Cargando…

Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study

PURPOSE: Problematic polypharmacy can exaggerate “medicine burden” for the patient. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key indicators of medicine burden, and PRO measures (PROMs) can help patients articulate their perceptions of medicine burden. We aimed to: (a) evaluate what PROMs currently exist...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kotronoulas, Grigorios, Cooper, Mark, Johnston, Bridget
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6916699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31853173
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S236122
_version_ 1783480284195323904
author Kotronoulas, Grigorios
Cooper, Mark
Johnston, Bridget
author_facet Kotronoulas, Grigorios
Cooper, Mark
Johnston, Bridget
author_sort Kotronoulas, Grigorios
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Problematic polypharmacy can exaggerate “medicine burden” for the patient. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key indicators of medicine burden, and PRO measures (PROMs) can help patients articulate their perceptions of medicine burden. We aimed to: (a) evaluate what PROMs currently exist that assess medicine burden, and what PROs they target, and (b) understand patients’ experiences with using multiple medicines to establish a core set of most meaningful and relevant PROs for assessment in polypharmacy medicines reviews. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, sequential mixed-methods study in two consecutive work phases. Phase 1 involved a rapid review of PROMs, informed by the published PRISMA and COSMIN initiative guidelines. We integrated all evidence in a thematic narrative synthesis. Phase 2 involved cross-sectional, one-to-one, semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, including members of the public and healthcare professionals (HCPs). We conducted thematic content analysis to identify and classify emerging PROs. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 13 studies described the development and/or validation of 12 PROMs. The PROMs targeted 14 content domains of adult patients’ experiences with prescribed medicines. PROMs varied widely in terms of length, comprehensiveness and psychometric robustness. In Phase 2, all participants (seven members of the public; eight HCPs) agreed on the clinical relevance of PROMs, providing a rich account of justifications. We identified four core PROs: ‘Knowledge, information and communication about own medicines’; “Perceptions, views and attitudes about (own) medicines”; “Impact on daily living: Side-effects and practicalities”, and “Medicine usage: ‘as planned’, misuse, abuse, no use”. CONCLUSION: We suggest combining psychometrically robust PROMs or domains across PROMs into a bespoke PROM that addresses comprehensively and succinctly the four core PROs. We recommend a careful implementation process that must involve consultation with all relevant stakeholders, while establishing a clear purpose for collecting a PROM and realistic and ongoing collection at key time-points.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6916699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69166992019-12-18 Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study Kotronoulas, Grigorios Cooper, Mark Johnston, Bridget Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research PURPOSE: Problematic polypharmacy can exaggerate “medicine burden” for the patient. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are key indicators of medicine burden, and PRO measures (PROMs) can help patients articulate their perceptions of medicine burden. We aimed to: (a) evaluate what PROMs currently exist that assess medicine burden, and what PROs they target, and (b) understand patients’ experiences with using multiple medicines to establish a core set of most meaningful and relevant PROs for assessment in polypharmacy medicines reviews. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, sequential mixed-methods study in two consecutive work phases. Phase 1 involved a rapid review of PROMs, informed by the published PRISMA and COSMIN initiative guidelines. We integrated all evidence in a thematic narrative synthesis. Phase 2 involved cross-sectional, one-to-one, semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, including members of the public and healthcare professionals (HCPs). We conducted thematic content analysis to identify and classify emerging PROs. RESULTS: In Phase 1, 13 studies described the development and/or validation of 12 PROMs. The PROMs targeted 14 content domains of adult patients’ experiences with prescribed medicines. PROMs varied widely in terms of length, comprehensiveness and psychometric robustness. In Phase 2, all participants (seven members of the public; eight HCPs) agreed on the clinical relevance of PROMs, providing a rich account of justifications. We identified four core PROs: ‘Knowledge, information and communication about own medicines’; “Perceptions, views and attitudes about (own) medicines”; “Impact on daily living: Side-effects and practicalities”, and “Medicine usage: ‘as planned’, misuse, abuse, no use”. CONCLUSION: We suggest combining psychometrically robust PROMs or domains across PROMs into a bespoke PROM that addresses comprehensively and succinctly the four core PROs. We recommend a careful implementation process that must involve consultation with all relevant stakeholders, while establishing a clear purpose for collecting a PROM and realistic and ongoing collection at key time-points. Dove 2019-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6916699/ /pubmed/31853173 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S236122 Text en © 2019 Kotronoulas et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Kotronoulas, Grigorios
Cooper, Mark
Johnston, Bridget
Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title_full Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title_fullStr Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title_full_unstemmed Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title_short Core Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and PRO Measures (PROMs) for Polypharmacy Medicines Reviews: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Study
title_sort core patient-reported outcomes (pros) and pro measures (proms) for polypharmacy medicines reviews: a sequential mixed-methods study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6916699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31853173
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S236122
work_keys_str_mv AT kotronoulasgrigorios corepatientreportedoutcomesprosandpromeasurespromsforpolypharmacymedicinesreviewsasequentialmixedmethodsstudy
AT coopermark corepatientreportedoutcomesprosandpromeasurespromsforpolypharmacymedicinesreviewsasequentialmixedmethodsstudy
AT johnstonbridget corepatientreportedoutcomesprosandpromeasurespromsforpolypharmacymedicinesreviewsasequentialmixedmethodsstudy