Dataset Information

Surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide healthcare professionals with peer benchmarked feedback is growing. However, there is little evidence on the opinions of professionals on the value of this information in practice. The purpose of this research is to explore surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked PROMs feedback and to examine whether this information led to changes in their practice. METHODS: This qualitative research employed a Framework approach. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with surgeons who received peer benchmarked PROMs feedback. The participants included eleven consultant orthopaedic surgeons in the Republic of Ireland. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: conceptual, methodological, practical, attitudinal, and impact. A typology was developed based on the attitudinal and impact themes from which three distinct groups emerged. 'Advocates' had positive attitudes towards PROMs and confirmed that the information promoted a self-reflective process. 'Converts' were uncertain about the value of PROMs, which reduced their inclination to use the data. 'Sceptics' had negative attitudes towards PROMs and claimed that the information had no impact on their behaviour. The conceptual, methodological and practical factors were linked to the typology. CONCLUSION: Surgeons had mixed opinions on the value of peer benchmarked PROMs data. Many appreciated the feedback as it reassured them that their practice was similar to their peers. However, PROMs information alone was considered insufficient to help identify opportunities for quality improvements. The reasons for the observed reluctance of participants to embrace PROMs can be categorised into conceptual, methodological, and practical factors. Policy makers and researchers need to increase professionals' awareness of the numerous purposes and benefits of using PROMs, challenge the current methods to measure performance using PROMs, and reduce the burden of data collection and information dissemination on routine practice.

SUBMITTER: Boyce MB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4227108 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.

Boyce Maria B MB Browne John P JP Greenhalgh Joanne J

Implementation science : IS 20140627

<h4>Background</h4>The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide healthcare professionals with peer benchmarked feedback is growing. However, there is little evidence on the opinions of professionals on the value of this information in practice. The purpose of this research is to explore surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked PROMs feedback and to examine whether this information led to changes in their practice.<h4>Methods</h4>This qualitative research employed a ...[more]

PMID: 24972784

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) or patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used by clinicians in everyday clinical practice to assess patients' perceptions of their own health and the healthcare they receive. By providing insight into how illness and interventions impact on patients' lives, they can help to bridge the gap between clinicians' expectations and what matters most to the patient. Given increasing focus on patient-centred care, the objective of this meta-synthesis was to summarise the qualitative evidence regarding patients' perspectives and experiences of the use of PROMs in clinical care.MethodsA systematic search of the following databases was undertaken in August 2020: Medline, EMBASE, EMCARE, PsychINFO, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. This review was conducted and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative research (CASP). A meta-ethnographic approach was used for data extraction and meta-synthesis of findings (PROSPERO registration: CRD42020202506).ResultsFourteen studies from a range of countries with differing qualitative research methodologies were identified. Three themes were identified, namely 'patient preferences regarding PROMs', 'patient perceived benefits' and 'barriers to patient engagement with PROMs'. The perspectives of patients suggested they preferred PROMs that were simple and relevant to their conditions and found benefits in the way they facilitated self-reflection and effective communication with their clinicians. Patients, however, questioned the relevance of some individual questions and purpose.ConclusionPROMs can be a useful tool in the clinical setting by enabling individualisation and patient centred care. This meta-synthesis provides insights into what patients find beneficial as well as barriers to their engagement, highlighting the importance of educating patients about PROMs.

Project description:Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are linked to adverse health outcomes for adults and children in the United States. The prevalence of critically ill children who are exposed to ACEs is not known. Our objective was to compare the frequency of ACEs of critically ill children with that of the general pediatric population of Georgia and the United States using publicly available National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH) data. The impact of ACEs on patient-reported outcome measures of emotional, social, and physical health in critically ill children is not known. We sought to determine whether a higher total number of ACEs was associated with poorer patient-reported measures of emotional, social, and physical health. We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study of children < 18 years of age who were admitted to a 36-bed free-standing, quaternary academic pediatric intensive care unit in Atlanta, Georgia from June 2020-December 2021. Parents of patients who were admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit completed a survey regarding their child's ACEs, health care use patterns, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMIS) of emotional, social, and physical health. Prevalence estimates of ACEs were compared with national and state data from the NSCH using Rao-Scott Chi-square tests. PROMIS measures reported within the PICU cohort were compared with population normed T-scores. The association of cumulative ACEs within the PICU cohort with patient-reported outcomes of emotional, social, and physical health were evaluated with a t-test. Among the 84 participants, 54% had ≥ 1 ACE, 29% had ≥ 2 ACEs, and 10% had ≥ 3 ACEs. Children with ≥ 2 ACEs had poorer anxiety and family relationship T-scores compared to those with ≤ 1 ACE. Given the high burden of ACEs in critically ill children, screening for ACEs may identify vulnerable children that would benefit from interventions and support to mitigate the negative effects of ACEs and toxic stress on emotional, social, and physical health.

Dataset Information

Surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.

Publications

Surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets