Electronic forms for patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an effective, time-efficient, and cost-minimizing alternative to paper forms

Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of electronic collection and use of patient-reported measures in routine care of older adults: a systematic review with qualitative evidence synthesis

Objective

The aims of this systematic review were to (1) synthesize the available qualitative evidence on the barriers and facilitators influencing implementation of the electronic collection and use of patient-reported measures (PRMs) in older adults' care from various stakeholder perspectives and (2) map these factors to the digital technology implementation framework Non-adoption, Abandonment, challenges to the Scale-up, Spread, Sustainability (NASSS) and behavior change framework Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B).

Materials and Methods

A search of MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, and Web of Science databases from 1 January 2001 to 27 October 2021 was conducted and included English language qualitative studies exploring stakeholder perspectives on the electronic collection and use of PRMs in older adults' care. Two authors independently screened studies, conducted data extraction, quality appraisal using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP), data coding, assessed confidence in review findings using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE CERQual), and mapped the findings to NASSS and COM-B. An inductive approach was used to synthesize findings describing the stakeholder perspectives of barriers and facilitators.

Results

Twenty-two studies were included from the 3368 records identified. Studies explored older adult, caregiver, healthcare professional, and administrative staff perspectives. Twenty nine of 34 review findings (85%) were graded as having high or moderate confidence. Key factors salient to older adults related to clinical conditions and socio-cultural factors, digital literacy, access to digital technology, and user interface. Factors salient to healthcare professionals related to resource availability to collect and use PRMs, and value of PRMs collection and use.

Conclusion

Future efforts to implement electronic collection and use of PRMs in older adults' care should consider addressing the barriers, facilitators, and key theoretical domains identified in this review. Older adults are more likely to adopt electronic completion of PRMs when barriers associated with digital technology access, digital literacy, and user interface are addressed. Future research should explore the perspectives of other stakeholders, including those of organizational leaders, digital technology developers and implementation specialists, in various healthcare settings and explore factors influencing implementation of PREMs.

PROSPERO registration number

CRD42022295894.

The impact of electronic versus paper-based data capture on data collection logistics and on missing scores in thyroid cancer patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the type of data capture on the time and help needed for collecting patient-reported outcomes as well as on the proportion of missing scores.

METHODS

In a multinational prospective study, thyroid cancer patients from 17 countries completed a validated questionnaire measuring quality of life. Electronic data capture was compared to the paper-based approach using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 437 patients were included, of whom 13% used electronic data capture. The relation between data capture and time needed was modified by the emotional functioning of the patients. Those with clinical impairments in that respect needed more time to complete the questionnaire when they used electronic data capture compared to paper and pencil (ORadj 24.0; p = 0.006). This was not the case when patients had sub-threshold emotional problems (ORadj 1.9; p = 0.48). The odds of having the researcher reading the questions out (instead of the patient doing this themselves) (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) and of needing any help (ORadj 0.1; p = 0.01) were lower when electronic data capture was used. The proportion of missing scores was equivalent in both groups (ORadj 0.4, p = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of electronic data capture, such as real-time assessment and fewer data entry errors, may come at the price of more time required for data collection when the patients have mental health problems. As this is not uncommon in thyroid cancer, researchers need to choose the type of data capture wisely for their particular research question.

A Randomized Clinical Trial: Patient Satisfaction of Paper Versus Electronic Provider Feedback

IMPORTANCE

Minimal data compare patient satisfaction with completing paper versus electronic evaluations.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare patient satisfaction with completing paper versus electronic evaluations. Secondary objectives were assessing age, education, and socioeconomic status with comfort with technology; preference for evaluation type; and timeliness of completing evaluations.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a single-center randomized trial comparing paper versus electronic patient evaluations of health care providers. Study participation occurred at the end of clinic visits.

RESULTS

Among 145 participants, 73 (50.3%) were analyzed as paper versus 72 (49.7%) as electronic. Groups were similar in age, race, education level, income, insurance type, technology comfort, and technology use. Groups were similar in finding ease (P = 0.99) and satisfaction (P = 0.76) with their randomized method. For participants randomized to paper, 34% preferred paper, 25% preferred electronic, and 41% had no preference. Electronic feedback took longer to complete (4.5 minutes vs 3.4 minutes, P < 0.001). Older participants took longer to complete the evaluation (4.5 minutes vs 3.2 minutes, P < 0.001), had less internet use (P = 0.01), and were less likely to own a computer (P = 0.03) than younger participants. There were differences by education level for comfort with technology (P = 0.007) and internet use (P = 0.016). There were no differences in ease of feedback completion or satisfaction when comparing age, education status, or income status.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients were satisfied with paper and electronic health care provider evaluations, regardless of age or other demographics. Evaluations were completed quickly during visits. Requesting feedback from patients via multiple modalities is feasible in a varied patient population.

Exploring patient perspectives on electronic patient-reported outcome measures in home-based cancer palliative care: A qualitative study

Background

Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROMs) enhance symptom management and patients' engagement in palliative cancer care. However, integrating them into this setting brings challenges, including patients' familiarity with technological devices and declining health status. Prioritizing the patient's acceptability and feasibility is crucial for their adoption. However, more knowledge is needed about patients' perspectives on the adoption of ePROMs in the community, especially for home-based palliative care.

Aim

Explore patient viewpoints on utilizing ePROMs for symptom reporting in home-based oncology palliative care.

Design

A qualitative interpretative approach was used to evaluate patients' points of view on using ePROMs in this specific care setting. Semistructured interviews were carried out. Data were analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis.

Setting/participants

A total of 25 patients receiving oncological home palliative care from the advanced palliative care unit of the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori in Milan, Italy, were invited to participate. Twenty interviews were conducted, as five patients declined due to deteriorating health.

Results

Four themes were identified: (1) strategic value of ePROMs and subjective appreciation; (2) enhancing patient centeredness through ePROMs; (3) exploring and addressing concerns about the use of ePROMs and (4) intersecting factors influencing the efficacy of ePROMs.

Conclusion

Despite initial reticence, home palliative care patients consider ePROMs as potentially valuable allies monitoring symptoms, enhancing their quality of life, and amplifying their voices on less explored aspects of care. Continuous dialog between healthcare professionals and patients is crucial for addressing patient skepticism about ePROMs and their impact on the human aspect of care.

Barriers and facilitators of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (e-PROMs) for patients in home palliative cancer care: a qualitative study of healthcare professionals' perceptions

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes in palliative care enable early monitoring and management of symptoms that most impact patients' daily lives; however, there are several barriers to adopting electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures (e-PROMs) in daily practice. This study explored the experiences of health care professionals (HCPs) regarding potential barriers and facilitators in implementing e-PROMs in palliative cancer care at home.

METHODS

This was a qualitative descriptive study. The data were collected from two focus groups structured according to the conceptual framework of Grol. HCPs involved in home palliative cancer care of Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori of Milan were enrolled. Data were analyzed using a reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 245 codes were generated, 171 for the first focus group and 74 for the second focus group. The results were subdivided into subthemes according to Grol's themes: Innovation, Individual professional, Patient, Social context, Organizational context, except Economic Political context. Nine HCPs attended the first focus group, and ten attended the second. According to these participants, e-PROMs could be integrated into clinical practice after adequate training and support of HCPs at all stages of implementation. They identified barriers, especially in the social and organizational contexts, due to the uniqueness of the oncological end-of-life setting and the intangible care interventions, as well as many facilitators for the innovation that these tools bring and for improved communication with the patient and the healthcare team.

CONCLUSIONS

e-PROMs are perceived by HCPs as adding value to patient care and their work; however, barriers remain especially related to the fragility of these patients, the adequacy of technological systems, lack of education, and the risk of low humanization of care.

Validation of the Spanish electronic version of the BREAST-Q questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have gained considerable interest in health care moving beyond traditional outcome measures of morbidity and mortality. In breast cancer surgery, women's' perceptions of appearance, function and quality of life have become increasingly important. The BREAST-Q questionnaire is a validated PROM for use in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to validate the Spanish electronic version of the BREAST-Q questionnaire, to verify the measurement equivalence of digital and paper versions and to identify the possible disadvantages and advantages of implementing this new tool.

METHODS

The study population included 113 patients undergoing breast cancer survey at a single hospital in Barcelona (Spain) who were able to complete both the electronic and paper versions of the preoperative module of the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

RESULTS

The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) in the four domains of the questionnaire between the two versions of the questionnaire was >0.9, with a weighted kappa of >0.74 at item level. The reliability of the internal consistency was also excellent, with Cronbach's alpha coefficient of >0.70 in all domains. Age was a limiting factor for the delivery of the electronic version of BREAST-Q, with 69 years of age as the cut-off point to obtain reliable results.

CONCLUSIONS

The interchangeability of the electronic and paper versions of the BREAST-Q questionnaire facilitates implementation of this instrument in routine surgical oncological practice.

Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Person-centred outcome measures (PCOMs) are commonly used in routine adult healthcare to measure and improve outcomes, but less attention has been paid to PCOMs in children's services. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and synthesise existing evidence of the determinants, strategies, and mechanisms that influence the implementation of PCOMs into paediatric healthcare practice.

METHODS

The review was conducted and reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Databased searched included CINAHL, Embase, Medline, and PsycInfo. Google scholar was also searched for grey literature on 25^th March 2022. Studies were included if the setting was a children's healthcare service, investigating the implementation or use of an outcome measure or screening tool in healthcare practice, and reported outcomes relating to use of a measure. Data were tabulated and thematically analysed through deductive coding to the constructs of the adapted-Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results were presented as a narrative synthesis, and a logic model developed.

RESULTS

We retained 69 studies, conducted across primary (n = 14), secondary (n = 13), tertiary (n = 37), and community (n = 8) healthcare settings, including both child self-report (n = 46) and parent-proxy (n = 47) measures. The most frequently reported barriers to measure implementation included staff lack of knowledge about how the measure may improve care and outcomes; the complexity of using and implementing the measure; and a lack of resources to support implementation and its continued use including funding and staff. The most frequently reported facilitators of implementation and continued use include educating and training staff and families on: how to implement and use the measure; the advantages of using PCOMs over current practice; and the benefit their use has on patient care and outcomes. The resulting logic model presents the mechanisms through which strategies can reduce the barriers to implementation and support the use of PCOMs in practice.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings can be used to support the development of context-specific implementation plans through a combination of existing strategies. This will enable the implementation of PCOMs into routine paediatric healthcare practice to empower settings to better identify and improve child-centred outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero CRD 42022330013.

Digitalising patient reported outcome collection tools in orthopaedic trauma-A scoping review

AIMS

The aim of this study was to provide a scoping review to the role of digital technology in the collection of orthopaedic trauma related patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O'Malley frameworks were followed. A search strategy identified relevant literature, with the identified criteria screened for acceptability for inclusion. Data was extracted to form a descriptive analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies met the criteria for inclusion. All were quantitative, the majority were published in the United States of America and the use of iPads was the commonest form of digital technology used. Heterogeneity existed in the type of outcomes collected between studies. All studies aimed to compare traditional methods of PROMs collection to digital methods, with an overall thematic summary suggestive of the positive impact of electronic methods of collecting patient reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This paper has demonstrated the dearth of ePROM implementation in the orthopaedic trauma setting, however its use has proved successful and therefore further evidence is needed to demonstrate its effectiveness. Furthermore, the types of PROMs in orthopaedic trauma varies significantly, and efforts to standardise the type of digital trauma PROMs used are recommended.

Feasibility of using a patient-reported outcome measure into clinical practice following pediatric liver transplantation: The Starzl Network experience

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are not routinely used in clinical care by pediatric liver transplant (LT) teams. The Starzl Network for Excellence in Pediatric Transplantation (SNEPT) assessed feasibility of using a disease-specific Quality of Life (QoL) questionnaire in the ambulatory setting at 10 SNEPT sites.

METHODS

A mixed methods feasibility project assessing administration processes, barriers, and user experiences with the Pediatric Liver Transplant Quality of Life (PeLTQL) tool. Iterative processes sought stakeholder feedback across four phases (Pilot, Extended Pilot, Development of a Mobile App PeLTQL version, and Pilot App use).

RESULTS

A total of 149 patient-parent dyads completed the PeLTQL during LT clinic follow-up. Clinicians, parents, and patients evaluated and reported on feasibility of operationalization. Only two of 10 SNEPT sites continued PeLTQL administration after the initial two pilot phases. Reasons include limited clinical time and available personnel aggravated by the COVID-19 pandemic. In response, a mobile application version of the PeLTQL was initiated. Providing PeLTQL responses electronically was "very easy" or "easy" as reported by 96% (22/23) parents.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of a PROM into post-pediatric LT clinical care was feasible, but ongoing utilization stalled. Use of a mobile app towards facilitating completion of the PeLTQL outside of clinic hours may address the time and work-flow barriers identified.

Equivalence of Paper and Electronic-Based Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Children: A Systematic Review

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) exist for a variety of chronic gastrointestinal disorders in children. The availability of electronic (e-)formats of PROMs enhance the accessibility of these tools. The International Society for Pharmacoeconomic and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) defines measurement equivalence (ME) as "comparability of the psychometric properties of data" obtained from the administration of original and adapted versions of PROMs. Consideration of proxy PROM versions is unique to pediatrics and must be included in ME evaluations. We conducted a systematic review (SR) of the literature evaluating ME of e-versions adapted from pediatric paper-based PROMs. A literature search was conducted through Medline, Embase, APA PsychInfo, and the Cochrane Library. Titles, abstracts, and manuscripts were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers. The search yielded 19 studies meeting pre-defined criteria. Just over half (52.6%) of 19 PROMs were disease-specific ones. ME between paper- and e-PROM versions was reported as present in all 19 studies evaluating 5653 participants under the age of 18 years. However, only 6 (31.6%) studies evaluated ME in proxy reported e-versions. Despite the use of PROMs for children with a variety of chronic gastrointestinal disorders, only 1 study evaluated a PROM in this population (IMPACT III for inflammatory bowel disease). Findings from this SR highlight strategic opportunities for the pediatric gastroenterologist to broaden the clinical and research armamentarium to include e-PROMs.

Moving from development to implementation of digital innovations within the NHS: myHealthE, a remote monitoring system for tracking patient outcomes in child and adolescent mental health services

Objective

This paper aims to report our experience of developing, implementing, and evaluating myHealthE (MHE), a digital innovation for Child and Adolescents Mental Health Services (CAMHS), which automates the remote collection and reporting of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into National Health Services (NHS) electronic healthcare records.

Methods

We describe the logistical and governance issues encountered in developing the MHE interface with patient-identifiable information, and the steps taken to overcome these development barriers. We describe the application's architecture and hosting environment to enable its operability within the NHS, as well as the capabilities needed within the technical team to bridge the gap between academic development and NHS operational teams.

Results

We present evidence on the feasibility and acceptability of this system within clinical services and the process of iterative development, highlighting additional functions that were incorporated to increase system utility.

Conclusion

This article provides a framework with which to plan, develop, and implement automated PROM collection from remote devices back to NHS infrastructure. The challenges and solutions described in this paper will be pertinent to other digital health innovation researchers aspiring to deploy interoperable systems within NHS clinical systems.

Electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PROMs) in palliative cancer care: a scoping review

Background

In palliative oncology settings, electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment can play an important role in supporting clinical activities for clinicians and patients. This scoping review aims to map the technological innovation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (e-PROMs) in cancer palliative care and how PRO data collected through e-PROMs can influence the monitoring and management of symptoms and enable better communication between health professionals and patients.

Methods

A scoping review study was designed according to the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, SCOPUS, PsycINFO and CINAHL and gray literature sources were consulted. The inclusion criteria were people over 18 years old receiving palliative and/or end-of-life care using e-PROMs.

Results

Thirteen primary studies were included: nine quantitative studies, two qualitative studies, and two mixed-method studies. The recently developed software that supports e-PROMs allows patients to receive feedback on their symptoms, helps clinicians prioritize care needs and monitors patients’ conditions as their symptoms change. Electronic PRO data prompt difficult, end-of-life communication between clinicians and patients to better organize care in the last phase of life.

Conclusion

This work shows that electronic PRO data assessment provides valuable tools for patients’ well-being and the management of symptoms; only one study reported conflicting results. However, with studies lacking on how clinicians can use these tools to improve communication with patients, more research is needed.

Evaluation of Electronic and Pen-and-Paper Formats of the Inventory of Physical Activity Barriers: A Randomized Crossover Study

BACKGROUND

The Inventory of Physical Activity Barriers (IPAB) assesses physical activity participation barriers. Development, refinement, and psychometric evaluation of the IPAB occurred via an electronic format. However, various circumstances may require using a pen-and-paper format. As instrument formats are not always interchangeable, the authors aimed to establish whether 2 different formats (electronic and pen and paper) can be used interchangeably for the IPAB.

METHODS

This randomized crossover study included 66 community-dwelling adults aged 50 years and older (mean age = 73 [SD = 7.6]). Half the sample completed the electronic format of the IPAB first and the pen-and-paper format second, and the other half completed them in reverse order. Tests of equivalence and a Bland-Altman plot were performed.

RESULTS

The intraclass correlation coefficient between formats was .94, and kappa was .68. The mean difference between the 2 administration forms of the IPAB was 0.002 (P = .96). Both administration formats had high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = .92 and .93) and illustrated construct validity (P ≤ .001 for both administration formats).

CONCLUSION

Pen-and-paper and electronic formats of the IPAB are equivalent and, thus, can be used interchangeably among non-Hispanic whites who are highly educated. The format should be used consistently if completing preintervention and postintervention evaluations or comparing scores.