Cargando…

Electronic collection of patient-reported outcomes following discharge after surgery: systematic review

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the electronic collection and clinical feedback of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) following surgical discharge. This systematic review summarized the evidence on the collection and uses of electronic systems to collect PROs after discharge from hospital after sur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tsang, C, Lee, K S, Richards, H, Blazeby, J M, Avery, K N L
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8007587/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33782708
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zraa072
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Little is known about the electronic collection and clinical feedback of patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) following surgical discharge. This systematic review summarized the evidence on the collection and uses of electronic systems to collect PROs after discharge from hospital after surgery. METHOD: Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Central were undertaken from database inception to July 2019 using terms for ‘patient reported outcomes’, ‘electronic’, ‘surgery’ and ‘at home’. Primary research of all study designs was included if they used electronic systems to collect PRO data in adults after hospital discharge following surgery. Data were collected on the settings, patient groups and specialties, ePRO systems (including features and functions), PRO data collected, and integration with health records. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included from 9474 records, including two RCTs and six orthopaedic surgery studies. Most studies (9 of 14) used commercial ePRO systems. Six reported types of electronic device were used: tablets or other portable devices (3 studies), smartphones (2), combination of smartphones, tablets, portable devices and computers (1). Systems had limited features and functions such as real-time clinical feedback (6 studies) and messaging service for patients with care teams (3). No study described ePRO system integration with electronic health records to support clinical feedback. CONCLUSION: There is limited reporting of ePRO systems in the surgical literature, and ePRO systems lack integration with hospital clinical systems. Future research should describe the ePRO system and ePRO questionnaires used, and challenges encountered during the study, to support efficient upscaling of ePRO systems using tried and tested approaches.