Dataset Information

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To examine minimum sample sizes and follow-up times required for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PMs) to achieve acceptable reliability as PMs. PARTICIPANTS:We used 2 groups of patients age 65+ with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. The first was a sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, who reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline and 2 years. The second was a sample of primary care patients, who reported HRQoL at baseline and 6 months. MEASURES:Medicare Advantage beneficiaries completed the Veterans RAND 12-Item Short Form (VR-12), while the primary care sample completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item Profile Measure (PROMIS-29). We constructed binary candidate PMs indicating stable or improved physical or mental HRQoL at follow-up, and continuous PMs measuring mean change over time. RESULTS:In the Medicare Advantage sample, with a sample size per entity profiled of 160, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.32 as a PM. A sample size of 882 per entity would have been needed for this PM to achieve an acceptable reliability of 0.7. In the prospective sample, with a sample size of 27 per clinic, the most promising PM achieved a reliability of 0.16 as a PM. A sample size of 341 patients (at the clinic level) would have been needed for this PM to achieve a reliability of 0.7. CONCLUSIONS:Achieving acceptable reliability for these PMs and conditions would have required minimum sample sizes of 341 at the clinic level or 880 at the health plan level. These estimates can guide the design of future patient-reported outcome-based PMs.

SUBMITTER: Rose AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6375799 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Rose Adam J AJ Bayliss Elizabeth E Baseman Lesley L Butcher Emily E Huang Wenjing W Edelen Maria O MO

Medical care 20190301 3

<h4>Objective</h4>To examine minimum sample sizes and follow-up times required for patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PMs) to achieve acceptable reliability as PMs.<h4>Participants</h4>We used 2 groups of patients age 65+ with at least 2 of 13 chronic conditions. The first was a sample of Medicare Advantage beneficiaries, who reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at baseline and 2 years. The second was a sample of primary care patients, who reported HRQoL at baseline ...[more]

PMID: 30422839

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe routine use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) aims to compare providers as regards the clinical need of their patients and their outcome. Simple methods of estimating recruitment rates based on aggregated data may be inaccurate. Our objectives were to: use patient-level linked data to evaluate these estimates; produce revised estimates of national and providers' recruitment rates; and explore whether or not recruitment bias exists.MethodsCase study based on patients who were eligible to participate in the English National PROMs Programme for elective surgery (hip and knee replacement, groin hernia repair, varicose vein surgery) using data from pre-operative questionnaires and Hospital Episode Statistics. Data were linked to determine: the eligibility for including operations; eligibility of date of surgery; duplicate questionnaires; cancelled operations; correct assignment to provider. Influence of patient characteristics on recruitment rates were investigated.ResultsNational recruitment rates based on aggregated data over-estimated the true rate because of the inclusion of ineligible operations (from 1.9% - 7.0% depending on operation) and operations being cancelled (1.9% - 3.6%). Estimates of national recruitment rates using inclusion criteria based on patient-level linked data were lower than those based on simple methods (eg hip replacement was 73% rather than 78%).Estimates of provider's recruitment rates based on aggregated data were also adversely affected by attributing patients to the wrong provider (2.4% - 4.9%). Use of linked data eliminated all estimates of over 100% recruitment, though providers still showed a wide range of rates.While the principal determinant of recruitment rates was the provider, some patients' socio-demographic characteristics had an influence on non-recruitment: non-white (Adjusted Odds Ratio 1.25-1.67, depending on operation); most deprived socio-economic group (OR 1.11-1.23); aged over 75 years (OR 1.28-1.79). However, there was no statistically significant association between providers' recruitment rates and patients' pre-operative clinical need.ConclusionsAccurate recruitment rates require the use of linked data to establish consistent inclusion criteria for numerators and denominators. Non-recruitment will bias comparisons of providers' pre-operative case-mix and may bias comparisons of outcomes if unmeasured confounders are not evenly distributed between providers. It is important, therefore, to strive for high recruitment rates.

Project description:BackgroundDuring care transitions, the older (75+) patient's agenda can easily be missed. To counteract this, involving patients in shared clinical decision making has proven to be of great value. Likewise, involving patients and other stakeholders as researchers is gaining ground. Patient and public involvement (PPI) in research entails many benefits, for example, by bringing further insight from those with lived experiences of being ill. There are various challenges associated with involving some older patients, for example frailty, cognitive impairment and other chronic illnesses. To the best of our knowledge, there are only a few examples of initiatives involving older patients beyond research participation. The feasibility of involving frail older patients during an ongoing care transition from hospital to primary health care remains unknown. To investigate the feasibility of including older frail patients, their relatives and health care professionals (HCPs) as co-researchers, we established a study with increasingly demanding levels of patient involvement to identify relevant outcome measures for future transitional care research.MethodsThe study was a pragmatic, qualitative feasibility study. The involved individuals were frail older patients, their relatives and HCPs. Patients and their relatives were interviewed, while the interviewer made reflective notes. A thematic analysis was made. Relatives and HCPs discussed the themes to identify relevant outcome measures and potentially co-create new patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in future transitional care studies. The feasibility was evaluated according to six involvement steps. The level of involvement was evaluated using the five-levelled Health Canada Public Involvement Continuum (HCPIC).ResultsIn total, eight patients, five relatives and three HCPs were involved in the study. Patients were involved in discussing care transitions (HCPIC level 3), while some relatives were engaged (HCPIC level 4) in forming PROMs. The partnership level of involvement (HCPIC level 5) was not reached. The thematic analysis and the subsequent theme discussion successfully formed PROMs. The key PROMs were related to care, transparency and the relatives' roles in the transitional care process.ConclusionsWhen applying a pragmatic involvement approach, frail older patients can be successfully involved in identifying relevant transitional care outcome measures; however, involving these patients as fellow researchers seems infeasible. To maintain involvement, supportive relatives are essential. Useful experiences for future research involvement of this vulnerable group were reported, arguing that patient participation has the potential to become inherent in future geriatric research.

Dataset Information

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Publications

Feasibility of Distinguishing Performance Among Provider Groups Using Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets