A qualitative analysis and development of a conceptual model assessing financial toxicity in cancer patients accessing the universal healthcare system

Silvia Riva, Fabio Efficace, Massimo Di Maio, Jane Bryce, Laura Del Campo, Francesco De Lorenzo, Luciano Frontini, Diana Giannarelli, Lara Gitto, Elisabetta Iannelli, Claudio Jommi, Vincenzo Montesarchio, Francesca Traclò, Concetta Maria Vaccaro, Laura Arenare, Giuliana Canzanella, Anna Gimigliano, Fiorella Romano, Alfonso Savio, Lucia Sparavigna, Maria Carmela Piccirillo, Lorenzo Guizzaro, Ciro Gallo, Francesco Perrone, Silvia Riva, Fabio Efficace, Massimo Di Maio, Jane Bryce, Laura Del Campo, Francesco De Lorenzo, Luciano Frontini, Diana Giannarelli, Lara Gitto, Elisabetta Iannelli, Claudio Jommi, Vincenzo Montesarchio, Francesca Traclò, Concetta Maria Vaccaro, Laura Arenare, Giuliana Canzanella, Anna Gimigliano, Fiorella Romano, Alfonso Savio, Lucia Sparavigna, Maria Carmela Piccirillo, Lorenzo Guizzaro, Ciro Gallo, Francesco Perrone

Abstract

Purpose: This paper illustrates a conceptual model for a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) aimed at measuring financial toxicity (FT) in oncological setting in Italy, where citizens are provided universal healthcare coverage.

Methods: Focus groups with overall 34 patients/caregivers in three different Italian centers (from Northern, Centre, and Southern Italy) and an open-ended survey with 97 medical oncologists were undertaken. Transcripts from focus groups and the open-ended survey were analyzed to identify themes and links between themes. Themes from the qualitative research were supplemented with those reported in the literature; concepts identified formed the basis for item development that were then tested through the importance analysis (with 45 patients) and the cognitive debriefing (with other 45 patients) to test relevance and comprehension of the first draft PRO instrument.

Results: Ten domains were extracted by analyzing 156 concepts generated from focus groups and the open-ended survey. After controlling for redundancy, 55 items were generated and tested through the importance analysis. After controlling comprehension and feasibility through cognitive debriefing interviews, a first version of the questionnaire consisting of 30 items was devised.

Conclusions: This qualitative study represents the first part of a study conducted to develop a new PROM to assess FT in Italy, by using a bottom-up approach that makes the most of patients' experiences and the health system analysis.

Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT03473379 first posted on March 22, 2018.

Keywords: Cancer; Conceptual model; Financial toxicity; Patient experience; Qualitative research.

References

    1. Altice CK, Banegas MP, Tucker-Seeley RD, Yabroff KR (2017) Financial hardships experienced by cancer survivors: a systematic review. JNCI: J Natl Cancer Inst 109(2):djw205
    1. Braveman P, Egerter S, Williams DR (2011) The social determinants of health: coming of age. Annu Rev Public Health 32:381–398
    1. Carrera PM, Kantarjian HM, Blinder VS (2018) The financial burden and distress of patients with cancer: understanding and stepping-up action on the financial toxicity of cancer treatment. CA Cancer J Clin 68:153–165
    1. de Souza JA, Yap BJ, Hlubocky FJ, Wroblewski K, Ratain MJ, Cella D, Daugherty CK (2014) The development of a financial toxicity patient-reported outcome in cancer: the COST measure. Cancer 120:3245–3253
    1. Desai A, Gyawali B (2020) Financial toxicity of cancer treatment: moving the discussion from acknowledgement of the problem to identifying solutions. EClinicalMedicine 20:100269
    1. FAVO (Federazione Italiana delle Associazioni di Volontariato in Oncologia) (2012) 4° Rapporto sulla condizione assistenziale dei malati oncologici.
    1. FAVO CENSIS (2011) Ad alta voce - I tumori in Italia: i bisogni e le aspettative dei pazienti e delle famiglie.
    1. Goldstein DA (2017) Financial toxicity in cancer care-edging toward solutions. Cancer 123:1301–1302
    1. Gordon LG, Merollini KMD, Lowe A, Chan RJ (2017) A systematic review of financial toxicity among cancer survivors: we can’t pay the co-pay. Patient 10:295–309
    1. Lasch KE, Marquis P, Vigneux M, Abetz L, Arnould B, Bayliss M, Crawford B, Rosa K (2010) PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Qual Life Res 19:1087–1096
    1. Marmot M (2005) Social determinants of health inequalities. Lancet 365:1099–1104
    1. Marmot M, Friel S, Bell R, Houweling TA, Taylor S, Commission on social determinants of H (2008) Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Lancet 372:1661–1669
    1. Mitchell T, Thompson L (1994) A theory of temporal adjustment of the evaluation of events: rosy prospection & rosy retrospection. In: Stubbart C, Porac J, Meindl J (eds) . JAI Press, Advances in managerial cognition and organizational information-processing, pp 85–114
    1. Nederhof AJ (1985) Methods of coping with social desirability bias: a review. European Journal of Social Psychology 15:263–280
    1. O'Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA (2014) Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med 89:1245–1251
    1. O'Connor JM, Kircher SM, de Souza JA (2016) Financial toxicity in cancer care. J Community Support Oncol 14:101–106
    1. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Leech N, Collins KMT (2010) Innovative data collection strategies in qualitative research. Qualitative report 15:696–726
    1. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, Ring L (2011) Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value Health 14:967–977
    1. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Gwaltney CJ, Leidy NK, Martin ML, Molsen E, Ring L (2011) Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2--assessing respondent understanding. Value Health
    1. Perrone F, Di Maio M, Efficace F, Gallo C, Giannarelli D, Montesarchio V, Riva S (2019) Assessing financial toxicity in patients with cancer: moving away from a one-size-fits-all approach. J Oncol Pract JOP1900200
    1. Perrone F, Jommi C, Di Maio M, Gimigliano A, Gridelli C, Pignata S, Ciardiello F, Nuzzo F, de Matteis A, Del Mastro L, Bryce J, Daniele G, Morabito A, Piccirillo MC, Rocco G, Guizzaro L, Gallo C (2016) The association of financial difficulties with clinical outcomes in cancer patients: secondary analysis of 16 academic prospective clinical trials conducted in Italy. Annals of oncology 27:2224–2229
    1. Richardson JTE (1999) The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of educational research 69:53–82
    1. Riva S, Bryce J, De Lorenzo F, Del Campo L, Di Maio M, Efficace F, Frontini L, Giannarelli D, Gitto L, Iannelli E, Jommi C, Montesarchio V, Traclo F, Vaccaro CM, Gallo C, Perrone F (2019) Development and validation of a patient-reported outcome tool to assess cancer-related financial toxicity in Italy: a protocol. BMJ Open 9:e031485
    1. Rotter J, Spencer JC, Wheeler SB (2019) Financial toxicity in advanced and metastatic cancer: overburdened and underprepared. J Oncol Pract JOP1800518
    1. Russell BH (2013) Social research methods - qualitative and quantitative approaches. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oakx, California
    1. Seale C (1999) Quality in qualitative research 5:465–478
    1. Sharp L, Carsin AE, Timmons A (2013) Associations between cancer-related financial stress and strain and psychological well-being among individuals living with cancer. Psychooncology 22:745–755
    1. Starks H, Trinidad SB (2007) Choose your method: a comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qual Health Res 17:1372–1380
    1. Stover AM, Haverman L, van Oers HA, Greenhalgh J, Potter CM, Group IPPiCPISW (2020) Using an implementation science approach to implement and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) initiatives in routine care settings. Qual Life Res
    1. Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks
    1. Tesch R (1990) Qualitative research: analysis types and software. Routledge
    1. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J (2007) Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care 19:349–357
    1. Zafar SY, Peppercorn JM, Schrag D, Taylor DH, Goetzinger AM, Zhong X, Abernethy AP (2013) The financial toxicity of cancer treatment: a pilot study assessing out-of-pocket expenses and the insured cancer patient's experience. Oncologist 18:381–390

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir