Cargando…

A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care

INTRODUCTION: Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about the status of their health condition without amendment or interpretation by others. Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the tools used to measure PROs; they are usually validated questionnaires patients c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nguyen, Hanh, Butow, Phyllis, Dhillon, Haryana, Sundaresan, Puma
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8168064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32815314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.421
_version_ 1783701813324677120
author Nguyen, Hanh
Butow, Phyllis
Dhillon, Haryana
Sundaresan, Puma
author_facet Nguyen, Hanh
Butow, Phyllis
Dhillon, Haryana
Sundaresan, Puma
author_sort Nguyen, Hanh
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about the status of their health condition without amendment or interpretation by others. Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the tools used to measure PROs; they are usually validated questionnaires patients complete by self‐assessing their health status. Whilst the benefits of using PROs and PROMs to guide real‐time patient care are well established, they have not been adopted by many oncology institutions worldwide. This literature review aimed to examine the barriers associated with using PROs and PROMs in routine oncology care. METHODS: A literature search was conducted across EMBASE, Medline and CINAHL databases. Studies detailing barriers to routine PRO use for real‐time patient care were included; those focusing on PRO collection in the research setting were excluded. RESULTS: Of 1165 records captured, 14 studies informed this review. At the patient level, patient time, incapacity and difficulty using electronic devices to complete PROMs were prominent barriers. At the health professional level, major barriers included health professionals’ lack of time and knowledge to meaningfully interpret and integrate PRO data into their clinical practice and the inability for PRO data to be acted upon. Prominent barriers at the service level included difficulties integrating PROs and PROMs into clinical workflows and inadequate information technology (IT) infrastructures for easy PRO collection. CONCLUSION: This review has outlined potential barriers to routine PRO use in the oncology setting. Such barriers should be considered when implementing PROs into routine clinical practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8168064
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81680642021-06-05 A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care Nguyen, Hanh Butow, Phyllis Dhillon, Haryana Sundaresan, Puma J Med Radiat Sci Review Articles INTRODUCTION: Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about the status of their health condition without amendment or interpretation by others. Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the tools used to measure PROs; they are usually validated questionnaires patients complete by self‐assessing their health status. Whilst the benefits of using PROs and PROMs to guide real‐time patient care are well established, they have not been adopted by many oncology institutions worldwide. This literature review aimed to examine the barriers associated with using PROs and PROMs in routine oncology care. METHODS: A literature search was conducted across EMBASE, Medline and CINAHL databases. Studies detailing barriers to routine PRO use for real‐time patient care were included; those focusing on PRO collection in the research setting were excluded. RESULTS: Of 1165 records captured, 14 studies informed this review. At the patient level, patient time, incapacity and difficulty using electronic devices to complete PROMs were prominent barriers. At the health professional level, major barriers included health professionals’ lack of time and knowledge to meaningfully interpret and integrate PRO data into their clinical practice and the inability for PRO data to be acted upon. Prominent barriers at the service level included difficulties integrating PROs and PROMs into clinical workflows and inadequate information technology (IT) infrastructures for easy PRO collection. CONCLUSION: This review has outlined potential barriers to routine PRO use in the oncology setting. Such barriers should be considered when implementing PROs into routine clinical practice. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-08-19 2021-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8168064/ /pubmed/32815314 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.421 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Nguyen, Hanh
Butow, Phyllis
Dhillon, Haryana
Sundaresan, Puma
A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title_full A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title_fullStr A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title_full_unstemmed A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title_short A review of the barriers to using Patient‐Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care
title_sort review of the barriers to using patient‐reported outcomes (pros) and patient‐reported outcome measures (proms) in routine cancer care
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8168064/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32815314
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.421
work_keys_str_mv AT nguyenhanh areviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT butowphyllis areviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT dhillonharyana areviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT sundaresanpuma areviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT nguyenhanh reviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT butowphyllis reviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT dhillonharyana reviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare
AT sundaresanpuma reviewofthebarrierstousingpatientreportedoutcomesprosandpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsinroutinecancercare