Patient Reported Outcome and Experience Measures (PROMs and PREMs) in substance use disorder treatment services: A scoping review

Women and opioid use disorder treatment: A scoping review of experiences, use of patient-reported experience measures, and integration of person-centred care principles

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are an important aspect of assessing and improving women's experiences of person-centred care during treatment for Opioid Use Disorder (OUD). This scoping review aimed to 1) examine the extent, type, and characteristics of evidence regarding women's OUD treatment experiences, and 2) describe the extent to which PREMs and person-centred care principles are incorporated within research methods.

METHODS

Following Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), we conducted a scoping review to identify peer-reviewed articles on women's OUD treatment experiences. Data were extracted from 39 included studies and synthesised based on study design, method of assessment/analysis (including use of PREMs), key findings, and the integration of person-centred care principles.

RESULTS

Analysis of included studies revealed a predominance of qualitative research focused on women's experiences of pharmacological OUD treatment (methadone and/or buprenorphine) in Western countries. Women in these studies reported predominantly negative or mixed experiences of treatment. Few studies used validated PREMs and there was a lack of direct assessment or focus on recognised person-centred care principles. However, common categories of outcomes/findings identified in results across studies broadly aligned with person-centred care principles (e.g., fast access to reliable healthcare, effective treatment by trusted professionals), emphasising their applicability to women's experiences of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there has been an increased focus on women's experiences of treatment for OUD in recent years, results highlighted room for improvement regarding the systematic and comprehensive assessment of women's experiences across different contexts. Given the often negative or mixed experiences reported by women, an increased focus on assessing service provision through a person-centred care lens (including utilising PREMs) may allow for service improvements or adaptations targeted towards the needs and experiences of women.

An International, Multidisciplinary Consensus Set of Patient-Centered Outcome Measures for Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders

Background: In 1990, the United States' Institute of Medicine promoted the principles of outcomes monitoring in the alcohol and other drugs treatment field to improve the evidence synthesis and quality of research. While various national outcome measures have been developed and employed, no global consensus on standard measurement has been agreed for addiction. It is thus timely to build an international consensus. Convened by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), an international, multi-disciplinary working group reviewed the existing literature and reached consensus for a globally applicable minimum set of outcome measures for people who seek treatment for addiction. Methods: To this end, 26 addiction experts from 11 countries and 5 continents, including people with lived experience (n = 5; 19%), convened over 16 months (December 2018-March 2020) to develop recommendations for a minimum set of outcome measures. A structured, consensus-building, modified Delphi process was employed. Evidence-based proposals for the minimum set of measures were generated and discussed across eight videoconferences and in a subsequent structured online consultation. The resulting set was reviewed by 123 professionals and 34 people with lived experience internationally. Results: The final consensus-based recommendation includes alcohol, substance, and tobacco use disorders, as well as gambling and gaming disorders in people aged 12 years and older. Recommended outcome domains are frequency and quantity of addictive disorders, symptom burden, health-related quality of life, global functioning, psychosocial functioning, and overall physical and mental health and wellbeing. Standard case-mix (moderator) variables and measurement time points are also recommended. Conclusions: Use of consistent and meaningful outcome measurement facilitates carer-patient relations, shared decision-making, service improvement, benchmarking, and evidence synthesis for the evaluation of addiction treatment services and the dissemination of best practices. The consensus set of recommended outcomes is freely available for adoption in healthcare settings globally.

Addressing the need for Indigenous-specific PROMs and PREMS: A focus on methodology

PURPOSE

Differences in Indigenous worldviews, practices and values highlight the need for Indigenous-specific health quality indicators, such as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). The purpose of this paper is to present our methodology, as part of a larger study that sought to develop a framework for creating Indigenous-specific PROMs and PREMs.

METHODS

The research design was informed by Indigenous research methodology and a community-based participatory approach. It had three core components: (1) a literature exploration of existing Indigenous-specific PROMs and PREMs; (2) interviews with researchers with expertise in PROMs and PREMs developed for Indigenous populations and community leaders interested in using these Indigenous-informed evaluation tools; and (3) conversations with Indigenous community members about their experiences with health surveys. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim; transcripts were analyzed qualitatively using an inductive and deductive approach. Themes and sub-themes were identified to build a framework that honours Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing. Results were validated with select research participants and the Project Advisory Committee.

RESULTS

Findings demonstrate how relationship building is the necessary starting point for engagement when developing survey instruments with Indigenous peoples. Engagement requires respectful collaboration through all stages of the project from determining what questions are asked to how the information will be collected, interpreted, and managed. A relational stance requires responsibility to Indigenous communities and peoples that goes beyond research carried out using a western scientific lens. It means ensuring that the project is beneficial to the community and framing questions based on Indigenous knowledge, worldviews, and community involvement.

CONCLUSIONS

This study employed a collaborative, participatory qualitative approach to develop a framework for creating PROMs and PREMs with Indigenous peoples. The methods described offer concrete examples of strategies that can be employed to support relationship-building and collaboration when developing Indigenous-specific survey instruments.