Factors in Randomized Controlled Trials Reported to Impact the Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Into Routine Care: Protocol for a Systematic Review

被引:4
作者
Roberts, Natasha Anne [1 ,2 ]
Alexander, Kimberly [1 ]
Wyld, David [2 ,3 ]
Janda, Monika [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Queensland Univ Technol, Sch Nursing, Musk Ave, Kelvin Grove 4059, Australia
[2] Royal Brisbane & Womens Hosp, Canc Care Serv, Herston, Qld, Australia
[3] Univ Queensland, Sch Med, St Lucia, Qld, Australia
[4] Univ Queensland, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Woolloongabba, Qld, Australia
[5] Queensland Univ Technol, Kelvin Grove, Australia
来源
JMIR RESEARCH PROTOCOLS | 2019年 / 8卷 / 11期
关键词
patient reported outcomes; PROs; PROMs; clinical practice; implementation; implementation science; iPARIHS; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; QUALITY; IMPROVE; HEALTH; PROFESSIONALS; INFORMATION; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.2196/14579
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
Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools that enable patients to directly report their own assessments of well-being, or symptoms, in a structured and consistent way. Despite the usefulness of PROMs in optimizing health outcomes, their use in clinical practice is not routine. PROMs are complex to integrate into the clinical setting, with many elements potentially impacting on the success of implementation. For this reason, a protocol has been developed to guide a systematic review to collate information on implementation as presented in the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to date. Objective: The primary objective of this systematic review is to identify and synthesize factors available from RCT data about the fidelity of PROM interventions in clinical practice. The secondary objective will be an assessment of how implementation factors impact fidelity outcomes. Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting standards will be followed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature via OvidSP will be accessed using a defined search strategy. Grey literature and ClinicalTrials.gov will be reviewed for unpublished studies. Data extraction will be done to identify fidelity and factors impacting implementation, summarized using a narrative synthesis. An evidence-based implementation science framework will assist in identifying potential elements of importance and their effect on the process and outcomes of implementation. A meta-analysis to assess the impact of implementation factors will be attempted. A Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used. Results: This protocol has received funding, and searches of databases will commence at the end of May 2019. It is planned that this systematic review will be finalized for publication in (December) 2019. Conclusions: Applying an implementation science evidence-based framework to the published literature may identify factors present in the data that impact on the implementation of PROMs into routine clinical care. This systematic review aims to improve understanding of how these factors impact the fidelity of this intervention, so that PROMs can be more effectively used in the care of patients. This systematic review can also offer more detailed information about the process and outcomes of successful implementation of PROMs.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [1] Investigating complexity in systematic reviews of interventions by using a spectrum of methods
    Anderson, Laurie M.
    Oliver, Sandy R.
    Michie, Susan
    Rehfuess, Eva
    Noyes, Jane
    Shemilt, Ian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2013, 66 (11) : 1223 - 1229
  • [2] Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice: A systematic review of facilitators and barriers
    Antunes, Barbara
    Harding, Richard
    Higginson, Irene J.
    [J]. PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2014, 28 (02) : 158 - 175
  • [3] Arai L., 2007, Evidence Policy, V3, P361, DOI DOI 10.1332/174426407781738029
  • [4] Evaluating implementation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention guidelines in spinal cord injury centers using the PARIHS framework: a mixed methods study
    Balbale, Salva N.
    Hill, Jennifer N.
    Guihan, Marylou
    Hogan, Timothy P.
    Cameron, Kenzie A.
    Goldstein, Barry
    Evans, Charlesnika T.
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2015, 10
  • [5] Patient-Reported Outcomes - Harnessing Patients' Voices to Improve Clinical Care
    Basch, Ethan
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2017, 376 (02) : 105 - 108
  • [6] The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research
    Boyce, Maria B.
    Browne, John P.
    Greenhalgh, Joanne
    [J]. BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2014, 23 (06) : 508 - 518
  • [7] Campbell M, 2016, LANCET, V388, P34
  • [8] The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings
    Dawson, Jill
    Doll, Helen
    Fitzpatrick, Ray
    Jenkinson, Crispin
    Carr, Andrew J.
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 340 : 464 - 467
  • [9] The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: a systematic review
    Duncan, Edward A. S.
    Murray, Jennifer
    [J]. BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2012, 12
  • [10] PARIHS revisited: from heuristic to integrated framework for the successful implementation of knowledge into practice
    Harvey, Gill
    Kitson, Alison
    [J]. IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2016, 11