1
|
Ahmed S, Parks-Vernizzi E, Perez B, Arnold B, Boucher A, Hossenbaccus M, Correia H, Bartlett SJ. Translation and linguistic validation of 24 PROMIS item banks into French. Qual Life Res 2024:10.1007/s11136-024-03690-4. [PMID: 38865068 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03690-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/17/2024] [Indexed: 06/13/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE The Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) was developed to provide reliable, valid, and normed item banks to measure health. The item banks provide standardized scores on a common metric allowing for individualized, brief assessment (computerized adaptive tests), short forms (e.g. heart failure specific), or profile assessments (e.g. PROMIS-29). The objective of this study was to translate and linguistically validate 24 PROMIS adult item banks into French and highlight cultural nuances arising during the translation process. METHODS We used the FACIT translation methodology. Forward translation into French by two native French-speaking translators was followed by reconciliation by a third native French-speaking translator. A native English-speaking translator fluent in French then completed a back translation of the reconciled version from French into English. Three independent reviews by bilingual translators were completed to assess the clarity and consistency of terminology and equivalency across the English source and French translations. Reconciled versions were evaluated in cognitive interviews for conceptual and linguistic equivalence. RESULTS Twenty-four adult item banks were translated: 12 mental health, 10 physical health, and two social health. Interview data revealed that 577 items of the 590 items translated required no revisions. Conceptual and linguistic differences were evident for 11 items that required iterations to improve conceptual equivalence and two items were revised to accurately reflect the English source. CONCLUSION French translations of 24 item banks were created for routine clinical use and research. Initial translation supported conceptual equivalence and comprehensibility. Next steps will include validation of the item banks.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sara Ahmed
- School of Physical and Occupation Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, 3655 Sir William-Osler, Montreal, QC, H3G 1Y6, Canada.
- Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation of Greater Montreal (CRIR), Montreal, Canada.
- Lethbridge Layton Mackay Rehabilitation Centre, CIUSSS Centre-Ouest-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, Canada.
- Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada.
| | | | | | | | | | - Mushirah Hossenbaccus
- Lethbridge Layton Mackay Rehabilitation Centre, CIUSSS Centre-Ouest-de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Helena Correia
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Susan J Bartlett
- Center for Outcomes Research & Evaluation, Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kamran R, Jackman L, Laws A, Stepney M, Harrison C, Jain A, Rodrigues J. Developing feasible and acceptable strategies for integrating the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in gender-affirming care: An implementation study. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0301922. [PMID: 38625952 PMCID: PMC11020962 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301922] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/09/2023] [Accepted: 03/21/2024] [Indexed: 04/18/2024] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Use CFIR guidance to create comprehensive, evidence-based, feasible, and acceptable gender-affirming care PROM implementation strategies. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS A 3-Phase participatory process was followed to design feasible and acceptable strategies for integrating PROMs in gender-affirming care. In Phase 1, barriers and enablers to PROM implementation for gender-affirming care were identified from a previous systematic review and our prior qualitative study. We used the CFIR-ERIC tool to match previously identified barriers and enablers with expert-endorsed implementation strategies. In Phase 2, implementation strategy outputs from CFIR-ERIC were organised according to cumulative percentage value. In Phase 3, gender-affirming care PROM implementation strategies underwent iterative refinement based on rounds of stakeholder feedback with seven patient and public partners and a gender-affirming healthcare professional. RESULTS The systematic review and qualitative study identified barriers and enablers to PROM implementation spanning all five CFIR domains, and 30 CFIR constructs. The top healthcare professional-relevant strategies to PROM implementation from the CFIR-ERIC output include: identifying and preparing implementation champions, collecting feedback on PROM implementation, and capturing and sharing local knowledge between clinics on implementation. Top patient-relevant strategies include: having educational material on PROMs, ensuring adaptability of PROMs, and collaborating with key local organisations who may be able to support patients. CONCLUSIONS This study developed evidence-based, feasible, and acceptable strategies for integrating PROMs in gender-affirming care, representing evidence from a systematic review of 286 international articles, a qualitative study of 24 gender-affirming care patients and healthcare professionals, and iteration from 7 patient and public partners and a gender-affirming healthcare professional. The finalised strategies include patient- and healthcare professional-relevant strategies for implementing PROMs in gender-affirming care. Clinicians and researchers can select and tailor implementation strategies best applying to their gender-affirming care setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rakhshan Kamran
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
- Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Liam Jackman
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anna Laws
- Northern Region Gender Dysphoria Service, Newcastle, United Kingdom
| | - Melissa Stepney
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Conrad Harrison
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Abhilash Jain
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jeremy Rodrigues
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Warwick, United Kingdom
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Aylesbury, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hoffmann C, Avery K, Macefield R, Dvořák T, Snelgrove V, Blazeby J, Hopkins D, Hickey S, Gibbison B, Rooshenas L, Williams A, Aning J, Bekker HL, McNair AG. Usability of an Automated System for Real-Time Monitoring of Shared Decision-Making for Surgery: Mixed Methods Evaluation. JMIR Hum Factors 2024; 11:e46698. [PMID: 38598276 PMCID: PMC11043934 DOI: 10.2196/46698] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2023] [Revised: 10/02/2023] [Accepted: 03/02/2024] [Indexed: 04/11/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Improving shared decision-making (SDM) for patients has become a health policy priority in many countries. Achieving high-quality SDM is particularly important for approximately 313 million surgical treatment decisions patients make globally every year. Large-scale monitoring of surgical patients' experience of SDM in real time is needed to identify the failings of SDM before surgery is performed. We developed a novel approach to automating real-time data collection using an electronic measurement system to address this. Examining usability will facilitate its optimization and wider implementation to inform interventions aimed at improving SDM. OBJECTIVE This study examined the usability of an electronic real-time measurement system to monitor surgical patients' experience of SDM. We aimed to evaluate the metrics and indicators relevant to system effectiveness, system efficiency, and user satisfaction. METHODS We performed a mixed methods usability evaluation using multiple participant cohorts. The measurement system was implemented in a large UK hospital to measure patients' experience of SDM electronically before surgery using 2 validated measures (CollaboRATE and SDM-Q-9). Quantitative data (collected between April 1 and December 31, 2021) provided measurement system metrics to assess system effectiveness and efficiency. We included adult patients booked for urgent and elective surgery across 7 specialties and excluded patients without the capacity to consent for medical procedures, those without access to an internet-enabled device, and those undergoing emergency or endoscopic procedures. Additional groups of service users (group 1: public members who had not engaged with the system; group 2: a subset of patients who completed the measurement system) completed user-testing sessions and semistructured interviews to assess system effectiveness and user satisfaction. We conducted quantitative data analysis using descriptive statistics and calculated the task completion rate and survey response rate (system effectiveness) as well as the task completion time, task efficiency, and relative efficiency (system efficiency). Qualitative thematic analysis identified indicators of and barriers to good usability (user satisfaction). RESULTS A total of 2254 completed surveys were returned to the measurement system. A total of 25 service users (group 1: n=9; group 2: n=16) participated in user-testing sessions and interviews. The task completion rate was high (169/171, 98.8%) and the survey response rate was good (2254/5794, 38.9%). The median task completion time was 3 (IQR 2-13) minutes, suggesting good system efficiency and effectiveness. The qualitative findings emphasized good user satisfaction. The identified themes suggested that the measurement system is acceptable, easy to use, and easy to access. Service users identified potential barriers and solutions to acceptability and ease of access. CONCLUSIONS A mixed methods evaluation of an electronic measurement system for automated, real-time monitoring of patients' experience of SDM showed that usability among patients was high. Future pilot work will optimize the system for wider implementation to ultimately inform intervention development to improve SDM. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079155.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christin Hoffmann
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Kerry Avery
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Rhiannon Macefield
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Tadeáš Dvořák
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | | - Jane Blazeby
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | | - Shireen Hickey
- Improvement Academy, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, United Kingdom
| | - Ben Gibbison
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | - Leila Rooshenas
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Hilary L Bekker
- Leeds Unit of Complex Intervention Development (LUCID), Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
- The Research Centre for Patient Involvement (ResCenPI), Department of Public Health, Aarhus University, Central Denmark Region, Denmark
| | - Angus Gk McNair
- National Institute for Health and Care Research Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol Centre for Surgical Research, Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
- North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Lai-Kwon J, Rutherford C, Jefford M, Gore C, Best S. Using Implementation Science Frameworks to Guide the Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring in Routine Cancer Care. JCO Oncol Pract 2024; 20:335-349. [PMID: 38206290 DOI: 10.1200/op.23.00462] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/26/2023] [Revised: 11/02/2023] [Accepted: 11/20/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are an evidence-based means of detecting symptoms earlier and improving patient outcomes. However, there are few examples of successful implementation in routine cancer care. We conducted a qualitative study to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing ePRO symptom monitoring in routine cancer care using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS Participants were adult patients with cancer, their caregivers, or health care professionals involved in ePRO monitoring or processes. Focus groups or individual interviews were conducted using a semistructured approach informed by the CFIR. Data were analyzed deductively using the CFIR. Barriers were matched to theory-informed implementation strategies using the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) matching tool. RESULTS Thirty participants were interviewed: 22 females (73%), aged 31-70 years (28, 94%), comprising patients (n = 8), caregivers (n = 2), medical oncologists (n = 4), nurses (n = 4), hospital leaders (n = 6), clinic administrators (n = 2), pharmacists (n = 2), and information technology specialists (n = 2). Barriers pertaining to four CFIR domains were identified and several were novel, including the challenge of adapting ePROs for different anticancer treatments. Facilitators pertaining to all CFIR domains were identified, such as leveraging acceptability of remote care post-COVID-19 to drive implementation. Conducting consensus discussions with stakeholders to tailor ePROs to the local setting, identifying/preparing individual and group-level champions, and assessing readiness for change (including leveraging technological advances and increased confidence in using remote monitoring post-COVID-19) were the most frequently recommended implementation strategies. CONCLUSION The CFIR facilitated identification of known and novel barriers and facilitators to implementing ePRO symptom monitoring in routine cancer care. Implementation strategies summarized in a conceptual framework will be used to codesign an ePRO symptom monitoring system for immunotherapy side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Lai-Kwon
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Claudia Rutherford
- Cancer Care Research Unit (CCRU), Susan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Michael Jefford
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Claire Gore
- Department of Psychology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Stephanie Best
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
- Department of Psychology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
- Australian Genomics, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia
- Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kamran R, Jackman L, Laws A, Stepney M, Harrison C, Jain A, Rodrigues J. Patient and healthcare professional perspectives on implementing patient-reported outcome measures in gender-affirming care: a qualitative study. BMJ Open Qual 2023; 12:e002507. [PMID: 37940336 PMCID: PMC10632877 DOI: 10.1136/bmjoq-2023-002507] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/17/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 11/10/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Patient and healthcare professional perspectives are needed to develop a gender-affirming care patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) implementation plan. We aimed to identify top considerations relevant to gender-affirming care PROM implementation from patient and healthcare professional perspectives. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS This qualitative study conducted in the UK between January and April 2023 includes focus groups with a patient sample diverse in age and gender identity, and a healthcare professional sample diverse in age and role. Established methods in implementation science and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research were used to create interview guides, and analyse data. Focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed by two independent researchers. Patient and healthcare professional focus groups were conducted separately. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES Patient and healthcare professional perspectives on PROM implementation were explored through focus groups and until data saturation. RESULTS A total of 7 virtual focus groups were conducted with 24 participants (14 patients, mean (SD) age, 43 (14.5); 10 healthcare professionals, mean (SD) age, 46 (11.3)). From patient perspectives, key barriers to PROM implementation were mistrust with PROMs, lack of accessibility, burden, and lack of communication on why PROMs are important and how they will help care. From healthcare professional perspectives, key barriers to PROM implementation were lack of accessibility, burden with PROM administration and scoring, costs of implementation (financial and time), and lack of communication on what PROMs are and how they benefit service provision. CONCLUSION Gender-affirming care PROM implementation must address: patient mistrust with PROMs, accessibility, communication on what PROMs are and how they can be used, reducing burden, and hybridised implementation. These factors may also be applicable to other clinical areas interested in implementing PROMs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rakhshan Kamran
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Liam Jackman
- Temerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Anna Laws
- Northern Region Gender Dysphoria Service, Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne & Wear NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle, UK
| | - Melissa Stepney
- The CHiMES Collaborative, Department of Psychiatry University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Conrad Harrison
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Abhilash Jain
- Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Jeremy Rodrigues
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Aylesbury, UK
- Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
O'Donovan B, Kirke C, Pate M, McHugh S, Bennett K, Cahir C. Mapping the Theoretical Domain Framework to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: do multiple frameworks add value? Implement Sci Commun 2023; 4:100. [PMID: 37620981 PMCID: PMC10464139 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-023-00466-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2022] [Accepted: 07/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implementation researchers often combine the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) in their studies. However there is some debate on the merits of using multiple frameworks-whether they contribute to results or provide superfluous analysis. Our recent research combined the TDF and CFIR to identify determinants to widespread incorporation of patient held medication lists (PHML) in healthcare practice. The aim of this report is to provide guidance on the use of the TDF and CFIR; by assessing the degree of overlap between the two frameworks in their application to interviews about PHML. METHODS Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and non HCPs (people taking multiple medicines and caregivers).Interview data were transcribed and analysed using the TDF and CFIR. Within paired domains substantial intersection/overlap across constructs and domains within the two frameworks was classified as > 75% of coding references, consistent intersection/overlap was defined as > 50% and ≤ 75%, average intersection/overlap was defined as ≤ 50% and > 25% and non-substantial intersection/overlap was classified as ≤ 25% of coding references. RESULTS Interview data were collected from 39 participants - 21 HCPs and 18 non HCPs. Mapping of TDF domains to CFIR domains/constructs identified key determinants in six TDF domains: Environmental context & resources, Beliefs about capabilities, Beliefs about consequences, Social influences, Behavioural regulation and Social/professional role & identity; and five CFIR domains: Intervention Characteristics, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, Characteristics of Individual and Process. A pattern of substantial intersection/overlap in coding emerged with broad TDF domains such as Environmental context & resources often linked to well-defined CFIR domains and constructs (e.g. design quality & packaging within Intervention Characteristics). Broad CFIR constructs such as knowledge & beliefs about intervention within Characteristics of Individuals also linked to more descriptive TDF domains like Beliefs about capabilities. In addition there was some unexpected non-substantial intersection/overlap in coding with the TDF domain Social influences less frequently linked to the CFIR Inner Setting domain and constructs such as networks and communications. CONCLUSIONS Identifying intersections/overlaps in coding between CFIR and TDF can assist interpretation of findings in implementation research. The strengths of each framework were exploited in a reciprocal process which provided more information to broad/poorly defined domains and enabled identification of implementation determinants and innovation determinants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B O'Donovan
- Data Science Centre, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland.
| | - C Kirke
- Quality Improvement Division, Health Service Executive (HSE), Medication Safety, Dublin, Ireland
| | - M Pate
- Quality Improvement Division, Health Service Executive (HSE), Medication Safety, Dublin, Ireland
| | - S McHugh
- School of Public Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| | - K Bennett
- Data Science Centre, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| | - C Cahir
- Data Science Centre, School of Population Health, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dublin, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Lai-Kwon J, Cohen JE, Lisy K, Rutherford C, Girgis A, Basch E, Jefford M. The Feasibility, Acceptability, and Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring for Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicities: A Systematic Review. JCO Clin Cancer Inform 2023; 7:e2200185. [PMID: 37220322 DOI: 10.1200/cci.22.00185] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2022] [Revised: 03/07/2023] [Accepted: 03/30/2023] [Indexed: 05/25/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in routine cancer care will increase the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Systems are needed to support remote monitoring for irAEs. Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring systems can help monitor and manage symptoms and side effects. We assessed the content and features of ePRO symptom monitoring systems for irAEs, and their feasibility, acceptability, and impact on patient outcomes and health care utilization. METHODS A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2022 on MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review questions were extracted and synthesized in tables. RESULTS Seven papers describing five ePRO systems were included. All systems collected PROs between clinic visits. Two of five used validated symptom questionnaires, 3/5 provided prompts to complete questionnaires, 4/5 provided reminders to self-report, and 3/5 provided clinician alerts for severe/worsening side effects. Four of five provided coverage of ≥26/30 irAEs in the ASCO irAE guideline. Feasibility and acceptability were demonstrated with consent rates of 54%-100%, 17%-27% of questionnaires generating alerts, and adherence rates of 74%-75%. One paper showed a reduction in grade 3-4 irAEs, treatment discontinuation, clinic visit duration, and emergency department presentations, while another showed no difference in these outcomes or the rate of steroid use. CONCLUSION There is preliminary evidence of the feasibility and acceptability of ePRO symptom monitoring for irAEs. However, further studies are needed to confirm the impact on ICI-specific outcomes, such as the frequency of grade 3-4 irAEs and duration of immunosuppression. Suggestions for the content and features of future ePRO systems for irAEs are provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Lai-Kwon
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Jordan E Cohen
- Liverpool Hospital, South-Western Sydney Local Health District, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Karolina Lisy
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Claudia Rutherford
- Sydney Quality of Life Office, School of Psychology, Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Cancer Care Research Unit (CCRU), Susan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Afaf Girgis
- South-West Sydney Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Ethan Basch
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
| | - Michael Jefford
- Department of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Australian Cancer Survivorship Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kost RG, Devine RK, Fernands M, Gottesman R, Kandpal M, MacArthur RB, O’Sullivan B, Romanick M, Ronning A, Schlesinger S, Tobin JN, Vaughan R, Neville-Williams M, Krueger JG, Coller BS. Building an infrastructure to support the development, conduct, and reporting of informative clinical studies: The Rockefeller University experience. J Clin Transl Sci 2023; 7:e104. [PMID: 37250985 PMCID: PMC10225266 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2023.521] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2023] [Accepted: 03/30/2023] [Indexed: 05/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Clinical trials are a vital component of translational science, providing crucial information on the efficacy and safety of new interventions and forming the basis for regulatory approval and/or clinical adoption. At the same time, they are complex to design, conduct, monitor, and report successfully. Concerns over the last two decades about the quality of the design and the lack of completion and reporting of clinical trials, characterized as a lack of "informativeness," highlighted by the experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, have led to several initiatives to address the serious shortcomings of the United States clinical research enterprise. Methods and Results Against this background, we detail the policies, procedures, and programs that we have developed in The Rockefeller University Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS), supported by a Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program grant since 2006, to support the development, conduct, and reporting of informative clinical studies. Conclusions We have focused on building a data-driven infrastructure to both assist individual investigators and bring translational science to each element of the clinical investigation process, with the goal of both generating new knowledge and accelerating the uptake of that knowledge into practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rhonda G. Kost
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Rita K. Devine
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Mark Fernands
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Riva Gottesman
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Manoj Kandpal
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Robert B. MacArthur
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Barbara O’Sullivan
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Michelle Romanick
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Andrea Ronning
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sarah Schlesinger
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Jonathan N. Tobin
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
- Clinical Directors Network, Inc. (CDN), New York, NY, USA
| | - Roger Vaughan
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Maija Neville-Williams
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - James G. Krueger
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Barry S. Coller
- Center for Clinical and Translational Science, Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Depla AL, Pluut B, Lamain-de Ruiter M, Kersten AW, Evers IM, Franx A, Bekker MN. PROMs and PREMs in routine perinatal care: mixed methods evaluation of their implementation into integrated obstetric care networks. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2023; 7:26. [PMID: 36894797 PMCID: PMC9998006 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-023-00568-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2022] [Accepted: 02/23/2023] [Indexed: 03/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the transition towards value-based healthcare, patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROM and PREM) are recommended by international collaborations and government programs to guide clinical practice and quality improvement. For many conditions, using PROM/PREM over the complete continuum of care requires implementation across care organizations and disciplines. Along PROM/PREM implementation in obstetric care networks (OCN), we aimed to evaluate implementation outcomes and the processes influencing these outcomes in the complex context of care networks across the continuum of perinatal care. METHODS Three OCN in the Netherlands implemented PROM/PREM in routine practice, using an internationally developed outcomes set with care professionals and patient advocates. Their aim was to use PROM/PREM results individually to guide patient-specific care decisions and at group-level to improve quality of care. The implementation process was designed following the principles of action research: iteratively planning implementation, action, data generation and reflection to refine subsequent actions, involving both researchers and care professionals. During the one-year implementation period in each OCN, implementation outcomes and processes were evaluated in this mixed-methods study. Data generation (including observation, surveys and focus groups) and analysis were guided by two theoretical implementation frameworks: the Normalization Process Theory and Proctor's taxonomy for implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings were supplemented with survey data to solidify findings in a broader group of care professionals. RESULTS Care professionals in OCN found the use of PROM/PREM acceptable and appropriate, recognized their benefits and felt facilitated in their patient-centered goals and vision. However, feasibility for daily practice was low, mainly due to IT issues and time constraints. Hence PROM/PREM implementation did not sustain, but strategies for future PROM/PREM implementation were formulated in all OCN. Processes contributing positively to implementation outcomes were internalization (understand the value) and initiation (driven by key-participants), whereas challenges in relational integration (maintain confidence) and reconfiguration (refine activities) affected implementation negatively. CONCLUSION Although implementation did not sustain, network-broad PROM/PREM use in clinic and quality improvement matched professionals' motivation. This study provides recommendations to implement PROM/PREM meaningfully in practice in ways that support professionals in their drive towards patient-centered care. In order for PROM/PREM to fulfill their potential for value-based healthcare, our work highlights the need for sustainable IT infrastructures, as well as an iterative approach to refine their complex implementation into local contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne L Depla
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Bettine Pluut
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marije Lamain-de Ruiter
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MC Sophia, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anna W Kersten
- Department of Public Health, Julius Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Inge M Evers
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - Arie Franx
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mireille N Bekker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
McCabe E, Rabi S, Bele S, Zwicker JD, Santana MJ. Factors affecting implementation of patient-reported outcome and experience measures in a pediatric health system. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2023; 7:24. [PMID: 36892738 PMCID: PMC9998780 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-023-00563-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2022] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 03/10/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in pediatric clinical practice can enhance clinical care and bring children and families' perspectives into evaluations of healthcare services. Implementing these measures is complex and requires a thorough assessment of the context of implementation The purpose of this study is to describe the barriers and facilitators to PROMs and PREMs implementation and to recommend strategies for implementing these measures in a pediatric health system. METHODS We used a qualitative descriptive approach to analyse data from interviews to understand the experiences of PROMs and PREMs users across different pediatric settings in a single Canadian healthcare system. RESULTS There were 23 participants representing a variety of roles within the healthcare system and pediatric populations. We found five main factors that affected implementation of PROMs and PREMs in pediatric settings: 1) Characteristics of PROMs and PREMs; 2) Individual's beliefs; 3) Administering PROMs and PREMs; 4) Designing clinical workflows; and 5) Incentives for using PROMs and PREMs. Thirteen recommendations for integrating PROMs and PREMs in pediatric health settings are provided. CONCLUSIONS Implementing and sustaining the use of PROMs and PREMs in pediatric health settings presents several challenges. The information presented will be useful for individuals who are planning or evaluating the implementation of PROMs and PREMs in pediatric settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erin McCabe
- School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. .,Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
| | - Sarah Rabi
- Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Sumedh Bele
- Patient Engagement Team, Alberta Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Support Unit, Calgary, Canada
| | - Jennifer D Zwicker
- School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
| | - Maria J Santana
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.,Patient Engagement Team, Alberta Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Support Unit, Calgary, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Girgis A, Bamgboje-Ayodele A, Rincones O, Vinod SK, Avery S, Descallar J, Smith A‘B, Arnold B, Arnold A, Bray V, Durcinoska I, Rankin NM, Chang CF, Eifler B, Elliott S, Hardy C, Ivimey B, Jansens W, Kaadan N, Koh ES, Livio N, Lozenkovski S, McErlean G, Nasser E, Ryan N, Smeal T, Thomas T, Tran T, Wiltshire J, Delaney GP. Stepping into the real world: a mixed-methods evaluation of the implementation of electronic patient reported outcomes in routine lung cancer care. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2022; 6:70. [PMID: 35723827 PMCID: PMC9207870 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-022-00475-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/06/2022] [Accepted: 06/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Background
To realize the broader benefits of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) in routine care, we used the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework to inform the translation of a clinically effective ePROM system (hereafter referred to as the PRM system) into practice. The study aimed to evaluate the processes and success of implementing the PRM system in the routine care of patients diagnosed with lung cancer.
Method
A controlled before-and-after mixed-methods study was undertaken. Data sources included a self-report questionnaire and interviews with healthcare providers, electronic health record data for PRMs patients and historical controls, and field notes. Descriptive statistics, logistic regression modelling, negative binomial models, generalized estimating equations and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Qualitative data was thematically analyzed.
Results
A total of 48/79 eligible people diagnosed with lung cancer completed 90 assessments during the 5-month implementation period (RE-AIM reach). Every assessment breached the pre-defined threshold and care coordinators reviewed and actioned 95.6% of breaches, resulting in 146 referrals to allied health services, most frequently for social work (25.3%), dietetics (18.5%), physiotherapy (18.5%) and occupational therapy (17.1%). PRMs patients had significantly fewer visits to the cancer assessment unit for problematic symptoms (M = 0.23 vs. M = 0.43; p = 0.035), and were significantly more likely to be offered referrals (71% vs. 29%, p < 0.0001) than historical controls (RE-AIM effect). The levels of ‘organizational readiness for implementing change’ (ORIC) did not show much differences between baseline and follow-up, though this was already high at baseline; but significantly more staff reported improved confidence when asking patients to complete assessments (64.7% at baseline vs. 88.2% at follow-up, p = 0.0046), and when describing the assessment tool to patients (64.7% at baseline vs. 76.47% at follow-up, p = 0.0018) (RE-AIM adoption). A total of 78 staff received PRM system training, and 95.6% of the PRM system alerts were actioned (RE-AIM implementation); and all lung cancer care coordinators were engaged with the PRM system beyond the end of the study period (RE-AIM maintenance).
Conclusion
This study demonstrates the potential of the PRM system in enhancing the routine care of lung cancer patients, through leveraging the capabilities of automated web-based care options.
Plain English summary
Research has shown the clear benefits of using electronically collected patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) for cancer patients and health services. However, we need to better understand how to implement ePROMs as part of routine care. This study evaluated the processes and outcomes of implementing an ePROMs system in the routine care of patients diagnosed with lung cancer. Key findings included: (a) a majority of eligible patients completed the scheduled assessments; (b) patient concerns were identified in every assessment, and care coordinators reviewed and actioned almost all of these, including making significantly more referrals to allied health services; (c) patients completing assessments regularly were less likely to present to the cancer assessment unit with problematic symptoms, suggesting that ePROMs identified patient concerns early and this led to a timely response to concerns; (d) staff training and engagement was high, and staff reporting increased confidence when asking patients to complete assessments and when describing the assessment tool to patients at the end of the implementation period. This study shows that implementing ePROMs in routine care is feasible and can lead to improvements in patient care.
Collapse
|
12
|
Anderson M, Pitchforth E, Vallance-Owen A, Mossialos E, Millner P, Fistein J. 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. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2022; 6:101. [PMID: 36138334 PMCID: PMC9500124 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-022-00511-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2022] [Accepted: 09/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
13
|
Parmar J, Sacrey LA, Anderson S, Charles L, Dobbs B, McGhan G, Shapkin K, Tian P, Triscott J. Facilitators, barriers and considerations for the implementation of healthcare innovation: A qualitative rapid systematic review. HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE IN THE COMMUNITY 2022; 30:856-868. [PMID: 34558143 DOI: 10.1111/hsc.13578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2021] [Revised: 09/08/2021] [Accepted: 09/10/2021] [Indexed: 06/13/2023]
Abstract
Family caregiving scholars recommend that health providers receive competency-based education to partner with and support family caregivers to care and to maintain their own health. While it may be relatively easy to develop competency-based education for healthcare providers, ensuring widespread uptake and spread and scale of healthcare education is critical to ensuring consistent person-centered support for all family caregivers (FCGs) throughout the care trajectory. The development of novel healthcare innovations requires implementation strategies for uptake and spread, with implementation involving the use of strategies to integrate a novel innovation into healthcare. Research suggests that there are many factors involved in successful implementation and a synthesis of potential factors is warranted. The purpose of this review is to provide an in-depth examination of facilitators, barriers and considerations for implementation of a novel healthcare innovation that will be used to develop an implementation plan for spread and scale of our competency-based education for health providers to learn about person-centered care for FCGs. A systematic review of published and grey literature was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA [Moher et al., 2015]) guidelines. The systematic review involved searching four databases for original research articles that described barriers, facilitators and/or other considerations when implementing innovations. Twenty-eight articles were included in the qualitative thematic analyses and described three areas of implementation research: barriers, facilitators and recommendations. There were major and parallel themes that emerged under facilitators and barriers. There were a wide variety of strategies that were identified as recommendations. The findings were synthesised into five considerations for implementation: Research and information sharing, intentional implementation planning, organisational underpinnings, creating the clinical context and facilitative training. This review provides an integrative overview of identified facilitators, barriers and recommendations for implementation that may aid in developing implementation strategies that can be tailored to the local context or innovation being implemented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasneet Parmar
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Edmonton Zone Home Living, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Lori Ann Sacrey
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Sharon Anderson
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Lesley Charles
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Bonnie Dobbs
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Gwen McGhan
- Faculty of Nursing, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | | | - Peter Tian
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| | - Jean Triscott
- Department of Family Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Boehnke JR, Rutherford C. Using feedback tools to enhance the quality and experience of care. Qual Life Res 2021; 30:3007-3013. [PMID: 34635961 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-021-03008-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jan R Boehnke
- School of Health Sciences, University of Dundee, City Campus, 11 Airlie Place, Dundee, DD1 4HJ, UK.
| | - Claudia Rutherford
- Faculty of Science, School of Psychology, Quality of Life Office, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.,Faculty of Medicine and Health, Susan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, Cancer Nursing Research Unit (CNRU), The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Tyack Z, Simons M, McPhail SM, Harvey G, Zappala T, Ware RS, Kimble RM. Improving the patient-centred care of children with life-altering skin conditions using feedback from electronic patient-reported outcome measures: protocol for a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study (PEDS-ePROM). BMJ Open 2021; 11:e041861. [PMID: 33837095 PMCID: PMC8043009 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-041861] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) with children have been described as 'giving a voice to the child'. Few studies have examined the routine use of these measures as potentially therapeutic interventions. This study aims to investigate: (1) the effectiveness of feedback using graphical displays of information from electronic PROMs (ePROMs) that target health-related quality of life, to improve health outcomes, referrals and treatment satisfaction and (2) the implementation of ePROMs and graphical displays by assessing acceptability, sustainability, cost, fidelity and context of the intervention and study processes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS A hybrid II effectiveness-implementation study will be conducted from February 2020 with children with life-altering skin conditions attending two outpatient clinics at a specialist paediatric children's hospital. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial and mixed methods process evaluation will be completed. Randomisation will occur at the child participant level. Children or parent proxies completing baseline ePROMs will be randomised to: (1) completion of ePROMs plus graphical displays of ePROM results to treating clinicians in consultations, versus (2) completion of ePROMs without graphical display of ePROM results. The primary outcome of the effectiveness trial will be overall health-related quality of life of children. Secondary outcomes will include other health-related quality of life outcomes (eg, child psychosocial and physical health, parent psychosocial health), referrals and treatment satisfaction. Trial data will be primarily analysed using linear mixed-effects models; and implementation data using inductive thematic analysis of interviews, meeting minutes, observational field notes and study communication mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION Ethical approval was obtained from Children's Health Queensland Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/2019/QCHQ/56290), The University of Queensland (2019002233) and Queensland University of Technology (1900000847). Dissemination will occur through stakeholder groups, scientific meetings and peer-reviewed publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12620000174987).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zephanie Tyack
- Centre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Child Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland, Australia
- Pegg Leditschke Children's Burns Centre, Children's Health Queensland, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Megan Simons
- Centre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Child Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland, Australia
- Department of Occupational Therapy, Queensland Children's Hospital, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Steven M McPhail
- Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
- Clinical Informatics Directorate, Metro South Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Gillian Harvey
- Adelaide Nursing School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Tania Zappala
- General Paediatrics and Dermatology Department, Queensland Children's Hospital, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Robert S Ware
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University - GC Campus, Southport, Queensland, Australia
| | - Roy M Kimble
- Centre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Child Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Saint Lucia, Queensland, Australia
- Pegg Leditschke Children's Burns Centre, Children's Health Queensland, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|