Cargando…

A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks

BACKGROUND: The complex, multidimensional nature of healthcare quality makes provider and treatment decisions based on quality difficult. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can enhance patient centricity and involvement. The proliferation of PRO measures, however, requires a simplification to i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schöner, Lukas, Kuklinski, David, Geissler, Alexander, Busse, Reinhard, Pross, Christoph
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10329084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36964454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03395-0
_version_ 1785069948002893824
author Schöner, Lukas
Kuklinski, David
Geissler, Alexander
Busse, Reinhard
Pross, Christoph
author_facet Schöner, Lukas
Kuklinski, David
Geissler, Alexander
Busse, Reinhard
Pross, Christoph
author_sort Schöner, Lukas
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The complex, multidimensional nature of healthcare quality makes provider and treatment decisions based on quality difficult. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can enhance patient centricity and involvement. The proliferation of PRO measures, however, requires a simplification to improve comprehensibility. Composite measures can simplify complex data without sacrificing the underlying information. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: We propose a five-step development approach to combine different PRO into one composite measure (PRO-CM): (i) theoretical framework and metric selection, (ii) initial data analysis, (iii) rescaling, (iv) weighting and aggregation, and (v) sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. We evaluate different rescaling, weighting, and aggregation methods by utilizing data of 3145 hip and 2605 knee replacement patients, to identify the most advantageous development approach for a PRO-CM that reflects quality variations from a patient perspective. RESULTS: The comparison of different methods within steps (iii) and (iv) reveals the following methods as most advantageous: (iii) rescaling via z-score standardization and (iv) applying differential weights and additive aggregation. The resulting PRO-CM is most sensitive to variations in physical health. Changing weighting schemes impacts the PRO-CM most directly, while it proves more robust towards different rescaling and aggregation approaches. CONCLUSION: Combining multiple PRO provides a holistic picture of patients’ health improvement. The PRO-CM can enhance patient understanding and simplify reporting and monitoring of PRO. However, the development methodology of a PRO-CM needs to be justified and transparent to ensure that it is comprehensible and replicable. This is essential to address the well-known problems associated with composites, such as misinterpretation and lack of trust. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-023-03395-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10329084
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103290842023-07-09 A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks Schöner, Lukas Kuklinski, David Geissler, Alexander Busse, Reinhard Pross, Christoph Qual Life Res Article BACKGROUND: The complex, multidimensional nature of healthcare quality makes provider and treatment decisions based on quality difficult. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures can enhance patient centricity and involvement. The proliferation of PRO measures, however, requires a simplification to improve comprehensibility. Composite measures can simplify complex data without sacrificing the underlying information. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: We propose a five-step development approach to combine different PRO into one composite measure (PRO-CM): (i) theoretical framework and metric selection, (ii) initial data analysis, (iii) rescaling, (iv) weighting and aggregation, and (v) sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. We evaluate different rescaling, weighting, and aggregation methods by utilizing data of 3145 hip and 2605 knee replacement patients, to identify the most advantageous development approach for a PRO-CM that reflects quality variations from a patient perspective. RESULTS: The comparison of different methods within steps (iii) and (iv) reveals the following methods as most advantageous: (iii) rescaling via z-score standardization and (iv) applying differential weights and additive aggregation. The resulting PRO-CM is most sensitive to variations in physical health. Changing weighting schemes impacts the PRO-CM most directly, while it proves more robust towards different rescaling and aggregation approaches. CONCLUSION: Combining multiple PRO provides a holistic picture of patients’ health improvement. The PRO-CM can enhance patient understanding and simplify reporting and monitoring of PRO. However, the development methodology of a PRO-CM needs to be justified and transparent to ensure that it is comprehensible and replicable. This is essential to address the well-known problems associated with composites, such as misinterpretation and lack of trust. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11136-023-03395-0. Springer International Publishing 2023-03-24 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10329084/ /pubmed/36964454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03395-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Schöner, Lukas
Kuklinski, David
Geissler, Alexander
Busse, Reinhard
Pross, Christoph
A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title_full A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title_fullStr A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title_full_unstemmed A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title_short A composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
title_sort composite measure for patient-reported outcomes in orthopedic care: design principles and validity checks
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10329084/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36964454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-023-03395-0
work_keys_str_mv AT schonerlukas acompositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT kuklinskidavid acompositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT geissleralexander acompositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT bussereinhard acompositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT prosschristoph acompositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT schonerlukas compositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT kuklinskidavid compositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT geissleralexander compositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT bussereinhard compositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks
AT prosschristoph compositemeasureforpatientreportedoutcomesinorthopediccaredesignprinciplesandvaliditychecks