be collected on work ergonomics variables (stress, burnout, working conditions, ratios) of nurses and health technicians, which will also be related to the health outcomes collected.
in clinical practice has been curbed by issues related to the variability in use of these tools for decision-making, and universally poor completion rates over time. Patients may not see the relevance of responding to questions about their health, and the results may not be reviewed by the clinician or presented and visualized with the patient. The questions may seem impersonal (e.g. too general and not directly assessing their individual goals, motivations, aspirations), irrelevant (e.g., asking about symptoms of depression when a person is seeking musculoskeletal specialty care) and insensitive (e.g., asking about sensitive subjects at the outset thereby disengaging the individual), and redundant or awkward (e.g., presenting questions that seem very similar or administered in strange orders). Finally, PROMs may also confer some burden (e.g., long PROM questionnaires often used for research may be unnecessarily burdensome for patient care), and provide logistical challenges (e.g., difficulties in administering the tools at the right time points), adding to a poor patient experience.
The transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) population with severe aortic stenosis (AS) is characterized by advanced age (most patients are octogenarians) and multiple comorbidities. For elderly patients, improvements in heart failure symptoms, functional status, and quality of life (QOL) maybe as important as longevity or even more. Over the last decade, we observe a change in trend, estimating medical interventions by clinical parameters along with other non-clinical parameters indicating a day-to-day improvement in factors which are more valuable to the patient and their families. This change is based on the understanding that treating a patient's physical symptoms successfully does not necessarily mean improving their QOL. The patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) initiative is focused upon what matters to patients during and following medical interventions. Data on PROMs in TAVI patients is increasing over the years but is still lacking, despite its potential to improve patient's care. In this study, we intend to create a novel self-developed patient-oriented PROM questionnaire specifically for TAVI patients and use it to assess the differences between physician's and patient's perception of a successful TAVI procedure. These discrepancies will form the basis for building a forecast model for a successful TAVI from the patient's perspective.
The Cochlear Implant - Quality of Life (CIQoL) PROM is a quality-of-life assessment questionnaire for adults with cochlear implants. The CIQoL responds to an important need for a questionnaire that captures the benefits of cochlear implantation as perceived by patients and that can be used in clinical practice.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the patient engagement with digital tools for diagnosis and monitoring of disease in rheumatology services
The objective of the study is to assess which health-related questionnaire is the most accurate and reliable. The hypothesis is that some health-related questionnaires are more reliable than others.
The study attempts to quantify the relative risks for chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) after Lichtenstein repair of groin hernia, depending on mesh type and fixation suture material. For this purpose the investigators will analyze data from the Swedish Hernia Registry (SHR).
Following unsuccessful CTO crossing a CTO modification procedure is sometimes performed. CTO PCI registries where plaque modification has been performed in some patients, report this to be safe, and associated with higher success rates at subsequent attempts. It has never been investigated whether a planned investment procedure, with an intention that both the initial and staged completion PCI are of shorter duration, could improve safety and efficacy. The investigators hypothesize that 1. A planned investment procedure in the treatment of CTOs will be associated with improved patient safety 2. A planned investment procedure will be associated with improved cumulative procedure success rates 3. A planned two stage procedure will be associated with improved patient experience
Rationale: Haemorrhoidal disease is one of the most common anorectal disorders which affects nearly half of the general population1. Given the current numerous modalities the obvious question which needs to be answered is which treatment is the best. An interesting conclusion from a recent systematic review regarding operative procedures for haemorrhoidal disease is that all procedures have their own advantages and disadvantages. There is a need for evaluating treatment from the patient's point of view and transparency in surgical and non-surgical treatment outcome. So far there is no sufficiently large trial that meets that demand. Objective: To establish the best treatment of patients with symptomatic haemorrhoids grade III: haemorrhoidectomy versus rubber band ligation (RBL). Patient bound effectiveness, clinical effectiveness and cost-utility of both treatments is compared; primary outcome is quality of life at 24 months measured with the EQ-5D-5L with Dutch rating and recurrence at one year post procedure. The assumption is that treatment with rubber band ligation is equally effective in comparison with haemorrhoidectomy in terms of quality of life. Study design:Multicentre randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with cost-utility analysis. Two treatment protocols are compared: haemorrhoidectomy and rubber band ligation. Study population: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with symptomatic haemorrhoids gr III. Patients are recruited in multiple clinics during 18-24 months. Intervention: Participants are allocated to either rubber band ligation or haemorrhoidectomy. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary outcome measure is quality of life at 24 months measured with the EQ-5D-5L with Dutch rating and recurrence at one year post procedure. Secondary outcomes are: complaint reduction with proctology specific patient-related outcome measure (HSS, PROM, PROMHISS), vaizey score, resumption of work, pain (VAS), complications and recurrence at two years.