Exploring organisational mechanisms in PRO-based follow-up in routine outpatient care - an interpretive description of the clinician perspective

Are all cancer survivors included when using electronically administered patient reported outcomes in primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation? A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are being used frequently in clinical practice. PROs often serve several purposes, such as increasing patient involvement, assessing health status, and monitoring and improving the quality-of-care at an aggregated level. However, the lack of representative PRO-data may have implications for all these purposes. This study aims to assess the association of non-administration of (not sending an electronic invite to PRO) and non-response to (not responding to PRO) electronically administered PROs with social inequality in a primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation setting. Furthermore, it examines whether the workflows surrounding PRO have an impact on non-administration and non-response.

METHODS

This is a cross sectional study using routinely collected data from electronic health records and registers including cancer survivors (CSs) over 18 years booked for an initial consultation in a primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation setting using PROs for systematic health status assessment. During the study period two different PRO platforms were used, each associated with different workflows. Non-administration and non-response rates were calculated for sociodemographic characteristics for each PRO platform. Crude and adjusted odds ratios were calculated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

In total, 1868 (platform 1) and 1446 (platform 2) CSCSs were booked for an initial consultation. Of these, 233 (12.5%) (platform 1) and 283 (19.6%) (platform 2) were not sent a PRO (non-administration). Among those who received a PRO, 157 (9.6%) on platform 1 and 140 (12.0%) on platform 2 did not respond (non-response). Non-administration of and non-response to PROs were significantly associated with lower socioeconomic status. Moreover, the workflows surrounding PROs seem to have an impact on non-inclusion in and non-response to PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-administration of and non-response to PROs in clinical practice is associated with determinants of social inequality. Clinical workflows and the PRO platforms used may potentially worsen this inequality. It is important to consider these implications when using PROs at both the individual and aggregated levels. A key aspect of implementing PROs in clinical practice is the ongoing focus on representativeness, including a focus on monitoring PRO administration and response.

Patient-reported outcome measures in diabetes outpatient care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly used in clinical diabetes care to increase patient involvement and improve healthcare services. The objectives were to identify instruments used to measure PROs in outpatient diabetes clinics and to investigate the use of these PRO measures alongside the experiences of patients and healthcare personnel in a clinical setting.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A scoping review was conducted according to the framework of Arksey and O'Malley with scoping searches of Cinahl, EMBASE, Medline and Health and Psychosocial Instruments. Studies reporting on adults with diabetes in a clinical setting where the PRO measure response directly affected patient care were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

In total, 35 197 citations were identified, of which 7 reports presenting 4 different PRO measures were included in the review. All four of the included items measured psychosocial aspects of diabetes, and three included elements of the Problem Areas in Diabetes scale. All the patients were satisfied with the use of PRO measures in clinical care, whereas the level of satisfaction among healthcare personnel with PRO measures varied within and among studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited number of eligible studies in this review suggests that research on PRO measures for diabetes outpatient care is scarce. Patients welcome the opportunity to express their concerns through the systematic collection of PRO measures, and some healthcare personnel value the broader insight that PRO measures provide into the impact of diabetes on patients' lives. However, the heterogeneity among services and among patients challenges the implementation of PRO measures. Research is needed to explore how PRO measures in clinical outpatient care affect healthcare personnel workflow.

REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/46AHC.

Exploring the Nurses' Perspective on Using Remote Electronic Symptom Monitoring in Clinical Decision-Making Among Patients With Metastatic Lung Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are commonly used in clinical practice, and an important aspect is how healthcare professionals use these measures to make clinical decisions. This study aimed 1) to understand how remote electronic symptom monitoring using PRO measures can support oncology nurses' clinical decision-making in patients with metastatic lung cancer and 2) to explore factors that potentially can influence how remote symptom monitoring supports clinical decision-making.

DATA SOURCES

A qualitative approach using semistructured interviews was conducted with 18 registered nurses working with remote symptom monitoring at oncology departments at eight Danish hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Nurses reported that remote symptom monitoring supports clinical decision-making because it assisted in identifying relevant problems, monitoring relevant changes over time, and prompting relevant clinical actions. Factors that affected how remote symptom monitoring could support clinical decision-making were access to supplemental information, the trustworthiness of PRO data, nursing competencies and responsibilities, working conditions, and care at a distance.

IMPLICATION FOR NURSING PRACTICE

The use of PRO data in the clinical decision-making process is highly dependent on the nurses' professional competencies, the organizational structure, and the trustworthiness of PRO data. Thus, we recommend considering these factors before implementing PRO data in routine care. For example, train clinical staff in using PRO data in their clinical decision-making, develop guidance for how to use PRO data with other forms of data to make sound clinical actions, and ensure that organizational resources are sufficient.

Reducing the pressures of outpatient care: the potential role of patient-reported outcomes

The global demand for hospital treatment exceeds capacity.The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this issue, leading to increased backlogs and longer wait times for patients. The amount of outpatient attendances undertaken in many settings is still below pre-pandemic levels and this, combined with delayed referrals, means that patients are facing delays in treatment and poorer health outcomes. Use of digital health technologies, notably the use of remote symptom monitoring systems based on patient-reported outcomes (PROs), may offer a solution to reduce outpatient waiting lists and tailor care to those in greatest need. Drawing on international examples, the authors explore the use of electronic PRO systems to triage clinical care. We summarise the key benefits of the approach and also highlight the challenges for implementation, which need to be addressed to promote equitable healthcare delivery.

Adapting a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure to Digital Outpatient Specialist Health Care Services for Type 1 Diabetes: User Involvement Study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes self-management is crucial for patients with type 1 diabetes, and digital services can support their self-management and facilitate flexible follow-up. The potential of using digital patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in routine outpatient care is not fully used owing to a lack of adapted PRO measures.

OBJECTIVE

This study presents the process of identifying and adapting a digital PRO measure for use in clinical diabetes practice and describes the preferred item topics of the adapted PRO measure, as reported by patients and diabetes specialist nurses.

METHODS

With the involvement of patients, diabetes specialist nurses, management, and researchers, we hosted a series of workshops and 2 dialogue conferences. Scoping searches to identify relevant PRO measures formed the foundation for the process. An in-person dialogue conference was conducted with diabetes specialist nurses as participants, and a digital dialogue conference was conducted with patients with type 1 diabetes as participants. A diabetes-specific PRO measure was translated and adapted to our digital platform. Notes and summaries from the dialogue conferences were imported into NVivo (QSR International) and thematically analyzed as a single combined data set.

RESULTS

The thematic analysis of the 2 dialogue conferences aimed to explore the views of patients with type 1 diabetes and diabetes specialist nurses on the outcomes necessary to measure. An overarching theme, Ensuring that the PRO measure captures the patients' needs precisely and accurately, in a way that facilitates care and communication with health care personnel, was identified and supported with data from both the patients and diabetes specialist nurses. This theme contained four categories: The need for explanatory text after questions to ensure understanding and accurate response, Capturing individual needs in standardized questions, getting to the heart of the patient's problem, and The questions increase patient reflection.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully conducted an iterative process that identified a PRO measure aligned with the topics raised by the diabetes specialist nurses. Similarly, the patients found the PRO measure to be relevant and one that was addressing their needs. Only minor adjustments were necessary when programming the PRO measure in the digital platform. Our management, patients, and diabetes specialist nurses had a valuable impact on the results. User involvement facilitated a specific focus on the clinical requests to be met by PRO measures and how they must be adapted to local and digital platforms. Overall, this has facilitated the current implementation of the adapted digital PRO measure.

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.

Neurologists' views on patient reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis care

Background

The value that patient reported outcomes (PROs) can bring to the clinical encounter is increasingly being recognized. Within the field of Multiple Sclerosis (MS), a number of activities have been initiated internationally with the aim of integrating PROs in MS care. Integration of PROs in MS care will, among other things, require MS neurologists' acceptance of PROs. This qualitative study aimed to explore MS specialized neurologists’ view on the potentials and barriers for the use of PROs in the clinical setting.

Methods

Eight neurologists specialized in MS participated in a series of individual in-depth semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. A thematic analysis was conducted using a reflexive thematic approach to identify meaning units and themes emerging from the interviews. The analysis focused on barriers and potentials for PROs that relate to the specific characteristics of MS.

Results

Three main themes emerged from the data. “The role of PROs in describing the patient's situation” describes how informants perceived MS as a complex disease, and in this context, PROs can bring forth new or otherwise hidden information, but they may also blur the picture. The theme “The validity of PROs reported by MS patients may be questionable” describes how impairments caused by MS, such as cognitive and physical disabilities, were identified as risk factors that could cause unreliable self-reported outcome measures within this patient group. Finally, the theme “Involving the patient” regards how the clinical conversation was viewed as the most important source of patient reported information, but at the same time PROs carry the potential to enhance shared decision making.

Conclusion

This study indicates that, according to MS neurologists, integration of PROs in MS clinical practice, though possibly valuable, is not without challenges. Possible benefits of PROs include the ability to bring forth otherwise hidden information on the patient's health status and the enhancement of shared decision making. Barriers include difficulties in capturing the full situation of the patient via PROs due to the complexity of MS as well as the issue of various MS-related impairments compromising the validity of PROs reported by MS patients.

•

The complexity of MS affects neurologists' attitudes towards PROs.

•

PROs hold the potential to bring forth otherwise hidden information.

•

Neurologists are sceptical regarding the quality of information from PROs.

•

PROs may not provide sufficiently detailed information about patients' situations.

Digital patient-reported outcomes in inflammatory bowel disease routine clinical practice: the clinician perspective

Background

Use of digital health services, such as digital patient-reported outcomes, depends on many different human factors as well as digital design solutions. One factor is clinicians’ attitude towards the system, their reasoning behind the using system and their perceptions of patients’ ability to engage with digital health systems. This study aimed to explore hospital clinicians’ attitudes towards digital patient-reported outcomes used in the routine care and treatment of inflammatory bowel disease, and to explore the potential role of clinicians’ attitudes in influencing patients’ use of digital patient-reported outcomes.

Results

Twelve clinicians using digital patient-reported outcome assessments in the care of inflammatory bowel disease were interviewed about their experiences of, and perspectives on, using this service. Most participants supported the use of digital patient-reported outcome assessments in the care of most patients. Participants reported that most patients found the digital solution easy to use. They perceived digital patient-reported outcomes to have three main purposes: prioritising resources; improving patients’ quality of life; and improving quality of care. The patient-clinician relationship was of great importance to participants. Participants varied in their intention to use digital PRO, as some viewed the system as a positive but optional add-on for patients, whilst others intended to use the system with all eligible patients.

Conclusion

Clinicians’ general support of using digital patient-reported outcomes might facilitate their use among patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The participants saw benefits in doing so for patients, clinicians and the wider health service. Clinicians’ attitudes towards the use of digital PRO in the care of their patients may influence patients’ uptake of health service.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00462-x.

The experiences of community-dwelling individuals with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes in using patient-reported outcomes in a municipal setting

Objective

The aim of this study was to examine the experiences of citizens with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes when using a newly developed and implemented patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire as part of clinical practice in a municipal setting. Specifically, the citizens’ experiences in completing the PRO questionnaire and using the PRO data in consultations were examined.

Methods

The study was based on participant observations and semi-structured interviews and conducted at the Centre for Diabetes in Copenhagen and online. Participants were recruited deliberately to represent different cases of citizens with type-2 diabetes. Ten citizens were observed during consultation with an healthcare professional (HCP) and subsequently interviewed. The interviews were recorded as audio or video and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was performed on the basis of previously described guidelines.

Results

The PRO instigated reflections and enlightened citizens on disease-specific matters and motivated citizens to engage in self-management activities. During the citizen-HCP consultations, the PRO data prepared the actors before the meeting and enabled structured, effective and relevant conversations. However, the PRO questionnaire lacked response options, triggered citizen concerns about future health conditions and made them unsure if their answers were correct and aware that they lacked disease-specific knowledge. The experiences were linked to the citizens' situation as newly diagnosed with type-2 diabetes.

Conclusion

The informants found the PRO questionnaire and data meaningful and useful. However, adjustments are needed if the PRO instrument is to resemble the disease situation of citizens with newly diagnosed type-2 diabetes.

Patient perspectives on patient-reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis treatment trajectories: A qualitative study of why, what, and how?

BACKGROUND

Interest in patient-reported outcomes has been growing in multiple sclerosis research and clinical care in recent years. This situation reflects the need for developing, testing, and integrating measures that adequately capture patients' perspectives on symptoms, functional capacity, health status, and health-related quality of life. However, the patient perspective on the relevance, content, and use of patient-reported outcomes is yet to be investigated. Hence, this study aims to investigate the perspectives of people with multiple sclerosis on the value of patient-reported outcomes in clinical encounters, the most important aspects of living with multiple sclerosis that should be reflected in these reports, and possible opportunities and barriers for integrating this data into clinical care.

METHODS

A qualitative study was conducted to capture patient perspectives in a Danish population of people with multiple sclerosis. Initially, two focus group interviews were conducted with a total of 11 participants to explore their perspectives on patient-reported outcomes and related prospects and barriers. Subsequently, nine individual interviews were conducted to further investigate the identified aspects, opportunities, and barriers to use patient-reported outcomes in clinical care and treatment.

RESULTS

In general, the informants were motivated to report patient-reported outcomes, and they believed these reports to be relevant in clinical encounters as well as to have potential to promote patient involvement by focusing on current challenges for others with this disease. However, differences in the perceived need for reporting patient-reported outcomes were detected regarding the stage in the multiple sclerosis care trajectory and in relation to the disease phenotypes. In terms of domains to be incorporated into patient-reported outcomes, a total of 28 were identified by the informants, including neurological symptoms, cognitive impairments, mental health and well-being, self-care activities, and social challenges. Several factors for integrating patient-reported outcomes into clinical care emerged as important, in particular related to timing and frequency of reporting patient reported outcomes, considerations of cognitive impairments, the need for individualized approaches to patient-reported outcomes, and the need for active use of these reports for adjustment of treatment approaches in clinical encounters.

CONCLUSION

From the perspective of people with multiple sclerosis, patient-reported outcomes hold important potential for enhanced patient involvement leading to a more multifaceted agenda in clinical consultations. However, patient-reported outcomes need to be comprehensive and encompass a broad range of measures regarding neurological symptoms, cognitive impairments, mental health and well-being, self-care activities, and social challenges to adequately capture and support the needs of people with multiple sclerosis in clinical encounters. It is important to address barriers for integration of patient-reported outcomes into clinical care, with the aim of preventing misuse. Future studies should focus on the synergy between perspectives from both patients and clinicians to understand how integration of patient-reported outcomes in clinical care can succeed.

Achieving Resilience in Primary Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Competing Visions and Lessons from Alberta

The COVID-19 pandemic has tested the resilience of health systems broadly and primary care (PC) specifically. This paper begins by distinguishing the technical and political aspects of resilience and then draws on a documentary analysis and qualitative interviews with health system and PC stakeholders to examine competing resilience-focused responses to the pandemic in Alberta, Canada. We describe the pre-existing linkages between the province's central service delivery agency and its independent PC clinics. Together, these central and independent elements make up Alberta's broader health system, with the focus of this paper being on PC's particular vision of how resilience ought to be achieved. We describe two specific, pandemic-affected areas of activity by showing how competing visions of resilience emerged in the central service delivery agency and independent PC responses as they met at the system's points of linkage. At the first point of linkage, we describe the centralized activation of an incident management system and the replies made by independent PC stakeholders. At the second point of linkage, we describe central efforts to disseminate infection prevention and control guidance to PC clinics and the improvisational efforts of staff at those independent clinics to operationalize the guidance and ensure continuity of operations. We identify gaps between the resilience visions of the central agency and independent PC, drawing broadly applicable policy lessons for improving responses in present and future public health emergencies. Finding ways to include PC in centralized resilience policy planning is a priority.

Cancer follow-up supported by patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing intended curative complex surgery for advanced cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Patient activation (PA) and Patient Involvement (PI) are considered elements in good survivorship. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a follow-up supported by electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePRO) on PA and PI.

METHOD

From February 2017 to January 2019, we conducted an explorative interventional study. We included 187 patients followed after intended curative complex surgery for advanced cancer at two different Departments at a University Hospital. Prior to each follow-up consultation, patients used the ePRO to screen themselves for clinical important symptoms, function and needs. The ePRO was graphically presented to the clinician during the follow-up, aiming to facilitate patient activation and involvement in each follow-up. PA was measured by the Patient Activation Measurement (PAM), while PI was measured by five indicator questions. PAM and PI data compared between (- ePRO) and interventional (+ ePRO) consultations. PAM data were analysed using a linear mixed effect regression model with intervention (yes/no) and time along with the interaction between them as categorical fixed effects. The analyses were further adjusted for time (days) since surgery.

RESULTS

According to our data, ePRO supported consultations did not improve PA. The average mean difference in PAM score between + ePRO and - ePRO consultations were - 0.2 (95% confidence interval - 2.6; 2.2, p = 0.9). There was no statistically significant improvement in PAM scores over time in neither + ePRO nor - ePRO group (p = 0.5). Based on the five PI-indicator questions, the majority of all consultations were evaluated as "some, much or very much" involved in consultation; providing a wider scope of dialogue, encouraged patients to ask questions and share their experiences and concerns. Nevertheless, another few patients reported not to be involved at all in the consultations.

CONCLUSION

We did not demonstrate evidence for ePRO supported consultations to improve patient activation, and patient activation did not improve over time. Our results generate the hypotheses that factors related to ePRO supported consultation had the potential to support PI by offering a wider scope of dialogue, and encourage patients to ask questions and share their experiences and concerns during follow-up.

A "Shock Test" to Primary Care Integration: COVID-19 Lessons from Alberta

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed primary care (PC), and policies aimed at integrating it into provincial health systems, to a "shock test." This paper draws on documentary analysis and qualitative interviews with PC and health system stakeholders to examine shifts in Alberta's pre-pandemic PC integration model during the first nine months of the pandemic. We begin with an account of three elements of the province's pre-pandemic model: finance, health authority activity and community activity. We describe these elements as they shifted, focusing on two indicators of change: novel virtual care billing codes and personal protective equipment (PPE) distribution channels. We draw out policy planning lessons for improving PC integration under normal and future pandemic conditions, namely, by facilitating rapid updates of virtual care billing codes, analyses of the impact of care delivery and backstopping of PPE markets and supply chains for PC.

Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical settings to inform individual patient care. In-depth understanding of end-users' experiences may help identify factors that promote or hinder their use in clinical decision-making. We aimed to examine stakeholder perceptions of the utility of using PROMs in clinical practice based on real-life experience.

METHODS

Systematic review searching Medline, Embase and PsychINFO from inception to May 2021. Qualitative studies examining patients' and/or clinicians' experiences of using PROMs in clinical settings were included. Study screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative data from included studies was analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Of 2388 abstracts retrieved, 52 articles reporting 50 studies met eligibility. Five key benefits were identified: (1) promotes active patient involvement (enables goal setting and discussion of sensitive topics); (2) enhances the focus of consultations (prioritizes patient needs); (3) improves quality of care (enables tailored, holistic care and prompts action); (4) enables standardized monitoring of patient outcomes; and (5) enhances the patient-clinician relationship (provides reassurance). Perceived limitations included the capacity of PROMs to shift the focus of consultations; inaccurately estimate problems; raise unrealistic expectations for care; inhibit patient-clinician interaction; lack clinically meaningful information; and not be suitable for all patients.

CONCLUSION

Both patients and clinicians reported benefits of using PROMs across diverse health conditions and clinical settings, but also highlighted several limitations. These limitations shed some light on why PROM use may not always improve patient outcomes and provide considerations for the design and implementation of future PROM initiatives.

Nurses' Experiences When Introducing Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in an Outpatient Clinic: An Interpretive Description Study

BACKGROUND

Application of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) seems to be a step toward person-centered care and identifying patients' unmet needs.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the experiences of nurses when PROMs were introduced in a hematological clinical practice as part of a multimethod intervention study.

METHODS

The qualitative framework was guided by the interpretive description (ID) methodology, including a focused ethnographic approach with participant observations and interviews. The instruments introduced were the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 and the Outcomes and Experiences Questionnaire. Analysis was inspired by Habermas' critical theory.

RESULTS

The analysis revealed 2 predominant themes of nurses' experiences: "PROMs are only used when there is time-which there rarely is" and "PROMs cannot be used without a strategy, just because they are present."

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses' experiences with PROMs depended on the systems' rationale, resulting in limited capacity to use and explore PROMs. Nurses believed that PROMs might have the potential to support clinical practice, as PROMs added new information about patients' conditions but also identified needs within supportive care, leaving the potential of PROMs uncertain. Simply introducing PROMs to practice does not necessarily actuate their potential because use of PROMs is dependent on institutional conditions and mandatory tasks are prioritized.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study contributes knowledge of nurses' experiences when introducing PROMs in a hematological outpatient clinical practice. Findings can guide future PROMs research within the field of nursing.

Electronic reporting of patient-reported outcomes in a fragile and comorbid population during cancer therapy - a feasibility study

Background

Electronic collection of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) is becoming widespread in health care, but the implementation into routine cancer care during therapy remains to be seen. Especially, little is known of the use and success of electronic reporting during active cancer treatment in fragile and comorbid patients. The aim of this study was to test the feasibility of ePRO and its incorporation into routine cancer care, measured by physician compliance, for a fragile and comorbid bladder cancer (BC) population receiving chemo- or immunotherapy.

Methods

All BC patients initiating treatment for locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer at Rigshospitalet or Herlev Hospital, Denmark, were approached during an 8 month period. Exclusion criteria were patients not speaking Danish or not being signed up for electronic communication with health authorities. Enrolled patients were prompted to complete weekly ePROs from home. Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer’s general quality of life questionnaire, QLQ-C30, and the module for muscle-invasive bladder cancer QLQ-BLM30, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS, and selected items from the Patient Reported-Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), in total 158 questions weekly. If failing to report when prompted, patients were sent two e-mail reminders. Patients were informed that the physician would have an overview of the reported ePROs at their following clinical visits. Physicians were at all clinical visits informed to look at the ePROs in a software solution separate from the medical records. Physicians were logged to check their compliance to the task. No continuous surveillance of ePROs was established.

Results

Of 91 patients screened for enrolment, 19 patients (21%) were not found eligible for standard treatment, eight patients (9%) were not signed up for electronic communication with the health authorities and nine patients (10%) declined participation. Another six patients did not meet other inclusion criteria. In total 49 BC patients were enrolled, 29 initiating chemotherapy and 20 initiating immunotherapy. A total of 466 electronic questionnaires were completed. The overall adherence of the patients to complete ePROs was at an expected level for an elderly cancer population (75%) and remained above 70% until the 6th cycle of treatment. The physician’ compliance was in contrast low (0–52%) throughout the course of treatment.

Conclusions

Electronic reporting of PROs is feasible in a fragile and comorbid population of patients during routine active cancer treatment. Despite clear implementation strategies the physician compliance remained low throughout the study proving the need for further implementation strategies.

Sociodemographic, personal, and disease-related determinants of referral to patient-reported outcome-based follow-up of remote outpatients: a prospective cohort study

Purpose

We examined the association between sociodemographic, personal, and disease-related determinants and referral to a new model of health care that uses patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures for remote outpatient follow-up (PRO-based follow-up).

Methods

We conducted a prospective cohort study among outpatients with epilepsy at the Department of Neurology at Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Included were all persons aged ≥ 15 years visiting the department for the first time during the period from May 2016 to May 2018. Patients received a questionnaire containing questions about health literacy, self-efficacy, patient activation, well-being, and general health. We also collected data regarding sociodemographic status, labour market affiliation, and co-morbidity from nationwide registers. Associations were analysed as time-to-event using the pseudo-value approach. Missing data were handled using multiple imputations.

Results

A total of 802 eligible patients were included in the register-based analyses and 411 patients (51%) responded to the questionnaire. The results based on data from registers indicated that patients were less likely to be referred to PRO-based follow-up if they lived alone, had low education or household income, received temporary or permanent social benefits, or if they had a psychiatric diagnosis. The results based on data from the questionnaire indicated that patients were less likely to be referred to PRO-based follow-up if they reported low levels of health literacy, self-efficacy, patient activation, well-being, or general health.

Conclusion

Both self-reported and register-based analyses indicated that socioeconomically advantaged patients were referred more often to PRO-based follow-up than socioeconomically disadvantaged patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-019-02407-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.

Fifteen Years' Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures at the Group and Patient Levels: Trend Analysis

Background

Since 2004, we have collected patient-reported outcome (PRO) data from several Danish patient populations for use at the group and patient levels.

Objective

The aim of this paper is to highlight trends during the last 15 years with respect to patient inclusion, the methods for collection of PRO data, the processing of the data, and the actual applications and use of the PRO measurements.

Methods

All PRO data have been collected using the AmbuFlex/WestChronic PRO system, which was developed by the author in 2004 and has been continuously updated since. The analysis of trends was based on a generic model applicable for any kind of clinical health data, according to which any application of clinical data may be divided into four processes: patient identification, data collection, data aggregation, and the actual data use. Data for analysis were generated by a specific application in the system and transferred for analysis to the R package.

Results

During the 15-year period, 78,980 patients within 28 different groups of chronic and malignant illnesses have answered 260,433 questionnaires containing a total of 13,538,760 responses. Several marked changes have taken place: (1) the creation of cohorts for clinical epidemiological research purposes has shifted towards cohorts defined by clinical use of PRO data at the patient level; (2) the development of AmbuFlex, where PRO data are used as the entire basis for outpatient follow-up instead of fixed appointments, has undergone exponential growth and the system is currently in use in 47 International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems groups, covering 16,000 patients and 94 departments throughout Denmark; (3) response rates (up to 92%) and low attrition rates have been reached in group level projects, and there are even higher response rates in AmbuFlex where the patients are individually referred; (4) The answering method has shifted, as while in 2005 a total of 66.5% of questionnaires were paper based, this is the case for only 4.3% in 2019; and (5) the approach methods for questionnaires and reminders have changed dramatically from letter, emails, and short message service text messaging to a national, secure electronic mail system through which 93.2% of the communication to patients took place in 2019. The combination of secure email and web-based answering has resulted in a low turnaround time in which half of responses are now received within 5 days.

Conclusions

The demand for clinical use of PRO measurements has increased, driven by a wish among patients as well as clinicians to use PRO to promote better symptom assessment, more patient-centered care, and more efficient use of resources. Important technological changes have occurred, creating new opportunities, and making PRO collection and use cheaper and more feasible. Several legal changes may constitute a barrier for further development as well as a barrier for better utilization of patients’ questionnaire data. The current legal restrictions on the joint use of health data imposed by the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation makes no distinction between use and misuse, and steps should be taken to alleviate these restrictions on the joint use of PRO data.