Acceptability and usefulness of the EORTC ‘Write In three Symptoms/Problems’ (WISP): a brief open-ended instrument for symptom assessment in cancer patients
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Acceptability and usefulness of the EORTC ‘Write In three Symptoms/Problems’ (WISP) : a brief open-ended instrument for symptom assessment in cancer patients. / Rojas-Concha, Leslye; Arrarrás, Juan Ignacio; Conroy, Thierry; Chalk, Tara; Guberti, Monica; Holzner, Bernhard; Husson, Olga; Kuliś, Dagmara; Shamieh, Omar; Piccinin, Claire; Puga, María José; Rohde, Gudrun; Groenvold, Mogens.
In: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, Vol. 22, No. 1, 28, 2024.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Acceptability and usefulness of the EORTC ‘Write In three Symptoms/Problems’ (WISP)
T2 - a brief open-ended instrument for symptom assessment in cancer patients
AU - Rojas-Concha, Leslye
AU - Arrarrás, Juan Ignacio
AU - Conroy, Thierry
AU - Chalk, Tara
AU - Guberti, Monica
AU - Holzner, Bernhard
AU - Husson, Olga
AU - Kuliś, Dagmara
AU - Shamieh, Omar
AU - Piccinin, Claire
AU - Puga, María José
AU - Rohde, Gudrun
AU - Groenvold, Mogens
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024
Y1 - 2024
N2 - Background: The use of open-ended questions supplementing static questionnaires with closed questions may facilitate the recognition of symptoms and toxicities. The open-ended ‘Write In three Symptoms/Problems (WISP)’ instrument permits patients to report additional symptoms/problems not covered by selected EORTC questionnaires. We evaluated the acceptability and usefulness of WISP with cancer patients receiving active and palliative care/treatment in Austria, Chile, France, Jordan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom. Methods: We conducted a literature search on validated instruments for cancer patients including open-ended questions and analyzing their responses. WISP was translated into eight languages and pilot tested. WISP translations were pre-tested together with EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-C15-PAL and relevant modules, followed by patient interviews to evaluate their understanding about WISP. Proportions were used to summarize patient responses obtained from interviews and WISP. Results: From the seven instruments identified in the literature, only the free text collected from the PRO-CTAE has been analyzed previously. In our study, 161 cancer patients participated in the pre-testing and interviews (50% in active treatment). Qualitative interviews showed high acceptability of WISP. Among the 295 symptoms/problems reported using WISP, skin problems, sore mouth and bleeding were more prevalent in patients in active treatment, whereas numbness/tingling, dry mouth and existential problems were more prevalent in patients in palliative care/treatment. Conclusions: The EORTC WISP instrument was found to be acceptable and useful for symptom assessment in cancer patients. WISP improves the identification of symptoms/problems not assessed by cancer-generic questionnaires and therefore, we recommend its use alongside the EORTC questionnaires.
AB - Background: The use of open-ended questions supplementing static questionnaires with closed questions may facilitate the recognition of symptoms and toxicities. The open-ended ‘Write In three Symptoms/Problems (WISP)’ instrument permits patients to report additional symptoms/problems not covered by selected EORTC questionnaires. We evaluated the acceptability and usefulness of WISP with cancer patients receiving active and palliative care/treatment in Austria, Chile, France, Jordan, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom. Methods: We conducted a literature search on validated instruments for cancer patients including open-ended questions and analyzing their responses. WISP was translated into eight languages and pilot tested. WISP translations were pre-tested together with EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-C15-PAL and relevant modules, followed by patient interviews to evaluate their understanding about WISP. Proportions were used to summarize patient responses obtained from interviews and WISP. Results: From the seven instruments identified in the literature, only the free text collected from the PRO-CTAE has been analyzed previously. In our study, 161 cancer patients participated in the pre-testing and interviews (50% in active treatment). Qualitative interviews showed high acceptability of WISP. Among the 295 symptoms/problems reported using WISP, skin problems, sore mouth and bleeding were more prevalent in patients in active treatment, whereas numbness/tingling, dry mouth and existential problems were more prevalent in patients in palliative care/treatment. Conclusions: The EORTC WISP instrument was found to be acceptable and useful for symptom assessment in cancer patients. WISP improves the identification of symptoms/problems not assessed by cancer-generic questionnaires and therefore, we recommend its use alongside the EORTC questionnaires.
KW - Acceptability
KW - Cancer
KW - Palliative care
KW - Prevalence
KW - Quality of Life
KW - Symptom assessment
U2 - 10.1186/s12955-024-02244-z
DO - 10.1186/s12955-024-02244-z
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 38532393
AN - SCOPUS:85188575640
VL - 22
JO - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
JF - Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
SN - 1477-7525
IS - 1
M1 - 28
ER -
ID: 387655966