Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice: a companion guide to the ISOQOL user's guide

被引:68
作者
Chan, Eric K. H. [1 ,2 ]
Edwards, Todd C. [3 ]
Haywood, Kirstie [4 ]
Mikles, Sean P. [5 ]
Newton, Louise [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, MERM Program, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada
[2] Janssen Global Serv LLC, Raritan, NJ 08869 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Dept Hlth Serv, 4333 Brooklyn Ave NE, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[4] Univ Warwick, Warwick Med Sch, Warwick Res Nursing, Coventry CV4 7AL, W Midlands, England
[5] Univ Washington, Dept Biomed Informat & Med Educ, 1959 NE Pacific St,Box 357240, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[6] Folkestone Enterprise Ctr, Unit 68, Clin Outcomes Solut, Shearway Business Pk,Shearway Rd, Folkestone CT19 4RH, Kent, England
关键词
Clinical practice; Patient-reported outcome; PRO; Guidelines; ISOQOL; Implementation; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; HEALTH; INFORMATION; CARE;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-018-2048-4
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
PurposeThe use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice is increasing. Following the creation of a User's Guide to Implementing PRO Assessment in Clinical Practice' by the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL), volunteers from ISOQOL sought to create a Companion Guide to assist health care providers with the scientific and practical considerations involved in implementing and using PRO measures in clinical care by using information from real-world case studies. This paper summarizes the key issues presented in the Companion Guide.MethodsTen respondents, who were members of the ISOQOL's CP-SIG and worked in various clinical areas, participated in a survey or telephone interview. Participants were from Canada (n=2), Denmark (n=1), England (n=2), Holland (n=1), and the United States (n=4).ResultsBased on the information provided by respondents, a Companion Guide was produced, organized according to the nine questions presented in the User's Guide. An additional section for key take-home messages was also provided. This guide provides examples of issues and considerations related to the implementation of PRO measures in clinical practice.ConclusionsRespondents provided insight into their experiences and emphasized that PRO initiatives were likely to be more successful if there is purposeful, designed integration into clinical practice, meaningful substantive engagement with all stakeholders and access to necessary organizational resources. The ability to leverage existing technology as well as realistic and stakeholder consensus-driven expectations for planning and timing were also key to the successful implementation of PRO measures.
引用
收藏
页码:621 / 627
页数:7
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2005, REFL PAP REG GUID US
[2]  
[Anonymous], INT CLASS FUNCT DIS
[3]  
[Anonymous], US GUID IMPL PAT OUT
[4]   The Triple Aim: Care, health, and cost [J].
Berwick, Donald M. ;
Nolan, Thomas W. ;
Whittington, John .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2008, 27 (03) :759-769
[5]   The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research [J].
Boyce, Maria B. ;
Browne, John P. ;
Greenhalgh, Joanne .
BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2014, 23 (06) :508-518
[6]   A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting [J].
Chen, Jack ;
Ou, Lixin ;
Hollis, Stephanie J. .
BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2013, 13
[7]  
Guest G., 2012, APPL THEMATIC ANAL
[8]   Continence specialists use of quality of life information in routine practice: a national survey of practitioners [J].
Haywood, Kirstie L. ;
Garratt, Andrew M. ;
Carrivick, Sandra ;
Mangnall, Joanne ;
Skevington, Suzanne M. .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (04) :423-433
[9]   Using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: challenges and opportunities [J].
Lohr, Kathleen N. ;
Zebrack, Bradley J. .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2009, 18 (01) :99-107
[10]  
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 2006, Health Qual Life Outcomes, V4, P79