Dataset Information

Feasibility of the collection of patient-reported outcomes in an ambulatory neurology clinic.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To determine whether patients could self-report physical and mental health assessments in the waiting room and whether these assessments would be associated with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-10) scores.

Methods

We offered iPad-based surveys to consecutive adult neurology patients at check-in to collect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We collected demographic and clinical data on 6,075 patients through survey or administrative claims and PROMs from participating patients. We compared demographic characteristics of participants and nonparticipants and tested associations between physical and mental health scores and mRS and QOLIE-10.

Results

Of 6,075 patients seen by neurologists during the study period, 2,992 (49.3%) participated in the survey. Compared to nonparticipating patients, participating patients more often were privately insured (53.5% vs 42.7%, p < 0.01), married (51.5% vs 47.9%, p < 0.01), and seen in general neurology (nonsubspecialty) clinics (53.1% vs 46.6%, p < 0.01) and more likely to report English as their preferred language (50.1% vs 38.4%, p < 0.01). Participating patients had a mean physical health T score of 28.7 (SD 15) and mental health T score of 33 (SD 15), which were 3 and 2 SD worse than the average for the US general population, respectively. Mean T scores in every category of the mRS were different from every other category (n = 232, p < 0.01). Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-10 T scores were linearly associated with QOLIE-10 scores (n = 202, p < 0.01) CONCLUSIONS: Systematic digital collection of PROMs is feasible. Differences among survey participants and nonparticipants highlight the need to develop multilingual measurement tools that may improve collection from vulnerable populations.

SUBMITTER: Moura LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5177682 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Feasibility of the collection of patient-reported outcomes in an ambulatory neurology clinic.

Moura Lidia M V R LM Schwamm Eli E Moura Junior Valdery V Seitz Michael P MP Hsu John J Cole Andrew J AJ Schwamm Lee H LH

Neurology 20161104 23

<h4>Objective</h4>To determine whether patients could self-report physical and mental health assessments in the waiting room and whether these assessments would be associated with modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Quality of Life in Epilepsy (QOLIE-10) scores.<h4>Methods</h4>We offered iPad-based surveys to consecutive adult neurology patients at check-in to collect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). We collected demographic and clinical data on 6,075 patients through survey or administrat ...[more]

PMID: 27815405

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the feasibility of soliciting outcomes from adults who received chemotherapy treatment for cancer and describe the patterns and correlates of patient-reported toxicities.Data sourcesPatient survey data from 29 Michigan ambulatory oncology practices collected in 2017.Study designSecondary analysis of patient survey data. Descriptive statistics were generated at the patient and practice levels. Thematic analysis of open-text comments identified clusters of frequently reported toxicities.Data collection methodsPatients completed 11 items from the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Using a 5-point Likert scale, patients rated the frequency of nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and pain; the severity of nausea, vomiting, constipation, numbness/tingling, and pain; and how much numbness/tingling and pain interfered with usual or daily activities. Patients could also report two toxicities in open-text comments. Finally, patients reported unplanned health care service for toxicity or side effect management.Principal findingsOf 3565 eligible patients, 2245 participated (63%) and 457 (20%) rated at least one toxicity as severe/very severe. Across practices, the proportion of patients who reported at least one severe/very severe toxicity ranged from 8% to 50%. Troubling toxicities included pain frequency (mean 2.3, SD 1.3), pain severity (2.1, 1.1), and diarrhea frequency (1.9, 1.0). From completed assessments, 1653 (74%) reported at least one toxicity in open-text comments; fatigue (n = 182), stomach discomfort (n = 53), and skin/nail changes (n = 41) were most frequently reported. Regarding consequences, 156 patients (7%) reported unplanned health care service use: 41 (26%) visited an emergency department and 32 (21%) were admitted to a hospital.ConclusionsQuerying patients on chemotherapy treatment experiences and toxicities was feasible. Toxicity rates varied across practices, which informed quality improvement. Toxicity severity and service use incidence exceed previously published trial data, particularly for pain, fatigue, and gastrointestinal issues. Open-text questions enabled exploration with newer treatment regimens.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Chronic pain is highly prevalent, and the ability to routinely measure patients' pain and treatment response using validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessments is important to clinical care. Despite this recognition, systematic use in everyday clinical care is rare. AIMS:The aims of this study were to (1) describe infrastructure designed to automate PRO data collection, (2) compare study-enhanced PRO completion rates to those in clinical care, and (3) evaluate patient response rates by method of PRO administration and sociodemographic and/or clinical characteristics. SETTING:The Pain Program for Active Coping and Training (PPACT) is a pragmatic clinical trial conducted within three regions of the Kaiser Permanente health care system. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION:PPACT evaluates the effect of integrative primary care-based pain management services on outcomes for chronic pain patients on long-term opioid treatment. We implemented a tiered process for quarterly assessment of PROs to supplement clinical collection and ensure adequate trial data using three methods: web-based personal health records (PHR), automated interactive voice response (IVR) calls, and live outreach. PROGRAM EVALUATION:Among a subset of PPACT participants examined (n =?632), the tiered study-enhanced PRO completion rates were higher than in clinical care: 96% completed ??1 study-administered PRO with mean of 3.46 (SD?=?0.85) vs. 74% completed in clinical care with a mean of 2.43 (SD?=?2.08). Among all PPACT participants at 3 months (n =?831), PRO completion was 86% and analyses of response by key characteristics found only that participant age predicted an increased likelihood of responding to PHR and IVR outreach. DISCUSSION:Adherence to pain-related PRO data collection using our enhanced tiered approach was high. No demographic or clinical identifiers other than age were associated with differential response by modality. Successful ancillary support should employ multimodal electronic health record functionalities for PRO administration. Using automated modalities is feasible and may facilitate better sustainability for regular PRO administration within health care systems. Clinical Trials Registration Number: NCT02113592.

Project description:Importance:The collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) has garnered intense interest, but dissemination of PRO programs has been limited, as have analyses of the factors associated with successful programs. Objective:To identify factors associated with improving PRO collection rates within a large health care system using a centralized PRO infrastructure. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cohort study included 205 medical and surgical clinics in the Partners Healthcare system in Massachusetts that implemented a PRO program between March 15, 2014, and December 31, 2018, using a standardized centralized infrastructure. Data were analyzed from March to April 2019. Exposures:Relevant clinical characteristics were recorded for each clinic launching a PRO program. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the mean PRO collection rate during each clinic's most recent 6 months of collection prior to January 2019. Data were analyzed using a linear regression model with the 6-month PRO collection rate as the dependent variable and clinic characteristics as independent variables. Secondary analysis used a logistic regression model to assess clinical factors associated with successful clinics, defined as those that collected PROs at a rate greater than 50%. Results:Between March 2014 and December 2018, 205 Partners Healthcare clinics were available for analysis, and 4?061?205 PRO measures from 745?028 encounters were collected. Among these, 103 clinics (50.2%) collected at a rate greater than 50%. Increased collection rates were associated with more than 50% of physicians in a clinic trained on PROs (change, 19.6% [95% CI, 9.9%-29.4%]; P?<?.001), routine administrative oversight of collection rates (change, 16.0% [95% CI, 6.6%-25.5%]; P?=?.001), previous collection of PROs on paper (change, 12.5% [95% CI, 4.7%-20.3%]; P?=?.002), presence of a clinical champion (change, 11.2% [95% CI, 2.5%-20.0%]; P?=?.01) and payer incentive (change, 10.5% [95% CI, 2.0%-18.9%]; P?=?.02). Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that training physicians on the use of PROs, administrative surveillance of collection rates, and the presence of a local clinical champion may be promising interventions for increasing PRO collection. Clinics that have previously collected PROs may have greater success in increasing collections. Payer incentive for collection was associated with improved collections, but not associated with successful programs.

Dataset Information

Feasibility of the collection of patient-reported outcomes in an ambulatory neurology clinic.

Objective

Methods

Results

Publications

Feasibility of the collection of patient-reported outcomes in an ambulatory neurology clinic.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure