Cargando…

An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures

BACKGROUND: Obtaining patients’ views of their health and outcomes of interventions utilising patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is a well-established method, but there is still uncertainty about the impact of PROMs on services and patient care. Studies are now needed of alternative ways of i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gibbons, Elizabeth, Fitzpatrick, Ray
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6031120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29997903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-018-0289-1
_version_ 1783337258064019456
author Gibbons, Elizabeth
Fitzpatrick, Ray
author_facet Gibbons, Elizabeth
Fitzpatrick, Ray
author_sort Gibbons, Elizabeth
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Obtaining patients’ views of their health and outcomes of interventions utilising patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is a well-established method, but there is still uncertainty about the impact of PROMs on services and patient care. Studies are now needed of alternative ways of implementing PROMs. This paper describes a case study of the introduction of a new PROM to assess musculoskeletal (MSK) problems, known as the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ). METHODS: Following an invitation from the Arthritis Research UK (ARUK), 11 groups and organisations agreed to become ‘partners’ in piloting the MSK-HQ. Twenty-nine interviews and a focus group were carried out with key informants from the partners. Interviews were supplemented with some documentary evidence of partners’ meetings. Data were coded and analysed with NVivo software V.10. Analysis was carried out via a framework method. RESULTS: Participants reported positive evidence that the MSK-HQ is feasible and practical for use in patient care with content that helped health professionals identify and address patients’ main presenting problems. Although mediated and reported through health professionals’ judgments, the questionnaire was also seen as very relevant and acceptable to a wide spectrum of patients. There was also broad support for the view that whilst the MSK-HQ is relevant to individual patient care, it could also, when aggregated, reflect the experiences of patients as a group and be used as evidence for third parties concerned with the provision and commissioning of services. The main difficulties revealed by the case study were in the form of logistics and sustainability. It was recognised that electronic systems would be more effective for administration and data processing but they were not feasible to develop and implement within reasonable timelines and available budgets. A sustainable approach to using the PROM required significant long-term commitment of budget, a coherent system, and active support from diverse organisations. CONCLUSIONS: The current study supports the view that a bottom-up approach is a promising method to generate PROM-related insights that are relevant to patients and health professionals. The partnership approach to developing and using PROMs may have wider relevance and potential as a model of implementation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-018-0289-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6031120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60311202018-07-11 An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures Gibbons, Elizabeth Fitzpatrick, Ray Pilot Feasibility Stud Research BACKGROUND: Obtaining patients’ views of their health and outcomes of interventions utilising patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is a well-established method, but there is still uncertainty about the impact of PROMs on services and patient care. Studies are now needed of alternative ways of implementing PROMs. This paper describes a case study of the introduction of a new PROM to assess musculoskeletal (MSK) problems, known as the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ). METHODS: Following an invitation from the Arthritis Research UK (ARUK), 11 groups and organisations agreed to become ‘partners’ in piloting the MSK-HQ. Twenty-nine interviews and a focus group were carried out with key informants from the partners. Interviews were supplemented with some documentary evidence of partners’ meetings. Data were coded and analysed with NVivo software V.10. Analysis was carried out via a framework method. RESULTS: Participants reported positive evidence that the MSK-HQ is feasible and practical for use in patient care with content that helped health professionals identify and address patients’ main presenting problems. Although mediated and reported through health professionals’ judgments, the questionnaire was also seen as very relevant and acceptable to a wide spectrum of patients. There was also broad support for the view that whilst the MSK-HQ is relevant to individual patient care, it could also, when aggregated, reflect the experiences of patients as a group and be used as evidence for third parties concerned with the provision and commissioning of services. The main difficulties revealed by the case study were in the form of logistics and sustainability. It was recognised that electronic systems would be more effective for administration and data processing but they were not feasible to develop and implement within reasonable timelines and available budgets. A sustainable approach to using the PROM required significant long-term commitment of budget, a coherent system, and active support from diverse organisations. CONCLUSIONS: The current study supports the view that a bottom-up approach is a promising method to generate PROM-related insights that are relevant to patients and health professionals. The partnership approach to developing and using PROMs may have wider relevance and potential as a model of implementation. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-018-0289-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6031120/ /pubmed/29997903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-018-0289-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Gibbons, Elizabeth
Fitzpatrick, Ray
An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title_full An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title_fullStr An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title_full_unstemmed An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title_short An alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
title_sort alternative approach to implementing patient-reported outcome measures
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6031120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29997903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40814-018-0289-1
work_keys_str_mv AT gibbonselizabeth analternativeapproachtoimplementingpatientreportedoutcomemeasures
AT fitzpatrickray analternativeapproachtoimplementingpatientreportedoutcomemeasures
AT gibbonselizabeth alternativeapproachtoimplementingpatientreportedoutcomemeasures
AT fitzpatrickray alternativeapproachtoimplementingpatientreportedoutcomemeasures