Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series – Paper 3: patient-reported outcomes can facilitate shared decision-making and guide self-management

Patient-driven research priorities for patient-centered measurement

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred measurement (PCM) emphasizes a holistic approach wherein the voices of patients are reflected in the standardized use of patient-reported outcome and experience measures and are represented throughout the continuum of measurement activities. Given the challenges of routinely integrating patient self-reports into clinical care decisions, the perspectives of all healthcare system stakeholders, especially patients, is necessary to advance the science of PCM. The purpose of the analysis we report on here was to identify patient-driven research priorities for advancing the science of PCM.

METHODS

We analyzed data from seven focus groups that were conducted across British Columbia, Canada and that included a total of 73 patients, using qualitative inductive analysis and constant comparative methods.

RESULTS

We found that the patients conveyed a desire for PCM to contribute to healthcare decisions, specifically that their individual healthcare needs and related priorities as they see them are always front and centre, guiding all healthcare interactions. The patients' commentaries highlighted intersecting priorities for research on advancing the science of PCM that would help transform care by (1) enhancing the patient-provider relationship, (2) giving voice to patients' stories, (3) addressing inclusivity, (4) ensuring psychological safety, (5) improving healthcare services and systems to better meet patient needs, and (6) bolstering healthcare system accountability.

CONCLUSIONS

These priorities provide direction for future research efforts that would be positioned to make progress towards better health, better care, and better use of resources for individuals and for society.

Effect of a Home-Base Core Stability Exercises in Hereditary Ataxia. A Randomized Controlled Trial. A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Core stability exercises (CSE) have been shown to be effective in improving trunk function in several neurological diseases, but the evidence is scarce on Hereditary Ataxias (HA).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a 5-week home-based CSE program in terms of ataxia severity, trunk function, balance confidence, gait speed, lower limb motor function, quality of life, health status and falls rate in HA individuals at short- and long-term.

METHODS

This is an assessor-blind randomized controlled clinical trial parallel group 1:1. The individuals were divided in experimental group (EG) performed standard care in addition to CSE, and control group (CG) performed standard care alone. The CSE home-program was conducted 1-h/day, 5-day/week for 5-week. The assessment was performed at baseline, endpoint (5-week), and follow-up (10-week). The primary outcomes were ataxia severity assessed by the Scale for the Assessment and Rating of Ataxia and trunk function assessed by Spanish-version of Trunk Impairment Scale 2.0. The secondary outcomes were balance confidence assessed by Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC), gait speed by 4-meter walk test (4-MWT), the lower limb motor function by 30-s sit-to-stand, quality of life by EuroQol 5-dimension 5-level (EQ-5D-5L), health-status by EQ-5D and falls rate.

RESULTS

Twenty-three HA individuals were recruited (51.8 ± 11.10 years). Statistically significant group-time interaction was shown in ABC (F:5.539; P = 0.007), EQ-5D-5L Total (F:4.836; P = 0.013), EQ 5D (F:7.207; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

No statistical differences between groups for ataxia severity and trunk function were observed. However, were differences for balance confidence, gait speed, quality of life, and falls rate in HA individuals.

Patient medication management, understanding and adherence during the transition from hospital to outpatient care - a qualitative longitudinal study in polymorbid patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Continuity of care is under great pressure during the transition from hospital to outpatient care. Medication changes during hospitalization may be poorly communicated and understood, compromising patient safety during the transition from hospital to home. The main aims of this study were to investigate the perspectives of patients with type 2 diabetes and multimorbidities on their medications from hospital discharge to outpatient care, and their healthcare journey through the outpatient healthcare system. In this article, we present the results focusing on patients' perspectives of their medications from hospital to two months after discharge.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes, with at least two comorbidities and who returned home after discharge, were recruited during their hospitalization. A descriptive qualitative longitudinal research approach was adopted, with four in-depth semi-structured interviews per participant over a period of two months after discharge. Interviews were based on semi-structured guides, transcribed verbatim, and a thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-one participants were included from October 2020 to July 2021. Seventy-five interviews were conducted. Three main themes were identified: (A) Medication management, (B) Medication understanding, and (C) Medication adherence, during three periods: (1) Hospitalization, (2) Care transition, and (3) Outpatient care. Participants had varying levels of need for medication information and involvement in medication management during hospitalization and in outpatient care. The transition from hospital to autonomous medication management was difficult for most participants, who quickly returned to their routines with some participants experiencing difficulties in medication adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

The transition from hospital to outpatient care is a challenging process during which discharged patients are vulnerable and are willing to take steps to better manage, understand, and adhere to their medications. The resulting tension between patients' difficulties with their medications and lack of standardized healthcare support calls for interprofessional guidelines to better address patients' needs, increase their safety, and standardize physicians', pharmacists', and nurses' roles and responsibilities.

Survivorship Care for People Affected by Advanced or Metastatic Cancer: MASCC-ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations

PURPOSE

People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared with those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end of life. These Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer.

METHODS

A MASCC-ASCO expert panel was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process.

RESULTS

A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including eight people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low- to middle-resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥94.8% agreement for seven standards, (1) Person-Centered Care; (2) Coordinated and Integrated Care; (3) Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; (4) Evaluated and Communicated Care; (5) Accessible and Equitable Care; (6) Sustainable and Resourced Care; and (7) Research and Data-Driven Care, and ≥84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders (health care professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers). Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts.Additional information is available at www.mascc.org, www.asco.org/standards and www.asco.org/survivorship-guidelines.

Survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer: MASCC-ASCO standards and practice recommendations

PURPOSE

People with advanced or metastatic cancer and their caregivers may have different care goals and face unique challenges compared to those with early-stage disease or those nearing the end-of-life. These MASCC-ASCO standards and practice recommendations seek to establish consistent provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer.

METHODS

An expert panel comprising MASCC and ASCO members was formed. Standards and recommendations relevant to the provision of quality survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer were developed through conducting: (1) a systematic review of unmet supportive care needs; (2) a scoping review of cancer survivorship, supportive care, and palliative care frameworks and guidelines; and (3) an international modified Delphi consensus process.

RESULTS

A systematic review involving 81 studies and a scoping review of 17 guidelines and frameworks informed the initial standards and recommendations. Subsequently, 77 experts (including 8 people with lived experience) across 33 countries (33% were low-to-middle resource countries) participated in the Delphi study and achieved ≥ 94.8% agreement for seven standards (1. Person-Centred Care; 2. Coordinated and Integrated Care; 3. Evidence-Based and Comprehensive Care; 4. Evaluated and Communicated Care; 5. Accessible and Equitable Care; 6. Sustainable and Resourced Care; 7. Research and Data-Driven Care) and ≥ 84.2% agreement across 45 practice recommendations.

CONCLUSION

Standards of survivorship care for people affected by advanced or metastatic cancer are provided. These MASCC-ASCO standards will support optimization of health outcomes and care experiences by providing guidance to stakeholders in cancer care (healthcare professionals, leaders, and administrators; governments and health ministries; policymakers; advocacy agencies; cancer survivors and caregivers. Practice recommendations may be used to facilitate future research, practice, policy, and advocacy efforts.

Navigating outpatient care of patients with type 2 diabetes after hospital discharge - a qualitative longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

The transition from hospital to outpatient care is a particularly vulnerable period for patients as they move from regular health monitoring to self-management. This study aimed to map and investigate the journey of patients with polymorbidities, including type 2 diabetes (T2D), in the 2 months following hospital discharge and examine patients' encounters with healthcare professionals (HCPs).

METHODS

Patients discharged with T2D and at least two other comorbidities were recruited during hospitalization. This qualitative longitudinal study consisted of four semi-structured interviews per participant conducted from discharge up to 2 months after discharge. The interviews were based on a guide, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. Patient journeys through the healthcare system were represented using the patient journey mapping methodology.

RESULTS

Seventy-five interviews with 21 participants were conducted from October 2020 to July 2021. The participants had a median of 11 encounters (min-max: 6-28) with HCPs. The patient journey was categorized into six key steps: hospitalization, discharge, dispensing prescribed medications by the community pharmacist, follow-up calls, the first medical appointment, and outpatient care.

CONCLUSIONS

The outpatient journey in the 2 months following discharge is a complex and adaptive process. Despite the active role of numerous HCPs, navigation in outpatient care after discharge relies heavily on the involvement and responsibilities of patients. Preparation for discharge, post-hospitalization follow-up, and the first visit to the pharmacy and general practitioner are key moments for carefully considering patient care. Our findings underline the need for clarified roles and a standardized approach to discharge planning and post-discharge care in partnership with patients, family caregivers, and all stakeholders involved.

Exploring Data Collection Priorities of Community Partners in Early Psychosis Care

OBJECTIVE

Learning health care networks can significantly improve the effectiveness, consistency, and cost-effectiveness of care delivery. As part of a data harmonization process, incorporation of the perspectives of community partners to maximize the relevance and utility of the data is critical.

METHODS

A mixed-methods focus group study was conducted with early psychosis program providers, leadership, service users, and family members to explore their priorities regarding data collection in early psychosis care. Focus group transcripts were analyzed through thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-two focus groups comprising 178 participants were conducted across 10 early psychosis programs. Participants considered functioning, quality of life, recovery, and symptoms of psychosis as key outcomes to assess, although variation by participants' roles was also evident. Participants emphasized the clinical utility of assessing a broad range of predictors of care outcomes, favored a broad conceptualization of the constructs assessed, and indicated a preference for client-reported measures. Participants also emphasized the importance of surveys adopting a recovery-oriented, strengths-based approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-scale aggregation of health care data collected as part of routine care offers opportunities for research and may have a positive impact on care delivery and quality improvement activities. However, these benefits are contingent on the data being both relevant and accessible to those who deliver and receive such care. This study highlights an approach that may inform the development of core assessment batteries used, optimizing the utility of such data for all community partners.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Patients With CKD: The Case for Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Tools

Chronic kidney disease (CKD), kidney failure, and kidney replacement therapies are associated with high symptom burden and impaired health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Symptoms change with disease progression or transition between treatment modalities and frequently go unreported and unmanaged. Tools that reliably monitor symptoms may improve the management of patients with CKD. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assess symptom severity; physical, psychological, social, and cognitive functioning; treatment-related side effects; and HRQOL. Systematic use of PROMs can improve patient-provider communication, patient satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and HRQOL. Potential barriers to their use include a lack of engagement, response burden, and limited guidance about PROM collection, score interpretation, and workflow integration. Well-defined, acceptable, and effective clinical response pathways are essential for implementing PROMs. PROMs developed by the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) address some challenges and may be suitable for clinical use among patients with CKD. PROMIS tools assess multiple patient-valued, clinically actionable symptoms and functions. They can be administered as fixed-length, customized short forms or computer adaptive tests, offering precise measurement across a range of symptom severities or function levels, tailored questions to individuals, and reduced question burden. Here we provide an overview of the potential use of PROMs in CKD care, with a focus on PROMIS.

Clinical Patient-Relevant Outcome Domains for Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-A Scoping Review and Expert Panels

Large variation exists in the monitoring of clinical outcome domains in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS). Furthermore, it is unclear which outcome domains are important from the PSPS patient's perspective. The study objectives were to identify patient-relevant outcome domains for PSPS and to establish a PSPS outcomes framework. PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched to identify studies reporting views or preferences of PSPS patients on outcome domains. The Arksey and O'Malley framework was followed to identify outcome domains. An expert panel rated the domains based on the importance for PSPS patients they have treated. A framework of relevant outcome domains was established using the selected outcome domains by the expert panel. No studies were found for PSPS type 1. Five studies with 77 PSPS type 2 patients were included for further analysis. Fourteen outcome domains were identified. An expert panel, including 27 clinical experts, reached consensus on the domains pain, daily activities, perspective of life, social participation, mobility, mood, self-reliance, and sleep. Eleven domains were included in the PSPS type 2 outcomes framework. This framework is illustrative of a more holistic perspective and should be used to improve the evaluation of care for PSPS type 2 patients. Further research is needed on the prioritization of relevant outcome domains.

Patient-reported outcomes in bilateral prophylactic mastectomy with breast reconstruction: A narrative review

In women at high risk of developing breast cancer, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (BPM) 1 significantly reduces the risk; simultaneously, breast reconstruction preserves body integrity. Given the complex and personal nature of such surgical procedures, patient assessment of satisfaction and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) 2 is essential in evaluation of surgical outcomes. With this review, we aim to organize the current knowledge on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 3 in bilateral prophylactic surgery. Literature search was conducted using the databases Google Scholar, PubMed, and Web of Science to address the following questions, which can help clinicians and women undergoing the procedures navigate their healthcare decision-making process: How does BPM with reconstruction influence cancer-related distress? How does the surgery impact patient satisfaction and HRQoL? How do preoperative PROs differ from postoperative outcomes? Does the type of BPM and the type of reconstruction impact patient satisfaction and HRQoL? Furthermore, we summarize available patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 4 that can be administered to women undergoing BPM with reconstruction. In addition, we discuss possible future directions for PRO research in prophylactic breast surgery.

Perceptions regarding the concept and definition of patient-reported outcomes among healthcare stakeholders in Japan with relation to quality of life: a cross-sectional study

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are frequently used in a variety of settings, including clinical trials and clinical practice. The definition of PRO and quality of life (QOL) and their relationship have been concluded through discussions among experts that has been the premise of PRO guidelines are not clearly stated in the guidelines. Therefore, the definition of PRO, especially in relation to QOL, is sometimes explained simply, as "PRO includes QOL," but this complicated matters. This study investigated the perceptions of PRO among various stakeholders (including patients and their families, the industry, clinicians, regulatory or health technology assessment personnel, and academic researchers) in Japan to clarify its definitions and that of QOL, including their relationship.We conducted a two-step survey: a qualitative interview survey and a web-based survey to ensure the validity of the survey. During the interviews, eight stakeholders described their perceptions and thoughts on PRO and its relationship to QOL, and their experience of using PRO. Overall 253 clinicians, 249 company employees, and 494 patients participated in the web survey to confirm how the findings of the interview survey supported the results.In the interview survey, patient advocates described various perspectives of PRO and QOL, including unexpected dynamic relationships, while the most other stakeholders explained PRO and QOL with the language used in the guidelines, but their responses were split. The web-based survey revealed that all stakeholders had a lower awareness of PRO than QOL. The most common perception of PRO, especially in the relationship to QOL, was "they did not fully overlap." Although there were differences in perceptions of the relationship between PRO and QOL among clinicians, company employees, and patients, all perceived PRO as a tool to facilitate communication in clinical practice.The present results are inconsistent with the simplified explanation of PRO, but consistent with the original PRO guideline definitions, which also considered the role of PRO in clinical practice. To make PRO a more potent tool, all stakeholders using PRO should confirm its definition and how it differs from QOL, have a unified recognition in each PRO use, and avoid miscommunication.

Determining Construct Validity of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Birthmarks on the Face and Body

Background: The FACE-Q Craniofacial module includes a scale that measures how bothered an individual is by the appearance of a birthmark on the face or body. Objective: To determine if the Birthmark scale measuring appearance of the birthmark has evidence of construct validity among children and young adults, aged 8-29 years old, with a birthmark on the face or body. Methods: Participants were recruited as part of the field test of the FACE-Q Craniofacial module. Construct validity of the Birthmark scale was examined using a priori hypotheses testing. Results: Two hundred seventy participants were included, who were predominantly female (60.4%) and had a facial birthmark (71.5%). The Birthmark scale correlated (p ≤ 0.01) with scale scores for Face, Appearance Distress, Psychological, School, and Social. Scores for participants with more "noticeable" birthmarks were (p ≤ 0.01) associated with worse Birthmark scale scores. Conclusion: The findings support that the Birthmark scale can be used to measure the patient's perspective of the appearance of their birthmark, providing a means for clinicians to incorporate the patient's view in shared decision-making and research.

Development and Validation of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Fingernail and Toenail Conditions: The NAIL-Q

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are needed to measure outcomes that matter to people with nail conditions, from their perspective.

Objective

To design a comprehensive new PROM (NAIL-Q) to measure outcomes important in toenail and fingernail conditions.

Methods

A mixed methods iterative approach was used. Phase 1 involved concept elicitation interviews that were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded line-by-line. Concepts were developed into scales and refined through cognitive debriefing interviews with patients and expert input. Data was then collected from an international sample using a crowdsource platform. Eligible participants were aged ≥18 years with a nail condition for at least 3 months. Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis was used to examine item and scale performance. Other psychometric tests included test-retest reliability, and convergent and construct validity.

Results

Phase 1 interviews involved 23 patients with 10 nail conditions and input from 11 dermatologists. The analysis led to the development of 84 items for field-testing. In Phase 2, 555 participants completed the survey. Toenail conditions (n = 441) were more common than fingernail conditions (n = 186). The RMT analysis reduced the number of items tested to 45 in 7 scales measuring nail appearance, health-related quality of life concerns, and treatment outcomes. All items had ordered thresholds and nonsignificant chi-square p values. Reliability statistics with and without extremes for the Person Separation Index were ≥0.79 and Cronbach's alpha were ≥0.83, and for intraclass correlation coefficients were ≥0.81. Construct validity was further supported in that most participants agreed that the NAIL-Q was easy to understand, asked relevant and important questions in a respectful way, and that it should be used to inform clinical care.

Conclusion

The NAIL-Q is a rigorously designed and tested PROM that measures nail appearance, health-related quality of life and treatment outcomes. This PROM can be used in clinical practice to inform patient care and to include the patient perspective in research.

Placing patient-reported outcomes at the centre of cardiovascular clinical practice: implications for quality of care and management

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide important insights into patients' own perspectives about their health and medical condition, and there is evidence that their use can lead to improvements in the quality of care and to better-informed clinical decisions. Their application in cardiovascular populations has grown over the past decades. This statement describes what PROs are, and it provides an inventory of disease-specific and domain-specific PROs that have been developed for cardiovascular populations. International standards and quality indices have been published, which can guide the selection of PROs for clinical practice and in clinical trials and research; patients as well as experts in psychometrics should be involved in choosing which are most appropriate. Collaborations are needed to define criteria for using PROs to guide regulatory decisions, and the utility of PROs for comparing and monitoring the quality of care and for allocating resources should be evaluated. New sources for recording PROs include wearable digital health devices, medical registries, and electronic health record. Advice is given for the optimal use of PROs in shared clinical decision-making in cardiovascular medicine, and concerning future directions for their wider application.

Cross-cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Persian translation of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI)

PURPOSE

The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) is the most commonly used patient-reported outcome measure to record the quality of life in patients with shoulder instability. The current study aimed to translate the WOSI into the Persian language and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

The translation procedure of the WOSI was performed according to a standard guideline. A total of 52 patients were included in the study and responded to the Persian WOSI, Oxford shoulder score (OSS), Oxford shoulder instability score (OSIS), and disabilities of arm, shoulder and hand (DASH). A sub-group of 41 patients responded for the second time to the Persian WOSI after an interval of 1-2 weeks. The internal consistency, test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), measurement error, minimal detectable change (MDC), and floor and ceiling effect were analyzed. The hypothesis testing method was used to assess construct validity by calculating Pearson correlation coefficient between WOSI and DASH, OSS, and OSIS.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha value was 0.93, showing strong internal consistency. Test-retest reliability was good to excellent (ICC = 0.90). There was no floor and ceiling effect. The standard error of measurement and MDC were 8.30% and 23.03%, respectively. Regarding construct validity, 83.3% of the results agreed with hypotheses. High correlations were observed between WOSI and DASH, OSS and OSIS (0.746, 0.759 and 0.643, respectively) indicating excellent validity for the Persian WOSI.

CONCLUSION

The current study results demonstrated that the Persian WOSI is a valid and reliable instrument and can be used in the clinic and research for Persian-speaking patients with shoulder instability.

A novel electronic patient-reported outcome delivery system to implement health-related quality of life measures in routine clinical care: An analysis of 5 years of experience

Objective

To develop a simple and secure technological solution to incorporate electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) into routine clinical care.

Methods

A novel ePRO questionnaire delivery system was developed by Software for Specialists (S4S) in partnership with OPAL Rheumatology Australia. Validated questionnaires were sent from the electronic medical record (EMR) (Audit4) of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), lupus or giant cell arteritis (GCA) and delivered to the patient's email address or completed in the clinic waiting room using a smart device (in-practice). Completed questionnaires were encrypted and returned to the patient's Audit4. Deidentified clinical data was extracted and aggregated across all sites. Data collected between April 2016-Dec 2020 were analysed descriptively.

Results

Between April 2016 to Dec 2020, 221,352 Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue (FACIT-F), Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) and/or HealthCare Resource Utilization (HCRU) questionnaires were sent from 39 of 42 contributing clinics (93%). 85% of questionnaires were delivered via email and 15% in-practice. Overall, 85% of patients completed at least one questionnaire, and of all questionnaires sent, 73% were completed. Females were more likely to engage with the questionnaires than males (87% vs. 81%), and older patients were slightly more likely to complete all questionnaires delivered.

Conclusions

The novel Audit4 ePRO delivery system is an effective tool for incorporating PROs into routine clinical care. The data generated provides a unique opportunity to understand the full burden of disease for patients in the real-world setting and the impact of interventions.

Establishing severity levels for patient-reported measures of functional communication, participation, and perceived cognitive function for adults with acquired cognitive and language disorders

PURPOSE

To empirically assign severity levels (e.g., mild, moderate) to four relatively new patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for adults with acquired cognitive/language disorders. They include the Communicative Participation Item Bank, the Aphasia Communication Outcome Measure, and Neuro-QoL's item banks of Cognitive Function (v2.0) and Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (v1.0).

METHOD

We conducted 17 focus groups that comprised 22 adults with an acquired cognitive/language disorder from stroke, Parkinson's disease, or traumatic brain injury; 30 care partners of an adult with an acquired cognitive/language disorder; and 42 speech-language pathologists who had experience assessing/treating individuals with those and other cognitive/language disorders. In a small, moderated focus-group format, participants completed "PROM-bookmarking" procedures: They discussed hypothetical vignettes based on PROM item responses about people with cognitive/language disorders and had to reach consensus regarding whether their symptoms/function should be categorized as within normal limits or mild, moderate, or severe challenges.

RESULTS

There was generally good agreement among the stakeholder groups about how to classify vignettes, particularly when they reflected very high or low functioning. People with aphasia described a larger range of functional communication challenges as "mild" compared to other stakeholder types. Based on a consensus across groups, we present severity levels for specific score ranges for each PROM.

CONCLUSION

Standardized, stakeholder-informed severity levels that aid interpretation of PROM scores can help clinicians and researchers derive better clinical meaning from those scores, for example, by identifying important clinical windows of opportunity and assessing when symptoms have returned to a "normal" range.

Predicting non-response in patient-reported outcome measures: results from the Swiss quality assurance programme in cardiac inpatient rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Quality assurance programmes measure and compare certain health outcomes to ensure high-quality care in the health-care sector. The outcome of health-related quality of life is typically measured by patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). However, certain patient groups are less likely to respond to PROMs than others. This non-response bias can potentially distort results in quality assurance programmes.

OBJECTIVE

Our study aims to identify relevant predictors of non-response during assessment using the PROM MacNew Heart Disease questionnaire in cardiac rehabilitation.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study based on data from the Swiss external quality assurance programme. All patients aged 18 years or older who underwent inpatient cardiac rehabilitation in 16 Swiss rehabilitation clinics between 2016 and 2019 were included. Patients' socio-demographic and basic medical data were analysed descriptively by comparing two groups: non-responders and responders. We used a random intercept logistic regression model to estimate the associations of patient characteristics and clinic differences with non-response.

RESULTS

Of 24 572 patients, there were 33.3% non-responders and 66.7% responders. The mean age was 70 years, and 31.0% were women. The regression model showed that being female was associated with non-response [odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.30], as well as having no supplementary health insurance (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.39-1.59). Each additional year of age increased the chance of non-response by an OR of 1.02 (95% CI 1.02-1.02). Not being a first language speaker of German, French or Italian increased the chance of non-response by an OR of 6.94 (95% CI 6.03-7.99). Patients admitted directly from acute care had a higher chance of non-response (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.10-1.38), as well as patients being discharged back into acute care after rehabilitation (OR 3.89; 95% CI 3.00-5.04). Each point on the cumulative illness rating scale total score increased the chance of non-response by an OR of 1.05 (95% CI 1.04-1.05). Certain diagnoses also influenced the chance of non-response. Even after adjustment for known confounders, response rates differed substantially between the 16 clinics.

CONCLUSION

We have found significant non-response bias among certain patient groups, as well as across different treatment facilities. Measures to improve response rates among patients with known barriers to participation, as well as among different treatment facilities, need to be considered, particularly when PROMs are being used for comparison of providers in quality assurance programmes or outcome evaluation.

Discussing results of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between patients and healthcare professionals in routine dialysis care: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide insight into patients' experienced health and needs, and can improve patient-professional communication. However, little is known about how to discuss PROM results. This study aimed to provide in-depth knowledge of patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences with and perspectives on discussing PROM results as part of routine dialysis care.

DESIGN

A qualitative study was performed using an interpretive description approach. Individual semistructured interviews were conducted with 22 patients and healthcare professionals. Interviews focused on general and specific situations (eg, addressing sensitive topics or when no medical treatment is available). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using thematic analysis.

SETTING

Participants were purposively sampled from eight dialysis centres across the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Interviews were conducted with 10 patients receiving dialysis treatment and 12 healthcare professionals (nephrologists and nurses).

RESULTS

Patients and healthcare professionals provided practical guidance for optimal discussion about PROM results. First, patients and healthcare professionals emphasised that PROM results should always be discussed and indicated how to create a suitable setting, adequately prepare, deal with time constraints and use PROMs as a tool for personalised holistic consultations. Second, patients should actively participate and healthcare professionals should take a guiding role. A trusting patient-professional relationship was considered a prerequisite and patient-professional interaction was described as a collaboration in which both contribute their knowledge, experiences and ideas. Third, follow-up after discussing PROM results was considered important, including evaluations and actions (eg, symptom management) structurally embedded into the multidisciplinary treatment process. These general themes also applied to the specific situations, for example: results should also be discussed when no medical treatment is available. Though, healthcare professionals were expected to take more initiative and a leading role when discussing sensitive topics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides insight into how to organise and conduct conversations about PROM results and lays the foundation for training healthcare professionals to optimally discuss PROM results in routine nephrology care. Further research is needed to provide guidance on follow-up actions in response to specific PROM results.

Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK

Background

The independent healthcare sector in the UK collects PROMs for several surgical procedures, but implementation has been challenging. We aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to PROMs implementation in the independent healthcare sector in the UK.

Method

Between January and May 2021, we remotely conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital consultants, hospital managers and other clinical staff using a topic guide developed from an implementation science framework called the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

Results

We interviewed 6 hospital consultants, 5 hospital managers, and 3 other clinical staff (1 nurse and 2 physiotherapists) across 8 hospitals. Common barriers included: the perception that PROMs are predominantly a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool, absence of feedback mechanisms for PROMs data for clinicians, poor awareness of PROMs among healthcare professionals and the public, absence of direction or commitment from leadership, and limited support from hospital consultants. Common enablers included: regular feedback of PROMs data to clinicians, designating roles and responsibilities, formally embedding PROMs collection into patient pathways, and involvement of hospital consultants in developing strategies to improve PROMs uptake.

Conclusion

To support PROMs implementation, independent hospitals need to develop long-term organisational strategies that involve sustained leadership commitment, goals or targets, training opportunities to staff, and regular feedback of PROMs data at clinical or governance meetings. The primary purpose of PROMs needs to be reframed to independent healthcare sector stakeholders as a quality improvement tool rather than a reporting requirement.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5.

The association between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient participation in chronic care: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly applied in chronic care due to their many functionalities and synergies with current healthcare policies. The participatory potential of PROs is especially emphasised in the Danish context. This review scrutinises the association between PRO and patient participation in chronic care.

METHODS

This scoping review adheres to PRISMA-ScR guidelines, and the synthesis is based on narrative and thematic analyses.

RESULTS

Eighty-four articles were deemed eligible. The association between PRO and patient participation regards seven themes: PRO development, response rates and patient burden, patient empowerment and self-management, display and quality of data, patient-clinician communication, shared decision-making, and organisational and attitudinal aspects. Lack of knowledge, actor attitudes, organisational setup, and technological infrastructure act as the main barriers.

CONCLUSION

The connection between PROs and patient participation is dialectic and unfolds in three phases-before, during, and after patient-clinician consultation. Knowledge regarding the last phase is particularly scarce. Henceforth, studies should address how to include a broader segment of patients, PROs participatory effects over time and PROs impact on patients' everyday lives.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The review provides knowledge concerning the association between PROs and patient participation to enhance future chronic care, research, and discussions in the area.

Patient-reported outcome measure clustering after surgery for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis

OBJECTIVE

Adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) is a widespread and debilitating subset of adult spinal deformity. Although many patients benefit from operative treatment, surgery entails substantial cost and risk for adverse events. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are patient-centered tools used to evaluate the appropriateness of surgery and to assist in the shared decision-making process. Framing realistic patient expectations should include the possible functional limitation to improvement inherent in surgical intervention, such as multilevel fusion to the sacrum. The authors' objective was to predict postoperative ASLS PROMs by using clustering analysis, generalized longitudinal regression models, percentile analysis, and clinical improvement analysis of preoperative health-related quality-of-life scores for use in surgical counseling.

METHODS

Operative results from the combined ASLS cohorts were examined. PROM score clustering after surgery investigated limits of surgical improvement. Patients were categorized by baseline disability (mild, moderate, moderate to severe, or severe) according to preoperative Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Responder analysis for patients achieving improvement meeting the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) standards was performed using both fixed-threshold and patient-specific values (MCID = 30% of remaining scale, SCB = 50%). Best (top 5%), worst (bottom 5%), and median scores were calculated across disability categories.

RESULTS

A total of 171/187 (91%) of patients with ASLS achieved 2-year follow-up. Patients rarely achieved a PROM ceiling for any measure, with 33%-43% of individuals clustering near 4.0 for SRS domains. Patients with severe baseline disability (< 2.0) SRS-pain and SRS-function scores were often left with moderate to severe disability (2.0-2.9), unlike patients with higher (≥ 3.0) initial PROM values. Patients with mild disability according to baseline SRS-function score were unlikely to improve. Crippling baseline ODI disability (> 60) commonly left patients with moderate disability (median ODI = 32). As baseline ODI disability increased, patients were more likely to achieve MCID and SCB (p < 0.001). Compared to fixed threshold values for MCID and SCB, patient-specific values were more sensitive to change for patients with minimal ODI baseline disability (p = 0.008) and less sensitive to change for patients with moderate to severe SRS subscore disability (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that ASLS surgeries have a limit to possible improvement, probably due to both baseline disability and the effects of surgery. The most disabled patients often had moderate to severe disability (SRS < 3, ODI > 30) at 2 years, emphasizing the importance of patient counseling and expectation management.

Pediatric hand therapists' experiences with outcomes measurement: An interpretive descriptive study

BACKGROUND

Demonstrating that pediatric hand therapy patients are achieving improved functional and health status outcomes is critical as reimbursement for therapy services shifts to value-based reimbursement. Yet, practice patterns of outcomes assessment in pediatric hand therapy are unknown.

PURPOSE

Explore how pediatric hand therapists describe their experience measuring treatment outcomes and using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Secondarily, to elucidate what therapists perceive children and adolescents receiving hand therapy desire as treatment outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Interpretive descriptive qualitative study METHODS: Pediatric hand therapists were recruited through an email invitation sent to members of the Pediatric Hand Study Group to participate in one-on-one interviews over a teleconference link. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded to derive themes. Data collection and analysis were iterative.

RESULTS

Ten therapists with a median 13 years (range, 2-25 years) of experience practicing in pediatric hand therapy completed interviews. Overall, participants reported using 52 unique outcomes measures, including 20 PROMs. The following themes were elucidated: (1) Complexity and variability in pediatric hand therapy practice and outcomes assessment; (2) Barriers to PROM use; (3) Value of PROM utilization; (4) Desired characteristics of an optimal PROM for pediatric hand therapy.

CONCLUSION

Practice with outcomes assessment is variable. PROM utilization in pediatric hand therapy practice may be improved with the development of a PROM that is aligned with the pediatric population's outcomes priorities.

Systematic review on the measurement properties of diabetes-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for measuring physical functioning in people with type 2 diabetes

We aimed to systematically assess the measurement properties of diabetes-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for measuring physical functioning, one of the core outcomes, in adults with type 2 diabetes.We performed a systematic literature search for PROMs or subscales measuring physical function that were validated to at least some extent in EMBASE and MEDLINE. Measurement properties were evaluated according to the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs.In total 21 articles were included, describing 12 versions of 7 unique diabetes-specific PROMs or subscales measuring physical functioning. In general, there were few high-quality studies on measurement properties of PROMs measuring physical functioning in adults with type 2 diabetes. The Dependence/Daily Life subscale of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale-Short Form (DFS-SF) and the Impact of Weight on Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (IWADL) were most extensively evaluated. Both had sufficient ratings for aspects of content validity, although with mostly very low-quality evidence. Sufficient ratings for structural validity, internal consistency, and reliability were also found for both instruments, but responsiveness was rated inconsistent for both instruments. The other PROMs or subscales often had insufficient aspects of content validity, or their unidimensionality could not be confirmed.This systematic review showed that the Dependence/Daily Life subscale of the DFS-SF and the IWADL could be used to measure physical functioning in people with type 2 diabetes in research or clinical practice, while keeping the limitations of these instruments in mind. The measurement properties that have not been evaluated extensively for these PROMs should be evaluated in future studies.The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database, number CRD42021234890.

Artificial intelligence in knee arthroplasty: current concept of the available clinical applications

Background

Artificial intelligence (AI) is defined as the study of algorithms that allow machines to reason and perform cognitive functions such as problem-solving, objects, images, word recognition, and decision-making. This study aimed to review the published articles and the comprehensive clinical relevance of AI-based tools used before, during, and after knee arthroplasty.

Methods

The search was conducted through PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases from 2000 to 2021 using the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol (PRISMA).

Results

A total of 731 potential articles were reviewed, and 132 were included based on the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. Some steps of the knee arthroplasty procedure were assisted and improved by using AI-based tools. Before surgery, machine learning was used to aid surgeons in optimizing decision-making. During surgery, the robotic-assisted systems improved the accuracy of knee alignment, implant positioning, and ligamentous balance. After surgery, remote patient monitoring platforms helped to capture patients’ functional data.

Conclusion

In knee arthroplasty, the AI-based tools improve the decision-making process, surgical planning, accuracy, and repeatability of surgical procedures.

How Do PROMIS Scores Correspond to Common Physical Abilities?

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Report Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is increasingly used as a general-purpose tool for measuring orthopaedic surgery outcomes. This set of questionnaires is efficient, precise, and correlates well with specialty-specific measures, but impactful implementation of patient-specific data, especially at the point of care, remains a challenge. Although clinicians may have substantial experience with established patient-reported outcome measures in their fields, PROMIS is relatively new, and the real-life meaning of PROMIS numerical summary scores may be unknown to many orthopaedic surgeons.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We aimed to (1) identify a small subset of important items in the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) item bank that are answered by many patients with orthopaedic conditions and (2) graphically display characteristic responses to these items across the physical function spectrum in order to translate PROMIS numerical scores into physical ability levels using clinically relevant, familiar terms.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional study, 97,852 PROMIS PF assessments completed by 37,517 patients with orthopaedic conditions presenting to a tertiary-care academic institution were pooled and descriptively analyzed. Between 2017 and 2020, we evaluated 75,354 patients for outpatient orthopaedic care. Of these, 67% (50,578) were eligible for inclusion because they completed a PROMIS version 2.0 physical function assessment; 17% (12,720) were excluded because they lacked information in the database on individual item responses, and another < 1% (341) were excluded because the assessment standard error was greater than 0.32, leaving 50% of the patients (37,517) for analysis. The PROMIS PF is scored on a 0-point to 100-point scale, with a population mean of 50 and SD of 10. Anchor-based minimum clinically important differences have been found to be 8 to 10 points in a foot and ankle population, 7 to 8 points in a spine population, and approximately 4 points in a hand surgery population. The most efficient and precise means of administering the PROMIS PF is as a computerized adaptive test (CAT), whereby an algorithm intelligently tailors each follow-up question based on responses to previous questions, requiring only a few targeted questions to generate an accurate result. In this study, the mean PROMIS PF score was 41 ± 9. The questions most frequently used by the PROMIS CAT software were identified (defined in this study as any question administered to > 0.1% of the cohort). To understand the ability levels of patients based on their individual scores, patients were grouped into score categories: < 18, 20 ± 2, 25 ± 2, 30 ± 2, 35 ± 2, 40 ± 2, 45 ± 2, 50 ± 2, 55 ± 2, 60 ± 2, and > 62. For each score category, the relative frequency of each possible response (ranging from "cannot do" to "without any difficulty") was determined for each question. The distribution of responses given by each score group for each question was graphically displayed to generate an intuitive map linking PROMIS scores to patient ability levels (with ability levels represented by how patients responded to the PROMIS items).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight items from the 165-question item bank were used frequently (that is, administered to more than 0.1% of the cohort) by the PROMIS CAT software. The top four items constituted 63% of all items. These top four items asked about the patient's ability to perform 2 hours of physical labor, yard work, household chores, and walking more than 1 mile. Graphical displays of responses to the top 28 and top four items revealed how PROMIS scores correspond to patient ability levels. Patients with a score of 40 most frequently responded that they experienced "some difficulty" with physical labor, yard work, household chores, and walking more than 1 mile, compared with "little" or "no" difficulty for patients with a score of 50 and "cannot do" for patients with a score of 30.

CONCLUSION

We provided a visual key linking PROMIS numerical scores to physical ability levels using clinically relevant, familiar terms. Future studies might investigate whether using similar graphical displays as a patient education tool enhances patient-provider communication and improves the patient experience.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The visual explanation of PROMIS scores provided by this study may help new users of the PROMIS understand the instrument, feel empowered to incorporate it into their practices, and use it as a tool for counseling patients about their scores.

Patients’ experiences and perspectives of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical care: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis

Background

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) or patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used by clinicians in everyday clinical practice to assess patients’ perceptions of their own health and the healthcare they receive. By providing insight into how illness and interventions impact on patients’ lives, they can help to bridge the gap between clinicians’ expectations and what matters most to the patient. Given increasing focus on patient-centred care, the objective of this meta-synthesis was to summarise the qualitative evidence regarding patients’ perspectives and experiences of the use of PROMs in clinical care.

Methods

A systematic search of the following databases was undertaken in August 2020: Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE, PsychINFO, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. This review was conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative research (CASP). A meta-ethnographic approach was used for data extraction and meta-synthesis of findings (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020202506).

Results

Fourteen studies from a range of countries with differing qualitative research methodologies were identified. Three themes were identified, namely ‘patient preferences regarding PROMs’, ‘patient perceived benefits’ and ‘barriers to patient engagement with PROMs’. The perspectives of patients suggested they preferred PROMs that were simple and relevant to their conditions and found benefits in the way they facilitated self-reflection and effective communication with their clinicians. Patients, however, questioned the relevance of some individual questions and purpose.

Conclusion

PROMs can be a useful tool in the clinical setting by enabling individualisation and patient centred care. This meta-synthesis provides insights into what patients find beneficial as well as barriers to their engagement, highlighting the importance of educating patients about PROMs.

Development and consensus process for a clinical pathway for the assessment and management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients treated with neurotoxic chemotherapy are at risk of developing neurological symptoms that can impact functional capacity and quality of life. However, there are no standardised pathways to assess and manage chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN). This study aimed to determine consensus on statements regarding a CIPN assessment and management clinical pathway.

METHODS

A CIPN clinical pathway (CIPN-path) was developed and reviewed by an expert multi-disciplinary panel and consumers. Agreement with 18 statements regarding four content themes (pretreatment review, screening and assessment, management and referral, and CIPN-path feasibility) were assessed by 70 Australian respondents (68 health professionals, 2 consumers), using a 2-stage Delphi survey process to reach consensus. Respondents rated statements using a 5-point Likert scale to determine the level of agreement, with consensus defined as ≥ 80% of respondents agreeing with each statement.

RESULTS

The consensus was reached for 14 of 18 items after stage 1 and all items after stage 2. Feedback was obtained for all items to refine the CIPN-path. There was an agreement on important characteristics of the CIPN-path, including pretreatment screening, regular patient-reported assessment, and a stepped-care approach to investigating and managing symptom burden. There was a lack of agreement on who should oversee CIPN assessment, which may differ according to the structure and resources of each site.

CONCLUSIONS

There was an overall agreement concerning the CIPN-path to assess and manage CIPN, which may be adapted accordingly to the resources of each clinic. The CIPN-path may assist teams across different health services in identifying CIPN symptoms, aiding decision-making, and reducing morbidity from CIPN.

Performance of a Rasch-based method for group comparisons of longitudinal change and response shift at the item level in PRO data: A simulation study

The growing interest in patient perception and experience in healthcare has led to an increase in the use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) data. However, chronically ill patients may regularly adapt to their disease and, as a consequence, might change their perception of the PRO being measured. This phenomenon named response shift (RS) may occur differently depending on clinical and individual characteristics. The RespOnse Shift ALgorithm at the Item level (ROSALI), a method for RS analysis at the item level based on Rasch models, has recently been extended to explore heterogeneity of item-level RS between two groups of patients. The performances of ROSALI in terms of RS detection at the item level and biases of estimated differences in latent variable means were assessed. A simulation study was performed to investigate four scenarios: no RS, RS in only one group, RS affecting both groups either in a similar or a different way. Performances of ROSALI were assessed using rates of false detection of RS when no RS was simulated and a set of criteria (presence of RS, correct identification of items and groups affected by RS) when RS was simulated. Rates of false detection of RS were low indicating that ROSALI satisfactorily prevents from mistakenly inferring RS. ROSALI is able to detect RS and identify the item and group(s) affected when RS affects all response categories of an item in the same way. The performances of ROSALI depend mainly on the sample size and the degree of heterogeneity of item-level RS.

Real-world patient data: Can they support decision making and patient engagement?

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) capture data related to patients' perception of their health status and aspects of health care delivery. In parallel, digital innovations have advanced the administration, storage, processing, and accessibility of PROs, allowing these data to become actively incorporated in day-to-day clinical practice along the entire patient care pathway. Further, the emergence of shared decision making, where patients are engaged in informed treatment selection aligned with their preferences, values, and needs, can be realized by PROs and technology. This technology-enabled, data-driven approach provides insights which, when actioned, can enhance musculoskeletal care of patients and populations, while enriching the clinician-patient experience of decision making. In this review, we provide an overview of the opportunities enabled by PROs and technology for the cycle of orthopedic care.

Adapting a Patient-Reported Outcome Bookmarking Task to be Accessible to Adults With Cognitive and Language Disorders

Background Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures produce scores that do not always have obvious clinical meaning. The PRO-bookmarking procedure is a new and promising way to make PRO measures more meaningful and interpretable. However, the materials and procedures of the task may benefit from adaptations to be more accessible to individuals with cognitive and language disorders. Aims This study aims to provide an overview of the iterative refinement process used to modify the materials and procedures of the PRO-bookmarking task so that they are more accessible to adults with acquired cognitive and language impairments. Method and Procedures Our team of health psychologists, neuropsychologists, and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) conducted two focus groups with SLPs and care partners of people with aphasia using the same PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures as previous reports. These PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures were then refined iteratively based on discussion with those who participated in focus groups and among the research team, and three more times in the course of 16 additional focus groups of different stakeholders: people with Parkinson's disease, aphasia, or traumatic brain injury; care partners of people with those conditions; and SLPs who have experience with those, and other adult-acquired conditions. Outcomes and Results The PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures underwent four iterations to make them clearer, simpler, and more accessible. For example, the materials included more structured text and graphic supports where appropriate and the procedures were clustered into smaller discrete tasks and displayed graphically when possible and appropriate. Conclusions PRO-bookmarking materials and procedures were made simpler and more structured to increase their accessibility to adults with cognitive and language impairments. In fact, these adaptations made the tasks simpler and clearer for all types of stakeholders.

Rhinitis and Asthma Patient Perspective (RAPP): Clinical Utility and Predictive Value

BACKGROUND

RhinAsthma Patient Perspective (RAPP) is the only validated tool for assessing of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) related to asthma and rhinitis in individual patients.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the HRQoL burden among countries and explore the usefulness of RAPP as a complementary measure in disease management.

METHODS

In this post hoc analysis of the RAPP International Study, the enrolled population was clustered into patients with controlled rhinitis and controlled asthma (CA/CR), uncontrolled rhinitis and controlled asthma (CA/UR), controlled rhinitis and uncontrolled asthma (UA/CR), and uncontrolled rhinitis and uncontrolled asthma (UA/UR).

RESULTS

We recruited 575 adult patients. Significant differences among countries were observed in the mean RAPP score (from 15.7 in Spain to 18.7 in the Philippines) although the percentage of subjects with an optimal HRQoL (RAPP <15) was not significantly different. Compared with patients with AR and asthma disease control, those with UR/CA, CR/UA, and UR/UA had significantly higher RAPP scores (4.7, 5, and 9.8, respectively). The best cutoffs for detecting uncontrolled diseases were RAPP of 15 or greater (SE = 75%; specificity = 69%; and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.78) for AR; RAPP of 16 or greater (SE = 78%; specificity = 76%; and AUC = 0.83) for asthma; and RAPP of 18 or greater (SE = 86%; specificity = 87%; and AUC = 0.92) for both AR and asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide a better understanding of the individual burden of HRQoL related to asthma and rhinitis in daily practice. In addition, the RAPP estimates how much of the risk for uncontrolled disease depends on uncontrolled AR and asthma, allowing its use as a clinical support tool in clinical management.

FISSURE SEALANT IN A NUTSHELL. EVIDENCE-BASED META-EVALUATION OF SEALANTS' EFFECTIVENESS IN CARIES PREVENTION AND ARREST

OBJECTIVE

This meta-evaluation aimed to summarize all available evidence regarding different fissure sealants on occlusal caries prevention, arrest, retention rate, adverse effect, and cost-effectiveness; when compared with no intervention, other preventive or minimally-invasive procedures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The systematic reviews and meta-analyses were identified via four electronic databases and manual searching. Two independent reviewers performed study selection, data extraction, quality assessment with AMSTAR-2.

RESULTS

Among the 366 records yielded, 38 systematic reviews were identified as eligible 24 of them included meta-analyses. Moderate evidence has supported the efficacies of resin-based sealants (RBS) in occlusal caries prevention, arrest and cost-effectiveness compared to no interventions. Low to very low certainty of evidence suggested similar effectiveness of glass-ionomer cements in caries prevention with RBS and more superior performance of resin infiltration in arresting non-cavitated occlusal lesions.

CONCLUSION

This meta-evaluation supports the use of RBS on permanent molars to reduce occlusal caries occurrence, arrest lesion progression and alleviate oral health inequalities between individuals of different socioeconomic status. This meta-evaluation also advocates further research on glass-ionomer cements and resin infiltration with respect to their efficacies in caries prevention and arrest.

Integrating Patient Activation Into Dialysis Care

Patient activation, the measure of patients' readiness and willingness to manage their own health care, is low among people receiving in-center hemodialysis, which is exacerbated because such centers are commonly set up for patients to passively receive care. In our pursuit of person-centered care and value-based medicine, enabling patients to take a more active role in their care can lead to healthy behaviors, with subsequent reductions in individual burden and costs to the health care system. To improve patient activation, we need to embrace a patient-first approach and combine it with ways to equip patients to thrive with self-management. This requires changes in the training of the health care team as well as changes in care delivery models, promoting interventions such as health coaching and peer mentoring, while leveraging technology to enable self-access to records, self-monitoring, and communication with providers. We also need health care policies that encourage a focus on patient-identified goals, including more attention to patient-reported outcomes. In this article, we review the current status of patient activation in dialysis patients, outline some of the available interventions, and propose steps to change the dynamics of the current system to move toward a more active role for patients in their care.

Operationalization of the Brief ICF Core Set for Hearing Loss: An ICF-Based e-Intake Tool in Clinical Otology and Audiology Practice

OBJECTIVES

According to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), functioning reflects the interplay between an individual's body structures and functions, activities, participation, environmental, and personal factors. To be useful in clinical practice, these concepts need to be operationalized into a practical and integral instrument. The Brief ICF Core Set for Hearing Loss (CSHL) provides a minimum standard for the assessment of functioning in adults with hearing loss. The objective of the present study was to operationalize the Brief CSHL into a digital intake tool that could be used in the otology-audiology practice for adults with ear and hearing problems as part of their intake assessment.

DESIGN

A three-step approach was followed: (1) Selecting and formulating questionnaire items and response formats, using the 27 categories of the Brief CSHL as a basis. Additional categories were selected based on relevant literature and clinical expertise. Items were selected from existing, commonly used disease-specific questionnaires, generic questionnaires, or the WHO's official descriptions of ICF categories. The response format was based on the existing item's response categories or on the ICF qualifiers. (2) Carrying out an expert survey and a pilot study (using the three-step test interview. Relevant stakeholders and patients were asked to comment on the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the items. Results were discussed in the project group, and items were modified based on consensus. (3) Integration of the intake tool into a computer-based system for use in clinical routine.

RESULTS

The Brief CSHL was operationalized into 62 items, clustered into six domains: (1) general information, including reason for visit, sociodemographic, and medical background; (2) general body functions; (3) ear and hearing structures and functions; (4) activities and participation (A&P); (5) environmental factors (EF); and (6) personal factors (mastery and coping). Based on stakeholders' responses, the instructions of the items on A&P and EF were adapted. The three-step test interview showed that the tool had sufficient content validity but that some items on EF were redundant. Overall, the stakeholders and patients indicated that the intake tool was relevant and had a logical and clear structure. The tool was integrated in an online portal.

CONCLUSIONS

In the current study, an ICF-based e-intake tool was developed that aims to screen self-reported functioning problems in adults with an ear/hearing problem. The relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the originally proposed item list was supported, although the stakeholder and patient feedback resulted into some changes of the tool on item-level. Ultimately, the functioning information obtained with the tool could be used to promote patient-centered ear and hearing care taking a biopsychosocial perspective into account.

[The IBD-Control questionnaire: German translation and validation of the standardized questionnaire for Patient Reported Outcome Measurement in inflammatory bowel disease]

BACKGROUND

Subjectively perceived results of treatment will be in the center of defining treatment success on the way to value-based and patient-centered health care. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) serve as an instrument to measure treatment success. In inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), measuring treatment success from a patient's point of view is performed with the validated IBD-Control questionnaire. Because the IBD-Control questionnaire has not been published in German yet, the translation and validation of the IBD-Control in the German-speaking part of Switzerland was necessary before use.

METHODS

We have translated the English original version of the IBD-Control questionnaire into German in a state-of-the-art procedure of "forward-backward translation" and validated the translated IBD-Control questionnaire with 154 patients with Crohn's disease or with ulcerative colitis.

RESULTS

Professional health care and translation experts have contributed to the translation of the IBD-Control into German. The IBD-Control-D is an accepted questionnaire. Spearmans Rho showed high consistency between the IBD-Control-8-Subscore and the IBD-Control-VAS-Score (r=0.632). The disease activity in the past 6 months highly correlated with the IBD-8 subscore (r=0.640) as well as with the IBD-Control-VAS-Score (r=0.622). The IBD-Control-8-Subscore highly correlated with the Harvey Bradshaw Index (r=-0.620) and the partial Mayo Score (r=-0.679), as well as the IBD-Control-VAS-Score with the Harvey Bradshaw Index (r=-0.484) and the Mayo Score (r=-0.435), showing sufficient construct validity. The result is the German version of the IBD-Control, the IBD-Control-D, published here.

CONCLUSION

The original English version is a valid instrument, and its use has proven to be a suitable instrument in German-speaking areas to make the subjective feeling of illness and treatment outcome measurable.

Monitoring of Palliative Care Symptoms and Concerns in Specialized Palliative Home Care Using an Electronic Version of the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (Palli-MONITOR): protocol for a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Over the last decades, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures have been developed to better understand the patient's perspective and enable patient-centred care. In palliative care, the Integrated Palliative care Outcome Scale (IPOS) is recommended as a PRO tool. Its implementation in specialised palliative home care (SPHC) would benefit from an electronic version validated for the setting.Following the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance, the study Palli-MONITOR is developing (phase 1) and testing the feasibility (phase 2) of implementing the electronic version of IPOS (eIPOS) in the SPHC setting to inform a cluster-randomised phase 3 trial.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Palli-MONITOR is a multicentre, sequential mixed-methods, two-phase development and feasibility study. The study consists of four substudies. In phase 1 (MRC development phase), qualitative patient interviews and focus groups with SPHC professionals are used to identify barriers and facilitators of eIPOS (substudy I). Substudy II tests the equivalence of eIPOS and IPOS in a crossover randomised controlled trial. Phase 2 (MRC feasibility/piloting phase) includes a quasi-experimental study with two control groups (substudy III), and qualitative interviews as well as focus groups to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the developed intervention (substudy IV).Qualitative data will be analysed with thematic analysis following the framework approach. Quantitative analysis uses a two-way intraclass correlation coefficients model for the equivalence testing. Quantitative analysis of the quasi-experimental study will focus on the primary outcomes, recruitment rates and completeness of eIPOS. Secondary outcomes will include intraindividual change in palliative symptoms and concerns, quality of life and symptom burden.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approval of the ethics committee of the Ludwig Maximilian University Munich was received for all study parts. Results and experiences will be presented at congresses and in written form. Additionally, participating SPHC teams will receive summarised results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03879668.

Association of patient quality of life with the degree of agreement in the perceptions of patient disability within the stroke patient-rehabilitation therapist dyad: a cross-sectional study in postdischarge rehabilitation setting

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of study was to explore the association between patient physical and psychological quality of life (QOL) with the degree of agreement in perceptions of patient disability within the stroke patient-rehabilitation therapist dyad.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional dyadic study with a tablet-based structured questionnaire.

SETTING

Rehabilitation, nursing and long-term care facilities that provide rehabilitation services in the Kanagawa prefecture, Japan.

PARTICIPANTS

The 81 dyads of a male patient with stroke living at home and the rehabilitation therapist in charge of the eligible patient were recruited from March 2019 to February 2020.

METHOD

Patient physical and psychological QOL was measured using the WHOQOL BREF. Perceptions of patient disability were measured using the 12-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule V.2.0 (DAS). DAS scores of patients and therapists were classified into two (high and low) and three (high, medium, low) categories, respectively, and six patterns of agreement about patient function were created and used in the analysis. Generalised estimating equations were used to examine multivariable associations between WHOQOL scores in patients and the degree of agreement within dyads adjusting for other covariates and clustering effects.

RESULTS

Among 81 enrolled dyads, 48 (59.3%) were classified into one of four disagreement groups (low medium, low high, high medium, high low). When the patient appraised himself as having mild disability, the degree of patient-therapist disagreement was negatively associated with patient's physical and psychological QOL. When the patient appraised himself as having severe disability, his physical and/or psychological QOL was poorer, regardless of the degree of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

Disagreement in the perception of disability within patient-rehabilitation therapist dyad could be associated with patient's poor QOL, especially when the patient perceives himself as having mild disability. Reaching an agreement about patient disability is needed in the delivery of rehabilitation care for patients with stroke living at home to improve their QOL.

Patient-reported outcome measures ( PROMs): making sense of individual PROM scores and changes in PROM scores over time

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used in nephrology care. However, in contrast to well-known clinical measures such as blood pressure, health-care professionals are less familiar with PROMs and the interpretation of PROM scores is therefore perceived as challenging. In this paper, we provide insight into the interpretation of PROM scores by introducing the different types and characteristics of PROMs, and the most relevant concepts for the interpretation of PROM scores. Concepts such as minimal detectable change, minimal important change and response shift are explained and illustrated with examples from nephrology care.

Parents' satisfaction with paediatric dental treatment under sedation: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes are under-investigated in the field of paediatric dental sedation.

AIM

To evaluate the satisfaction of parents/guardians with their children's dental sedation, compare it to the dentist's satisfaction, and identify associated factors.

DESIGN

This study was performed with parents/guardians of young children treated under sedation and dentists. Participants' satisfaction was measured using the visual analogue scale (0-100). Child's behaviour was classified using the Ohio State Behavioural Rating Scale. Other information was collected during interviews and from patient charts. The Spearman's, Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed (P < .05).

RESULTS

A total of 167 parents/guardians and ten dentists participated in the study. Protective stabilisation and atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) were used in 69.9% and 51.5% appointments, respectively. The parents/guardians (median: 91 [25-75 percentile: 75-96]) and dentists (76 [23-98]) were satisfied. Parental/guardian satisfaction was higher than dentist satisfaction (P ≤ .001). Parental/guardian satisfaction was positively correlated with quiet child behaviour (r = 0.347, P ≤ .001) and was associated with the non-use of protective stabilisation (P ≤ .001), no previous toothache (P = .019), and the use of ART (P = .018).

CONCLUSION

The participants were satisfied with treatment under sedation. Parents/guardians were more satisfied, especially, when the child had cooperative behaviour.

"What Is the Right Decision for Me?" Integrating Patient Perspectives Through Shared Decision-Making for Valvular Heart Disease Therapy

Innovations in the treatment of valvular heart disease have transformed treatment options for people with valvular heart disease. In this rapidly evolving environment, the integration of patients' perspectives is essential to close the potential gap between what can be done and what patients want. Shared decision-making (SDM) and the measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are two strategies that are in keeping with this aim and gaining significant momentum in clinical practice, research, and health policy. SDM is a process that involves an individualised, intentional, and bidirectional exchange among patients, family, and health care providers that integrates patients' preferences, values, and priorities to reach a high-quality consensus treatment decision. SDM is widely endorsed by international valvular heart disease guidelines and increasingly integrated in health policy. Patient decision aids are evidence-based tools that facilitate SDM. The measurement of PROs-an umbrella term that refers to the standardised reporting of symptoms, health status, and other domains of health-related quality of life-provides unique data that come directly from patients to inform clinical practice and augment the reporting of quality of care. Sensitive and validated instruments are available to capture generic, dimensional, and disease-specific PROs in patients with valvular heart disease. The integration of PROs in clinical care presents significant opportunities to help guide treatment decision and monitor health status. The integration of patients' perspectives promotes the shift to patient-centred care and optimal outcomes, and contributes to transforming the way we care for patients with valvular heart disease.

Choosing and Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Practice

The increasing use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures is forcing clinicians and health care systems to decide which to select and how to incorporate them into their records and clinical workflows. This overview addresses 3 topics related to these concerns. First, a literature review summarizes key psychometric and practical factors (such as reliability, responsiveness, computer adaptive testing, and interpretability) in choosing PROs for clinical practice. Second, 3 clinical decision support issues are highlighted: gathering PROs, electronic health record effect on providers, and incorporating PROs into clinical decision support design and implementation. Lastly, the salience of crosscutting domains as well as 9 key pragmatic decisions are reviewed. Crosscutting domains are those that are relevant across most medical and mental health conditions, such as the SPADE symptom pentad (sleep problems, pain, anxiety, depression, low energy/fatigue) and physical functioning. The 9 pragmatic decisions include (1) generic vs disease-specific scales; (2) single- vs multidomain scales; (3) universal scales vs user-choice selection; (4) number of domains to measure; (5) prioritization of domains when multiple domains are assessed; (6) action thresholds; (7) clinical purpose (screening vs monitoring); as well as the (8) frequency and (9) logistical aspects of PRO administration.

Comparison of an Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Patient Decision Aid vs Educational Material on Decision Quality, Shared Decision-Making, Patient Experience, and Functional Outcomes in Adults With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Decision aids can help inform appropriate selection of total knee replacement (TKR) for advanced knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, few decision aids combine patient education, preference assessment, and artificial intelligence (AI) using patient-reported outcome measurement data to generate personalized estimations of outcomes to augment shared decision-making (SDM).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of an AI-enabled patient decision aid that includes education, preference assessment, and personalized outcome estimations (using patient-reported outcome measurements) on decision quality, patient experience, functional outcomes, and process-level outcomes among individuals with advanced knee OA considering TKR in comparison with education only.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This randomized clinical trial at a single US academic orthopedic practice included 129 new adult patients presenting for OA-related knee pain from March 2019 to January 2020. Data were analyzed from April to May 2020.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomized into a group that received a decision aid including patient education, preference assessment, and personalized outcome estimations (intervention group) or a group receiving educational material only (control group) alongside usual care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was decision quality, measured using the Knee OA Decision Quality Instrument (K-DQI). Secondary outcomes were collaborative decision-making (assessed using the CollaboRATE survey), patient satisfaction with consultation (using a numerical rating scale), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (KOOS JR) score, consultation time, TKR rate, and treatment concordance.

RESULTS

A total of 69 patients in the intervention group (46 [67%] women) and 60 patients in the control group (37 [62%] women) were included in the analysis. The intervention group showed better decisional quality (K-DQI mean difference, 20.0%; SE, 3.02; 95% CI, 14.2%-26.1%; P < .001), collaborative decision-making (CollaboRATE, 8 of 69 [12%] vs 28 of 60 [47%] patients below median; P < .001), satisfaction (numerical rating scale, 9 of 65 [14%] vs 19 of 58 [33%] patients below median; P = .01), and improved functional outcomes at 4 to 6 months (mean [SE] KOOS JR, 4.9 [2.24] points higher in intervention group; 95% CI, 0.8-9.0 points; P = .02). The intervention did not significantly affect consultation time (mean [SE] difference, 2.23 [2.18] minutes; P = .31), TKR rates (16 of 69 [23%] vs 7 of 60 [12%] patients; P = .11), or treatment concordance (58 of 69 [84%] vs 44 of 60 [73%] patients; P = .19).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, an AI-enabled decision aid significantly improved decision quality, level of SDM, satisfaction, and physical limitations without significantly impacting consultation times, TKR rates, or treatment concordance in patients with knee OA considering TKR. Decision aids using a personalized, data-driven approach can enhance SDM in the management of knee OA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03956004.

Informational Gaps, Needs, and Preferences of Adults With Chronic Health Conditions and Their Family Caregivers

The purpose of this cross-sectional, qualitative study was to determine unmet educational needs, preferences, and barriers experienced by individuals with chronic illness and their caregivers. A survey containing fixed-choice selections and open-ended questions was sent to persons with cancer and other chronic diseases who had been seen within a large national private health system. Between 20% and 25% of participants had difficulty obtaining health care information and/or felt overwhelmed with managing their condition. Coping, managing symptoms, and making treatment decisions were areas of need in both patients and caregivers. Preferences for receiving information were diverse. Existing methods of communication including secure Web sites where patients can access their medical records posed significant challenges.

Readability analysis of pediatric otolaryngology patient-reported outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

(s): Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools that allow patients to directly share information about their health with their healthcare provider. Health literacy experts recommend that health information, such as PROMs, be written at a 6th grade level to ensure patients can read and comprehend it. As the readability of PROMs used in pediatric otolaryngology has yet to be studied, our goal was to analyze the readability of these PROMs and assess their compliance with readability recommendations.

METHODS

The Gunning Fog, the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), and the FORCAST readability formulas were used to determine the readability of disease-specific PROMs for pediatric otolaryngology.

RESULTS

Fourteen PROMs were reviewed in the study. Most were intended for caregiver completion (n = 13, 92.9%). Ten PROMs when measured by Gunning Fog (71.4%), 2 PROMs when measured by SMOG (14.3%), and 0 PROMs when measured by FORCAST (0.0%) were at or below the 6th grade reading level.

CONCLUSION

Most PROMs available for use in pediatric otolaryngology are above the recommended 6th grade reading level when measured by FORCAST, the most appropriate metric for assessing questionnaires. The high reading grade level needed to complete these PROMs can contribute to health disparities among underserved and vulnerable populations, such as children. Pediatric otolaryngology PROMs developed in the future should take readability into account in order to ensure equity in the delivery of care.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the quality of clinical practice, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important as certain questions could only be answered by the patient himself. PROMs help to get a better understanding what is meaningful to a patient and directly affects daily functioning. To move beyond traditional measures, we are interested in what matters to patients and developed this project. The aim of this article is to provide the protocol for our study collecting PROMs in daily medical practice from patients who undergo knee arthroplasty.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a single-site, observational, prospective cohort study. We will recruit patients scheduled for a knee arthroplasty in our medical office, situated in a private clinic. After signed informed consent, patients complete self-reported questionnaires before the surgery, after 4 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years and 5 years. We will use the following PROMs: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Forgotten Joint Score, EuroQol five dimensions and satisfaction. Additionally, the surgeon will complete the objective Knee Society Score. Administration of the questionnaires will be electronically or paper-based. We will assess differences between preoperative and postoperative data with paired t-test for continuous variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for categorical variables. To assess subgroup differences, we will use unpaired t-test for continuous variables and Mann-Whitney U test for categorical variables. To assess possible presence of bias, we will conduct sensitivity analyses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been reviewed and approved by the local ethics committee in Basel, Switzerland. Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients. We will disseminate the results of the study through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conference presentations and presentations to relevant stakeholders through appropriate channels.

The influence of collecting patient-reported outcome measures on visit satisfaction in rheumatology clinics

Objectives

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can direct patient-centred care and increase patient satisfaction with the visit. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between the collection of PROMs and visit satisfaction, as measured by the Clinician and Group Practice Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CG-CAHPS) survey.

Methods

An electronic platform for collection of patient-reported information was implemented in rheumatology clinics between August and September 2016. Adult patients were included in the study if they completed CG-CAHPS after an ambulatory visit. The pre-implementation cohort consisted of patients seen between January and June 2016; the post-implementation cohort consisted of patients seen between January and June 2017. The CG-CAHPS scores were compared between cohorts. Mixed effect models were constructed to identify predictors of visit satisfaction.

Results

Characteristics were similar between the 2117 pre- and 2380 post-implementation patients. Visit satisfaction was high in both cohorts but did not differ [odds ratio = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.79, 1.19)]. Predictors of improved satisfaction included being an established patient, being male, older age and reporting higher quality of life. However, sensitivity analyses in the post-implementation cohort suggested that implementing PROMs might convey benefits for new patients, in particular.

Conclusion

Collection of PROMs had no effect on visit satisfaction in rheumatology clinics, although there might be benefits for new patients. These largely null findings might be attributable to high satisfaction levels in our cohorts or to lack of provider review of PROM data with patients. Further research is indicated to determine the impact of provider communication of PROM results to patients on different domains of visit satisfaction.

PHYSICIAN CHARACTERISTICS THAT INFLUENCE PATIENT PARTICIPATION IN THE TREATMENT OF PRIMARY IMMUNODEFICIENCY

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) is recommended to improve healthcare quality. Physicians who use a rational decision-making style and patient-centric approach are more likely to incorporate SDM into clinical practice. This paper explores how certain physician characteristics such as gender, age, race, experience, and specialty explain patient participation.

METHODS

A multi-group structural equation model tested the relationship between physician decision-making styles, patient-centered care, physician characteristics, and patient participation in clinical treatment decisions. A survey was completed by 330 physicians who treat primary immunodeficiency. Sample group responses were compared between groups across specialty, age, race, experience, or gender.

RESULTS

A patient-centric approach was the main factor that encouraged SDM independent of physician decision-making style with both treatment protocols and product choices. The positive effect of patient-centrism is stronger for immunologists, more experienced physicians, or male physicians. A rational decision-making style increases participation for non-immunologists, older physicians, white physicians, less-experienced physicians and female physicians.

CONCLUSION

A patient-centric approach, rational decision-making and certain physician characteristics help explain patient participation in clinical decisions. Practice Implications Future SDM research and policy initiatives should focus on physician adoption of patient-centric approaches to chronic care diseases and the potential bias associated with physician characteristics and decision-making style.

Patient-reported outcomes in RA care improve patient communication, decision-making, satisfaction and confidence: qualitative results

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine clinics, from the perspective of patients with RA, clinicians and other staff.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study using a mixed methods sequential explanatory design at an academic arthritis clinic. RA patients completed selected Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures on tablets in the waiting room. Results were immediately available to discuss during the visit. Post-visit surveys with patients and physicians evaluated topics discussed and their impact on decision making; patients rated confidence in treatment. Focus groups or interviews with patients, treating rheumatologists and clinic staff were conducted to understand perspectives and experiences.

RESULTS

Some 196 patients and 20 rheumatologists completed post-visit surveys at 816 and 806 visits, respectively. Focus groups were conducted with 24 patients, 10 rheumatologists and 4 research/clinic staff. PROs influenced medical decision-making and RA treatment changes (38 and 18% of visits, respectively). Patients reported very high satisfaction and treatment confidence. Impact on clinical workflow was minimal after a period of initial adjustment. PROs were valued by patients and physicians, and provided new insight into how patients felt and functioned over time. Reviewing results together improved communication, and facilitated patient-centred care, shared decision making, and the identification of new symptoms and contributing psychosocial/behavioural factors.

CONCLUSION

PRO use at RA visits was feasible, increased understanding of how disease affects how patients feel and function, facilitated shared decision-making, and was associated with high patient satisfaction and treatment confidence.