Feasibility of collecting retrospective patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in emergency hospital admissions

Usability of an Automated System for Real-Time Monitoring of Shared Decision-Making for Surgery: Mixed Methods Evaluation

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.

Feasibility of PROMIS using computerized adaptive testing during inpatient rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

There has been an increased significance on patient-reported outcomes in clinical settings. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of administering patient-reported outcome measures by computerized adaptive testing (CAT) using a tablet computer with rehabilitation inpatients, assess workload demands on staff, and estimate the extent to which rehabilitation inpatients have elevated T-scores on six Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures.

METHODS

Patients (N = 108) with stroke, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, and other neurological disorders participated in this study. PROMIS computerized adaptive tests (CAT) were administered via a web-based platform. Summary scores were calculated for six measures: Pain Interference, Sleep Disruption, Anxiety, Depression, Illness Impact Positive, and Illness Impact Negative. We calculated the percent of patients with T-scores equivalent to 2 standard deviations or greater above the mean.

RESULTS

During the first phase, we collected data from 19 of 49 patients; of the remainder, 61% were not available or had cognitive or expressive language impairments. In the second phase of the study, 40 of 59 patients participated to complete the assessment. The mean PROMIS T-scores were in the low 50 s, indicating an average symptom level, but 19-31% of patients had elevated T-scores where the patients needed clinical action.

CONCLUSIONS

The study demonstrated that PROMIS assessment using a CAT administration during an inpatient rehabilitation setting is feasible with the presence of a research staff member to complete PROMIS assessment.

Changes in health status and health related quality of life from six months to five years in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors - A NORCAST sub study

BACKGROUND

Brain injury in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) survivors affects health status and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). It is unknown how HRQoL evolves over time, and assessments at different time points may lead to different results.

METHODS

In a NORCAST sub study, OHCA survivors eligible for health status (EQ-5D-3L) and HRQoL (SF-36) assessments were examinated six months and five years after OHCA. At five-year follow-up, survivors also retrospectively assessed their health status for each consecutive year following OHCA. The next of kin independently assessed health status and HRQoL of their respective OHCA survivors.

RESULTS

Among 138 survivors alive after six months and 117 after five years, 80 (88% male) completed both follow-ups. Health status and HRQoL remained stable over time, except for increasing SF-36 mental summary score and decreasing physical functioning and physical component score. Anxiety and depression levels were generally low, although younger survivors stated more anxiety than older survivors. Retrospective assessment showed reduced health status for the first two years, which increased only from the third year. Explorative analyses revealed that younger age, longer time to return of spontaneous circulation (tROSC) and late awakening affected health status, particularly in the first two years post-arrest.

CONCLUSIONS

OHCA survivors showed stable health status and HRQoL with only minor differences between six months and five years. Younger survivors with long tROSC, late awakening, and more anxiety and depression symptoms at six months, had reduced health status the first two years with significant improvements towards the fourth year.

Value in acute care surgery, part 2: Defining and measuring quality outcomes

ABSTRACT

The prior article in this series delved into measuring cost in acute care surgery, and this subsequent work explains in detail how quality is measured. Specifically, objective quality is based on outcome measures, both from administrative and clinical registry databases from a multitude of sources. Risk stratification is key in comparing similar populations across diseases and procedures. Importantly, a move toward focusing on subjective outcomes like patient-reported outcomes measures and financial well-being are vital to evolving surgical quality measures for the 21st century.

Patient Judgement of Change with Elective Surgery Correlates with Patient Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life

Obtaining pre-surgery PROM measures is not always feasible. The aim of this study was to examine if self-reports of change following elective surgery correlate with change scores from a validated PROM (15-item Quality of Recovery (QoR-15)). This cross-sectional study across 29 hospitals enrolled elective surgery patients. PROMs were collected one-week pre-surgery, as well as one- and four-weeks post-surgery via an electronic survey. We examined associations between patient “judgement of change” at one and four-weeks after surgery and the actual pre-to post-surgery PROM change scores. A total of 4177 surveys were received. The correlation between patient judgement of change, and the actual change score was moderately strong at one-week (n = 247, rs = 0.512, p < 0.001), yet low at four-weeks (n = 241, rs = 0.340, p < 0.001). Patient judgement was aligned to the direction of the PROM change score from pre- to post-surgery. We also examined the correlation between the QoR-15 (quality of recovery) and the EQ-5D-5L (QOL). There was a moderately strong positive correlation between the two PROMs (n = 356, rs = 0.666, p < 0.001), indicating that change in quality of recovery was related to change in QOL. These findings support the use of a single “judgement of change” recall question post-surgery.

Emergency Laparotomy Follow-Up Study (ELFUS): prospective feasibility investigation into postoperative complications and quality of life using patient-reported outcome measures up to a year after emergency laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Emergency laparotomy carries a significant risk profile around the time of surgery. This research aimed to establish the feasibility of recruitment to a study using validated scoring tools to assess complications after surgery; and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess quality of life and quality of recovery up to a year following emergency laparotomy (EL).

METHODS

We used our local National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) register to identify potential participants at a single NHS centre in England. Complications were assessed at 5, 10 and 30 days after EL. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery using EQ5D and WHODAS 2.0 questionnaires.

RESULTS

Seventy of 129 consecutive patients (54%) agreed to take part in the study. Post-operative morbidity survey data was recorded from 63 and 37 patients at postoperative day 5 and day 10. Accordion Complication Severity Grading data was obtained from 70 patients. Patient-reported outcome measures were obtained from patients at baseline and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery from 70, 59, 51, 48, to 42 patients (100%, 87%, 77%, 75% and 69% of survivors), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study affirms the feasibility of collecting PROMs and morbidity data successfully at various time points following emergency laparotomy, and is the first longitudinal study to describe quality of life up to a year after surgery. This finding is important in the design of a larger observational study into quality of life and recovery after EL.

Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?

INTRODUCTION

The use of PROs for assessing the outcomes of emergency hospital admissions requires a means of estimating patients' pre-admission health status. A possible alternative to asking patients to recall how their health was before the incident causing admission is to use estimates derived from matched samples from population surveys. Our aims were to explore the impact of different methods of matching and to compare the results with estimates based on retrospective reporting.

METHODS

First, elective hip arthroplasty patients were matched to respondents to the General Practice Patient Survey using age, sex, socio-economic status and number of comorbidities. The impact of restricting matching for locality and specific co-morbidities was explored. Second, the best matching method was applied to emergency admissions for laparotomy and for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after acute myocardial infarction. Data were stratified by patient characteristics. Differences in mean EQ-5D scores between the patients and matched population respondents were tested using t tests.

RESULTS

Modifying the most basic form of matching by also taking locality and the specific comorbid conditions into account made no significant difference to the mean EQ-5D score for hip arthroplasty patients. Even using the most detailed matching possible, patients' mean EQ-5D score was significantly different to that of the general population for all three cohorts. The difference was greatest for elective hip arthroplasty (0.22 v 0.64), less so for emergency laparotomy (0.56 v 0.72) and least for PCI (0.79 v 0.71). This reflects hip arthroplasty patients having a long-standing condition characterised by pain and limited mobility, whereas the other two cohorts may have enjoyed reasonable health until an unexpected acute episode led to their emergency admission.

CONCLUSION

Routine PRO data acquired from population surveys cannot be used as an accurate alternative to retrospectively reported PROMs by patients during their emergency admission episode.

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Introduction

Routine measurement of the outcome of myocardial infarction is usually limited to immediate morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to determine the response to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 3 months later, identify response bias and explore the feasibility of comparing outcome with their recalled view of their prior health state.

Methods

Patients admitted with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to five percutaneous coronary intervention centres were invited to complete a retrospective questionnaire containing the EQ-5D-3L and short form Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7). Response rate for a 3-month mailed follow-up questionnaire and potential response biases were assessed. Patients' outcomes were compared with their baseline using χ2 and paired t-test to assess for differences.

Results

Of 392 patients contacted, 260 (66.3%) responded. Responders were more likely to be older, female, more affluent and have a higher EQ-5D at baseline. Three months after surgery, patients' SAQ-7 and angina symptom subscale returned to their baseline score. The physical limitation subscale score was worse than at baseline (79.9 vs 73.2, p=0.002), whereas the quality-of-life subscale was better (66.6 vs 73.9; p<0.001). The EQ-5D-3L index score was similar at 3 months to baseline (0.82 vs 0.79). Evidence of bias arising from responders being in better general health at baseline needs further investigation and, if confirmed, needs to be taken into account in interpreting PROMs data.

Conclusion

It is feasible to use PROMs routinely to assess the impact of emergency admissions of patients with STEMI. A larger demonstration project with more sites is needed to confirm these findings.

Feasibility of collecting and assessing patient-reported outcomes for emergency admissions: laparotomy for gastrointestinal conditions

INTRODUCTION

Audit of emergency surgery is usually limited to immediate clinical outcomes relating to outcomes during the acute hospital episode with little attempt to capture patients' views of their longer-term outcomes. Our aim was to determine the response rate to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients who underwent an emergency laparotomy for gastrointestinal conditions, identify response bias and explore the feasibility of comparing outcomes with their prior health based on their recalled view collected during their admission.

METHODS

Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy in 11 hospitals were recruited to complete a retrospective questionnaire containing the EQ-5D-3L and Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI). Response rate for 3-month mailed follow-up questionnaire and potential response biases were assessed. Patients' outcomes were compared with their baseline using χ2 and paired t-test to assess for differences.

RESULTS

Of 255 patients contacted at 3 months, 190 (74.1%) responded. Responders were more likely to be older, female and more affluent. Patients' health improved significantly as regards the GIQLI (93.3 vs 97.9; p=0.048) and the subscale on symptoms (51.9 vs 59.6; p<0.001). No significant change in subscales on emotion or physical aspects or for overall health status (EQ-5D: 0.58 vs 0.64; p=0.06). According to the social subscale, patients had deteriorated (11.0 vs 9.8; p<0.0006). Differences in change scores by patient characteristics were slight, suggesting minimal response bias.

CONCLUSION

This approach offers the opportunity for assessing the impact of treatment, from the patient's perspective and the potential to evaluate emergency laparotomy care using PROMs.