Implementing patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical care for diverse and underrepresented patients in the United States

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used increasingly in routine clinical care and inform policies, reimbursements, and quality improvement. Less is known regarding PRO implementation in routine clinical care for diverse and underrepresented patient populations. OBJECTIVE: This review a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hyland, Colby J., Guo, Ruby, Dhawan, Ravi, Kaur, Manraj N., Bain, Paul A., Edelen, Maria O., Pusic, Andrea L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Review
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8901833/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35254556
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00428-z
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used increasingly in routine clinical care and inform policies, reimbursements, and quality improvement. Less is known regarding PRO implementation in routine clinical care for diverse and underrepresented patient populations. OBJECTIVE: This review aims to identify studies of PRO implementation in diverse and underrepresented patient populations, elucidate representation of clinical specialties, assess implementation outcomes, and synthesize patient needs, concerns, and preferences. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched September 2021 for studies aiming to study PRO implementation in diverse and underrepresented patient populations within the United States. Studies were screened and data extracted by three independent reviewers. Implementation outcomes were assessed according to Proctor et al. taxonomy. A descriptive analysis of data was conducted. RESULTS: The search yielded 8,687 records, and 28 studies met inclusion criteria. The majority were observational cohort studies (n = 21, 75%) and conducted in primary care (n = 10, 36%). Most studies included majority female (n = 19, 68%) and non-White populations (n = 15, 54%), while fewer reported socioeconomic (n = 11, 39%) or insurance status (n = 9, 32.1%). Most studies assessed implementation outcomes of feasibility (n = 27, 96%) and acceptability (n = 19, 68%); costs (n = 3, 11%), penetration (n = 1, 4%), and sustainability (n = 1, 4%) were infrequently assessed. CONCLUSION: PRO implementation in routine clinical care for diverse and underrepresented patient populations is generally feasible and acceptable. Research is lacking in key clinical specialties. Further work is needed to understand how health disparities drive PRO implementation outcomes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00428-z.

Ejemplares similares