Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical settings to inform individual patient care. In-depth understanding of end-users' experiences may help identify factors that promote or hinder their use in clinical decision-making. We aimed to examine stakeholder perceptions of the utility of using PROMs in clinical practice based on real-life experience.

METHODS

Systematic review searching Medline, Embase and PsychINFO from inception to May 2021. Qualitative studies examining patients' and/or clinicians' experiences of using PROMs in clinical settings were included. Study screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative data from included studies was analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Of 2388 abstracts retrieved, 52 articles reporting 50 studies met eligibility. Five key benefits were identified: (1) promotes active patient involvement (enables goal setting and discussion of sensitive topics); (2) enhances the focus of consultations (prioritizes patient needs); (3) improves quality of care (enables tailored, holistic care and prompts action); (4) enables standardized monitoring of patient outcomes; and (5) enhances the patient-clinician relationship (provides reassurance). Perceived limitations included the capacity of PROMs to shift the focus of consultations; inaccurately estimate problems; raise unrealistic expectations for care; inhibit patient-clinician interaction; lack clinically meaningful information; and not be suitable for all patients.

CONCLUSION

Both patients and clinicians reported benefits of using PROMs across diverse health conditions and clinical settings, but also highlighted several limitations. These limitations shed some light on why PROM use may not always improve patient outcomes and provide considerations for the design and implementation of future PROM initiatives.

Association between attendance at a specialist palliative care day unit and improvement in patient symptoms and quality of life

BACKGROUND

Specialist palliative day care is an area of palliative care which has a notable scarcity of research. Evidence is needed on the role of palliative day care to improve patients' quality of life and symptom management, while recognising the different patient cohorts that use the service.

AIM

To determine the symptoms and quality of life of the patient cohort that are affected by the completion of a full therapeutic cycle (8 to 9 weeks) at a specialist palliative care day unit (SPCDU).

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study was carried out from January 2016 to December 2017. Patient related outcome measures (PROMs) were collected as part of routine clinical paperwork at admission and discharge, and these were used to determine symptoms and quality of life pre-attendance and on completion of an 8 to 9 week therapeutic cycle at the SPCDU.

RESULTS

Descriptive analysis demonstrated improvement across the many symptoms that were analysed. Quality of life analysis also established improvement. Statistically significant difference was achieved in several areas. Total physical symptoms (p value=.009) confirmed the positive impact attendance at SPCDU has on physical symptoms. Specific symptoms which displayed a statistically significant difference included: poor appetite (p value=.002), weakness (p value=.03) and the anxiety felt by family/friends (p value=.029). The quality of a patient's life also displayed statistically significant difference (p value=.000).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that attendance at a SPCDU may positively impact a patients' symptoms and quality of life. A more uniform national approach to specialist palliative day care delivery, alongside multi-setting research, may further bolster the image of palliative day care. This will improve referrals to and occupancy of SPDCUs and benefit the palliative patient in the community.

What Aspects of Quality of Life Are Important From Palliative Care Patients' Perspectives? A Systematic Review of Qualitative Research

CONTEXT

Despite the availability of numerous tools professing to measure quality of life (QOL) in the palliative care setting, no single instrument includes all patient-valued domains.

OBJECTIVES

To identify which aspects of QOL are important from palliative care patients' perspectives, aiding coverage, and content validity evaluation of available tools.

METHODS

A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. ASSIA, CINAHL, Cochrane library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched from database inception to December 31, 2015. Published, peer-reviewed, English-language articles reporting primary qualitative data investigating QOL domains in adults with a progressive, life-limiting illness were included. Studies a priori exploring a chosen aspect of QOL were not included. Articles scoring ≤2 on reporting quality were excluded. Framework synthesis was used to identify key themes across the studies.

RESULTS

Overall, 3589 articles were screened and 24 studies were included. Eight important aspects of QOL were identified: physical; personal autonomy; emotional; social; spiritual; cognitive; healthcare; and preparatory. All but one study discussed spiritual aspects, whereas only six studies mentioned cognitive aspects.

CONCLUSION

A broad range of domains are important to the QOL of people with life-limiting illnesses receiving palliation. Refinement of measures is needed to help ensure services address issues valued by patients such as preparation for death and aspects of health care provision, elements which are seldom included in currently available preference-based measures used to inform value for money decisions in palliative care.