1
|
Choucair K, Corrigan M, O'Sullivan A, Barber S, Stankiewicz L, Henn P, Dennehy O, Kayyal MY, Tan YY, Fadahunsi KP, O'Donoghue J. Acceptability, Perceptions, and Experiences Regarding Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study. JMIR Res Protoc 2024; 13:e57344. [PMID: 39159444 PMCID: PMC11369529 DOI: 10.2196/57344] [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: 02/13/2024] [Revised: 06/19/2024] [Accepted: 07/09/2024] [Indexed: 08/21/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can be defined as any report of a patient's health taken directly from the patient. Routine collection of PRO data has been shown to offer potential benefits to patient-doctor communication. Electronic forms of PRO measures (PROMs) could be more beneficial in comparison to traditional PROMs in obtaining PROs from patients. However, it is currently unclear whether the routine collection of electronic PRO data could result in better outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). OBJECTIVE This study aims to explore the perspectives of patients and surgeons on the use of electronic PROMs. Based on prior research, technical skill and experience level of the surgeon, long-term quality of life, patient involvement in decision-making, communication skills of the surgeon, cleanliness of the ward environment, and standards of nursing care are identified to be the most important factors for the patients. METHODS This is a mixed methods prospective study that will collect both quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interview) data. The study has two components. The first involves the distribution of an electronic presurvey to patients who received elective LC within 48 hours of their surgery (n=80). This survey will explore the perspective of patients regarding the procedure, hospital experience, long-term outcomes, and the perceived value of using PROMs. These patients will then be followed up after 1 year and given another survey. The second component involves the distribution of the same survey and the completion of structured interviews with general surgeons (n=10). The survey will ascertain what PROs from the participants are most useful for the surgeons and the interviews will focus on how the surgeons view routine PRO collection. A convenience sampling approach will be used. Surveys will be distributed through Qualtrics and interviews will be completed on Microsoft Teams. RESULTS Data collection began on February 14, 2023. As of February 12, 2024, 71 of 80 recruited patients have been given the presurvey. The follow-up with the patients and the general surgeon components of the study have not begun. The expected completion date of this study is in April 2025. CONCLUSIONS Overall, this study will investigate the potential of electronic PRO collection to offer value for patients and general surgeons. This approach will ensure that patient care is investigated in a multifaceted way, offering patient-centric guidance to surgeons in their approach to care. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/57344.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kareem Choucair
- School of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
- Assert Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
- Malawi eHealth Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
| | | | | | - Sean Barber
- Cork University Hospital, Cork City, Ireland
| | | | - Patrick Henn
- Assert Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
| | | | - Mohd Yasser Kayyal
- School of Medicine, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
- Cork University Hospital, Cork City, Ireland
| | - Yong Yu Tan
- Cork University Hospital, Cork City, Ireland
| | - Kayode Philip Fadahunsi
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - John O'Donoghue
- Assert Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
- Malawi eHealth Research Centre, University College Cork, Cork City, Ireland
- Business Information Systems, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kalenderian E, Tungare S, Mehta U, Hamid S, Mungia R, Yansane AI, Holmes D, Funkhouser K, Ibarra-Noriega AM, Urata J, Rindal DB, Spallek H, White J, Walji MF. Patient and dentist perspectives on collecting patient reported outcomes after painful dental procedures in the National Dental PBRN. BMC Oral Health 2024; 24:201. [PMID: 38326805 PMCID: PMC10848340 DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-03931-5] [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: 08/29/2023] [Accepted: 01/24/2024] [Indexed: 02/09/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dental Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) relate to a dental patient's subjective experience of their oral health. How practitioners and patients value PROs influences their successful use in practice. METHODS Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 practitioners and 32 patients who provided feedback on using a mobile health (mHealth) platform to collect the pain experience after dental procedures. A themes analysis was conducted to identify implementation barriers and facilitators. RESULTS Five themes were uncovered: (1) Sense of Better Care. (2) Tailored Follow-up based on the dental procedure and patient's pain experience. (3) Effective Messaging and Alerts. (4) Usable Digital Platform. (5) Routine mHealth Integration. CONCLUSION Frequent automated and preferably tailored follow-up messages using an mHealth platform provided a positive care experience for patients, while providers felt it saved them time and effort. Patients thought that the mHealth questionnaires were well-developed and of appropriate length. The mHealth platform itself was perceived as user-friendly by users, and most would like to continue using it. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS Patients are prepared to use mobile phones to report their pain experience after dental procedures. Practitioners will be able to close the post-operative communication gap with their patients, with little interruption of their workflow.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elsbeth Kalenderian
- Marquette University, School of Dentistry, Milwaukee, WI, USA
- University of California San Francisco, School of Dentistry, 600 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, USA
- University of Pretoria, School of Dentistry, Pretoria, South Africa
| | - Sayali Tungare
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, 7500 Cambridge St. room 4160, Houston, TX, TX 77054, USA
| | - Urvi Mehta
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, 7500 Cambridge St. room 4160, Houston, TX, TX 77054, USA
| | - Sharmeen Hamid
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, 7500 Cambridge St. room 4160, Houston, TX, TX 77054, USA
| | - Rahma Mungia
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Alfa-Ibrahim Yansane
- University of California San Francisco, School of Dentistry, 600 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Kim Funkhouser
- Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, 3800 N. Interstate Avenue, Portland, OR, 97227-1098, USA
| | - Ana M Ibarra-Noriega
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, 7500 Cambridge St. room 4160, Houston, TX, TX 77054, USA
| | - Janelle Urata
- University of California San Francisco, School of Dentistry, 600 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Heiko Spallek
- University of Sydney, School of Dentistry, Sydney, Australia
| | - Joel White
- University of California San Francisco, School of Dentistry, 600 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Muhammad F Walji
- UTHealth School of Dentistry, 7500 Cambridge St. room 4160, Houston, TX, TX 77054, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Scott HM, Braybrook D, Harðardóttir D, Ellis-Smith C, Harding R. Implementation of child-centred outcome measures in routine paediatric healthcare practice: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2023; 21:63. [PMID: 37394520 DOI: 10.1186/s12955-023-02143-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2022] [Accepted: 06/04/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023] Open
Abstract
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 25th 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah May Scott
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, Bessemer Rd, SE5 9RS, London, UK.
| | - Debbie Braybrook
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, Bessemer Rd, SE5 9RS, London, UK
| | - Daney Harðardóttir
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, Bessemer Rd, SE5 9RS, London, UK
| | - Clare Ellis-Smith
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, Bessemer Rd, SE5 9RS, London, UK
| | - Richard Harding
- Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing Midwifery and Palliative Care, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, Bessemer Rd, SE5 9RS, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Yoganathan A, Sandinha T, Shamdas M, Diafas A, Steel D. Patient-reported outcome measures in vitreoretinal surgery: a systematic review. Eye (Lond) 2023; 37:391-401. [PMID: 35550605 PMCID: PMC9905525 DOI: 10.1038/s41433-022-02073-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2021] [Revised: 04/08/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
This review article systematically reviews the use of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Vitreoretinal surgery, with the aim of recommending a preferred PROM-tool for use in clinical practice. Vitreoretinal surgery lags behind other ophthalmic subspecialties in the adoption of PROMs as a core outcome measure of success post-operatively. Current outcomes rely heavily on post-operative Best Corrected Visual Acuity (BCVA) and anatomical success on imaging modalities such as Ocular Coherence Tomography (OCT), despite the link between each of these measures and patient satisfaction being uncertain. We systematically reviewed the available literature in March 2021, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, searching six databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, SCOPUS and Cochrane Library. Critical appraisal of PROM-tools was facilitated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. We identified 14 eligible original research papers that used PROMs as a primary or secondary outcome of success post-operatively in patients having undergone vitreoretinal surgery. Eight different generic and vision-related PROM-tools were identified as being used in vitreoretinal studies, none of which were vitreoretinal-disease-specific. Our review article considers whether generic-health PROMs (e.g., EQ5D) or vision-related PROMs (e.g. NEI VFQ-25) are precise or responsive enough following vitreoretinal surgery to have a meaningful impact on clinical or research practice. We also consider the importance of standardisation of clinical outcomes in vitreoretinal clinical trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anusha Yoganathan
- Department of Eye and Visual Science, University of Liverpool, Merseyside, UK
| | - Teresa Sandinha
- Department of Eye and Visual Science, University of Liverpool, Merseyside, UK.
- Department of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Merseyside, UK.
| | - Mohith Shamdas
- Department of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Merseyside, UK
| | - Asterios Diafas
- Department of Ophthalmology, St Paul's Eye Unit, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Merseyside, UK
| | - David Steel
- Department of Eye and Visual Science, University of Liverpool, Merseyside, UK
- Sunderland Eye Infirmary, Sunderland, UK
- Bioscience Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Terheyden JH, Mekschrat L, Ost RAD, Bildik G, Berger M, Wintergerst MWM, Holz FG, Finger RP. Interviewer Administration Corresponds to Self-Administration of the Vision Impairment in Low Luminance (VILL) Questionnaire. Transl Vis Sci Technol 2022; 11:21. [PMID: 35446409 PMCID: PMC9034722 DOI: 10.1167/tvst.11.4.21] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To quantify the impact of the mode of administration (MOA) on scores of the Vision Impairment in Low Luminance (VILL) questionnaire. Methods The VILL questionnaire was implemented using different MOAs (paper, interview, electronic), in addition to a demographical survey of adult participants recruited at an outpatient eye clinic, with the initial MOA being either paper or interview. Polytomous Rasch models were used to generate person measure scores for the three subscales of the VILL questionnaire (reading, VILL_R; mobility, VILL_M; and emotional, VILL_E). Measures of agreement among the different MOAs were calculated (self-administered paper/interview, self-administered paper/self-administered electronic, and interview/self-administered electronic). An age-matched analysis was performed to control for the impact of the initial MOA, administration interval, visual acuity, and self-reported hearing difficulties. Results We included 309 participants (mean age, 63 ± 14 years; 61% female). Intra-class correlation coefficients were 0.930, 0.919, and 0.799 for paper versus interview assessment; 0.951, 0.959, and 0.916 for paper versus electronic; and 0.967, 0.955, and 0.907 for interview versus electronic assessment (VILL_R, VILL_M, and VILL_E, respectively). Mean differences were 0.35, 0.41, and 1.74 logits; 0.32, 0.18, and 0.68 logits; and 0.08, 0.22, and 0.63 logits, respectively. None of the mentioned factors significantly affected the results (corrected P ≥ 0.11). Conclusions Paper, interview, and electronic MOAs of the VILL can be considered equivalent. Reporting across the main MOAs of self-administration (paper) and interviewer-administration was unaffected by better eye visual acuity and self-reported hearing difficulties. Translational Relevance The results support use of the VILL questionnaire with flexible modes of administration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Liza Mekschrat
- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Reglind A D Ost
- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Gamze Bildik
- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Moritz Berger
- Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | | | - Frank G Holz
- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Robert P Finger
- Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Long C, Beres LK, Wu AW, Giladi AM. Patient-level barriers and facilitators to completion of patient-reported outcomes measures. Qual Life Res 2021; 31:1711-1718. [PMID: 34533759 DOI: 10.1007/s11136-021-02999-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/11/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify patient-level barriers and facilitators to completion of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in a hand and upper extremity clinic in Baltimore, Maryland. METHODS We conducted 12 h of direct observation of PROM completion (October-November, 2020). Ethnographic observation memos were qualitatively analyzed for barriers and facilitators using rapid thematic analysis. Informed by observation findings, we conducted 17 semi-structured interviews with mixed-literacy patients, caregivers, and clinic staff to understand the patient experience when completing PROMs (November 2020-March 2021). We identified initial themes through inductive and deductive framework analysis and validated findings through subsequent interviews with member-checking. RESULTS We identified nine patient-level factors that influence PROM completion: platform design, print literacy, health literacy, technology literacy, language proficiency, physical functioning, vision, cognitive functioning, and time. CONCLUSIONS There are multiple distinct patient-level factors that affect PROM completion. Failure to consider these factors in PROM design and implementation may lower completion rates or prevent accurate completion, undermining PROM validity. Because certain factors affect minority populations at disproportionate rates, this may also contribute to existing health disparities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chao Long
- The Curtis National Hand Center, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.,Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Laura K Beres
- Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Albert W Wu
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Aviram M Giladi
- The Curtis National Hand Center, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA.
| |
Collapse
|