Abstract Background Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are crucial for guiding patient care and maintaining quality of life This study assesses the feasibility of computer-based adaptations of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) in a clinical setting and compares its outcomes with the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EORTC-BN20 questionnaires. Validated, modular computer adaptive testing might reduce patient survey burden and provide physicians with more precise PROs. Methods Newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) patients were prospectively enrolled prior to radiation to evaluate feasibility. PROMIS modules were selected to reflect EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EORTC-BN20 domains, including anxiety, depression, fatigue, physical function, sleep disturbance, social satisfaction, cognitive ability, and global health. Patients completed both EORTC and PROMIS questionnaires electronically, preceding descriptive analyses. Results 43 patients with 124 responses were analyzed. 31 patients completed surveys before or within 14 days of radiation, and 12 were outside the radiation window, yielding 60 completed surveys. Median completion times for the EORTC-QLQ-C30 and EORTC-BN20 were 4.77 (range: 2.05–18.6) and 2.63 (range: 1.17–24.83) minutes, respectively. For most PROMIS modules, completion times ranged from 0.6–1 minute (range: 0.15–7.77), while global health took a median of 2.35 minutes (range: 1.02–21.12), The average time to completion was 8.65 minutes (range: 3.32–66.01). For most variables, PROMIS and EORTC-QLQ-C30 showed strong to moderate correlations Conclusions PROMIS measures correlated well with EORTC instruments, making them a suitable tool for evaluating patients with GBM. Response times were generally short, but variability suggested that low computer literacy, limited internet access, and disease burden may affect involvement.
Walbert et al. (Sat,) studied this question.