scholarly journals Group 3 ITI Consensus Report: Patient‐reported outcome measures associated with implant dentistry

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (S16) ◽  
pp. 270-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jocelyne Feine ◽  
Samir Abou‐Ayash ◽  
Majd Al Mardini ◽  
Ronaldo Barcelllos Santana ◽  
Trine Bjelke‐Holtermann ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (5) ◽  
pp. 348-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Roberts ◽  
B Bradley ◽  
D Williams

Introduction Electronic patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) enable real time reporting back to the patient and medical team, comparison between similar patient cohorts and long-term cost effective outcome measurement. The primary objective of this three-phase pilot study was to measure uptake using a web-based PROM system following the introduction of two separate process improvements. Methods Eighty consecutive new elective orthopaedic patients in a single surgeon’s practice were recruited for the study. Patients in Group 1 (n=26) received only a letter reminding them to complete a symptom score. Those in Group 2 (n=31) also received a reminder SMS (short message service) message via their mobile or home telephone and those in Group 3 (n=23) also had access to a tablet computer in clinic. Results The mean patient age in Group 1 was 55 years (range: 24–80 years), in Group 2 it was 60 years (range: 23–85 years) and in Group 3 it was 58 years (range: 37–78 years) (p>0.05). Overall, 79% of patients had internet access, and 35% of Group 1, 55% of Group 2 and 74% of Group 3 recorded an electronic PROM score (p=0.02). In Group 3, 94% of patients listed for an operation completed an electronic PROM score (p=0.006). Conclusions Collecting PROM data effectively in everyday clinical practice is challenging. Electronic collection should meet that challenge and improve healthcare delivery but it is in its infancy. This pilot study shows that the combination of an SMS reminder and access to a Wi-Fi enabled tablet computer in the clinic setting enabled 94% of patients listed for an operation to complete a score on a web-based clinical outcomes system. Additional staff training and telephone call reminders may further improve uptake.


Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472097412
Author(s):  
Ali Aneizi ◽  
Dominique Gelmann ◽  
Dominic J. Ventimiglia ◽  
Patrick M. J. Sajak ◽  
Vidushan Nadarajah ◽  
...  

Background: The objectives of this study were to determine the baseline patient characteristics associated with preoperative opioid use and to establish whether preoperative opioid use is associated with baseline patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing common hand surgeries. Methods: Patients undergoing common hand surgeries from 2015 to 2018 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospective orthopedic registry at a single academic institution. Medical records were reviewed to determine whether patients were opioid users versus nonusers. On enrollment in the registry, patients completed 6 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains (Physical Function, Pain Interference, Fatigue, Social Satisfaction, Anxiety, and Depression), the Brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire (BMHQ), a surgical expectations questionnaire, and Numeric Pain Scale (NPS). Statistical analysis included multivariable regression to determine whether preoperative opioid use was associated with patient characteristics and preoperative scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Results: After controlling for covariates, an analysis of 353 patients (opioid users, n = 122; nonusers, n = 231) showed that preoperative opioid use was associated with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (odds ratio [OR], 2.88), current smoking (OR, 1.91), and lower body mass index (OR, 0.95). Preoperative opioid use was also associated with significantly worse baseline PROMIS scores across 6 domains, lower BMHQ scores, and NPS hand scores. Conclusions: Preoperative opioid use is common in hand surgery patients with a rate of 35%. Preoperative opioid use is associated with multiple baseline patient characteristics and is predictive of worse baseline scores on patient-reported outcome measures. Future studies should determine whether such associations persist in the postoperative setting between opioid users and nonusers.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e044888
Author(s):  
Rita McMorrow ◽  
Barbara Hunter ◽  
Christel Hendrieckx ◽  
Dominika Kwasnicka ◽  
Leanne Cussen ◽  
...  

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is a global health priority. People with diabetes are more likely to experience mental health problems relative to people without diabetes. Diabetes guidelines recommend assessment of depression and diabetes distress during diabetes care. This systematic review will examine the effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a prespecified strategy using a prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Setting and study design strategy. The date range of the search of all databases will be from inception to 3 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case–control studies and analytical cross-sectional studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language will be included. Two review authors will independently screen abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer, if required, using Covidence software. Two reviewers will undertake risk of bias assessment using checklists appropriate to study design. Data will be extracted using prespecified template. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, with a meta-analysis, if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review of published studies. Presentation of results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document