Cargando…

Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK

BACKGROUND: The independent healthcare sector in the UK collects PROMs for several surgical procedures, but implementation has been challenging. We aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to PROMs implementation in the independent healthcare sector in the UK. METHOD: Between January and May 20...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Michael, Pitchforth, Emma, Vallance-Owen, Andrew, Mossialos, Elias, Millner, Paul, Fistein, Jon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500124/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36138334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5
_version_ 1784795143974420480
author Anderson, Michael
Pitchforth, Emma
Vallance-Owen, Andrew
Mossialos, Elias
Millner, Paul
Fistein, Jon
author_facet Anderson, Michael
Pitchforth, Emma
Vallance-Owen, Andrew
Mossialos, Elias
Millner, Paul
Fistein, Jon
author_sort Anderson, Michael
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The independent healthcare sector in the UK collects PROMs for several surgical procedures, but implementation has been challenging. We aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to PROMs implementation in the independent healthcare sector in the UK. METHOD: Between January and May 2021, we remotely conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital consultants, hospital managers and other clinical staff using a topic guide developed from an implementation science framework called the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: We interviewed 6 hospital consultants, 5 hospital managers, and 3 other clinical staff (1 nurse and 2 physiotherapists) across 8 hospitals. Common barriers included: the perception that PROMs are predominantly a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool, absence of feedback mechanisms for PROMs data for clinicians, poor awareness of PROMs among healthcare professionals and the public, absence of direction or commitment from leadership, and limited support from hospital consultants. Common enablers included: regular feedback of PROMs data to clinicians, designating roles and responsibilities, formally embedding PROMs collection into patient pathways, and involvement of hospital consultants in developing strategies to improve PROMs uptake. CONCLUSION: To support PROMs implementation, independent hospitals need to develop long-term organisational strategies that involve sustained leadership commitment, goals or targets, training opportunities to staff, and regular feedback of PROMs data at clinical or governance meetings. The primary purpose of PROMs needs to be reframed to independent healthcare sector stakeholders as a quality improvement tool rather than a reporting requirement. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9500124
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95001242022-09-24 Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK Anderson, Michael Pitchforth, Emma Vallance-Owen, Andrew Mossialos, Elias Millner, Paul Fistein, Jon J Patient Rep Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The independent healthcare sector in the UK collects PROMs for several surgical procedures, but implementation has been challenging. We aimed to understand the enablers and barriers to PROMs implementation in the independent healthcare sector in the UK. METHOD: Between January and May 2021, we remotely conducted semi-structured interviews with hospital consultants, hospital managers and other clinical staff using a topic guide developed from an implementation science framework called the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). RESULTS: We interviewed 6 hospital consultants, 5 hospital managers, and 3 other clinical staff (1 nurse and 2 physiotherapists) across 8 hospitals. Common barriers included: the perception that PROMs are predominantly a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool, absence of feedback mechanisms for PROMs data for clinicians, poor awareness of PROMs among healthcare professionals and the public, absence of direction or commitment from leadership, and limited support from hospital consultants. Common enablers included: regular feedback of PROMs data to clinicians, designating roles and responsibilities, formally embedding PROMs collection into patient pathways, and involvement of hospital consultants in developing strategies to improve PROMs uptake. CONCLUSION: To support PROMs implementation, independent hospitals need to develop long-term organisational strategies that involve sustained leadership commitment, goals or targets, training opportunities to staff, and regular feedback of PROMs data at clinical or governance meetings. The primary purpose of PROMs needs to be reframed to independent healthcare sector stakeholders as a quality improvement tool rather than a reporting requirement. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5. Springer International Publishing 2022-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9500124/ /pubmed/36138334 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Anderson, Michael
Pitchforth, Emma
Vallance-Owen, Andrew
Mossialos, Elias
Millner, Paul
Fistein, Jon
Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title_full Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title_fullStr Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title_full_unstemmed Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title_short Misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the UK
title_sort misconceiving patient reported outcome measures (proms) as primarily a reporting requirement rather than a quality improvement tool: perceptions of independent healthcare sector stakeholders in the uk
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500124/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36138334
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5
work_keys_str_mv AT andersonmichael misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk
AT pitchforthemma misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk
AT vallanceowenandrew misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk
AT mossialoselias misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk
AT millnerpaul misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk
AT fisteinjon misconceivingpatientreportedoutcomemeasurespromsasprimarilyareportingrequirementratherthanaqualityimprovementtoolperceptionsofindependenthealthcaresectorstakeholdersintheuk