scholarly journals Seeking Meaningful Innovation: Lessons Learned Developing, Evaluating, and Implementing the Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Tool

10.2196/17987 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. e17987
Author(s):  
Carolyn Steele Gray
Keyword(s):  
Digital Health ◽  
Perceived Value ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Information Communication ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Psychological Meaningfulness

Digital health solutions, in particular information communication technologies, often experience implementation failures leading to slower adoption than expected. This implementation challenge has spurred the development of frameworks to help navigate this uncertain and messy process. These frameworks point to environmental, organizational, individual, and technological factors that can drive or hinder implementation, with some in the field suggesting that perceived value may play a pivotal role. However, the concept of value can have varying meanings and be challenging to operationalize as a means to support implementation. Attending to philosophical and psychological meaningfulness for users and organizations in which technologies are adopted may offer a useful lens, by linking perceived value to individual behavior changes often required as part of implementing digital health technologies. Lessons learned from developing, evaluating, and implementing the electronic Patient-Reported Outcome (ePRO) tool demonstrate how qualitative methods can be used to uncover meaningfulness. By drawing from this example and other similar studies, this viewpoint offers suggestions on how future inquiry could deepen an understanding of meaningful innovation to help drive the implementation of digital health technologies.

scholarly journals Seeking Meaningful Innovation: Lessons Learned Developing, Evaluating, and Implementing the Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Tool (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Steele Gray
Keyword(s):  
Digital Health ◽  
Perceived Value ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Information Communication ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool ◽  
Psychological Meaningfulness

UNSTRUCTURED Digital health solutions, in particular information communication technologies, often experience implementation failures leading to slower adoption than expected. This implementation challenge has spurred the development of frameworks to help navigate this uncertain and messy process. These frameworks point to environmental, organizational, individual, and technological factors that can drive or hinder implementation, with some in the field suggesting that perceived value may play a pivotal role. However, the concept of value can have varying meanings and be challenging to operationalize as a means to support implementation. Attending to philosophical and psychological meaningfulness for users and organizations in which technologies are adopted may offer a useful lens, by linking perceived value to individual behavior changes often required as part of implementing digital health technologies. Lessons learned from developing, evaluating, and implementing the electronic Patient-Reported Outcome (ePRO) tool demonstrate how qualitative methods can be used to uncover meaningfulness. By drawing from this example and other similar studies, this viewpoint offers suggestions on how future inquiry could deepen an understanding of meaningful innovation to help drive the implementation of digital health technologies.

scholarly journals Patients’ preferences regarding the digital capturing of patient-reported outcomes: planning the future follow-up in a prospective heart failure registry

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian König ◽  
Johannes Leiner ◽  
Anne Nitsche ◽  
Konstantinos Mouratis ◽  
Carolin Schanner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Improve Patient Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Willingness To Use

Abstract Background Digital health technologies have the potential to improve patient care sustainably. A digital capturing of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) could facilitate patients’ surveillance and endpoint assessment within clinical trials especially in heart failure (HF) patients. However, data regarding the availability of digital infrastructure and patients’ willingness to use digital health solutions are scarce. Therefore, we conducted a survey as part of a digital-based HF registry. Methods and results The Helios Heart registry (H2-registry) has been introduced as a prospective registry being based on digitally augmented processes throughout the whole trial conduction from patients’ selection to data collection and follow-up (FU). PROMs are captured paper-based at recruitment, but patients are offered two digital solutions for FU. Overall, 125 patients (mean age 67.8 years, 34.4% female) were included in the single-center run-in phase of 16 weeks. Of them, 52.0% were not interested in any digital contact as part of the FU. If digital PROM capturing was conceivable, a web-based solution (70.0%) was preferred to an application-based approach (30.0%). Discrepancies occurred regarding the availability of email accounts and smartphones. Patients in the non-digital group were older (72.0 years vs. 63.2 years, P < 0.01) and more frequently female (female sex, non-digital vs. digital group: 47.7% vs. 20.0%, P < 0.01). Conclusions Our survey illustrated difficulties of implementing a digital FU to record PROMs in a contemporary HF cohort in particular among older patients. Further research is required to specify reasons in case of patients’ unwillingness and to better tailor digital health solutions to patients’ specific needs.

Optimizing electronic capture of patient-reported outcome measures in oncology clinical trials: lessons learned from a qualitative study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (17) ◽  
pp. 1195-1204
Author(s):  
Florence D Mowlem ◽  
Brad Sanderson ◽  
Jill V Platko ◽  
Bill Byrom
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Oncology Clinical Trials ◽  
Anticancer Treatment ◽  
Fit For Purpose ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Electronic Implementation

Aim: To understand the impact of anticancer treatment on oncology patients’ ability to use electronic solutions for completing patient-reported outcomes (ePRO). Materials & methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with seven individuals who had experienced a cancer diagnosis and treatment. Results: Participants reported that the following would impact the ability to interact with an ePRO solution: peripheral neuropathy of the hands (4/7), fatigue and/or concentration and memory issues (6/7), where they are in a treatment cycle (5/7). Approaches to improve usability included: larger, well-spaced buttons to deal with finger numbness, the ability to pause a survey and complete at a later point and presenting the recall period with every question to reduce reliance on memory. Conclusion: Symptoms associated with cancers and anticancer treatments can impact the use of technologies. The recommendations for optimizing the electronic implementation of patient-reported outcome instruments in this population provides the potential to improve data quality in oncology trials and places patient needs at the forefront to ensure ‘fit-for-purpose’ solutions.

224. Utilization of an automated SMS-based electronic patient-reported outcome tool in spinal surgery patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. S115
Author(s):  
Rami Elsabeh ◽  
Katie Delgado ◽  
Kaushik Das ◽  
Krishn M. Sharma ◽  
Ezriel Kornel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool

scholarly journals Benefits and Disadvantages of Electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

10.2196/15588 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. e15588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Meirte ◽  
Nick Hellemans ◽  
Mieke Anthonissen ◽  
Lenie Denteneer ◽  
Koen Maertens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Symptom Management ◽  
Completion Time ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Reported

Background Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important in clinical practice and research. The growth of electronic health technologies provides unprecedented opportunities to systematically collect information via PROMs. Objective The aim of this study was to provide an objective and comprehensive overview of the benefits, barriers, and disadvantages of the digital collection of qualitative electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs). Methods We performed a systematic review of articles retrieved from PubMED and Web of Science. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed during all stages. The search strategy yielded a total of 2333 records, from which 32 met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant ePROM-related information was extracted from each study. Results Results were clustered as benefits and disadvantages. Reported benefits of ePROMs were greater patient preference and acceptability, lower costs, similar or faster completion time, higher data quality and response rates, and facilitated symptom management and patient-clinician communication. Tablets were the most used ePROM modality (14/32, 44%), and, as a platform, Web-based systems were used the most (26/32, 81%). Potential disadvantages of ePROMs include privacy protection, a possible large initial financial investment, and exclusion of certain populations or the “digital divide.” Conclusions In conclusion, ePROMs offer many advantages over paper-based collection of patient-reported outcomes. Overall, ePROMs are preferred over paper-based methods, improve data quality, result in similar or faster completion time, decrease costs, and facilitate clinical decision making and symptom management. Disadvantages regarding ePROMs have been outlined, and suggestions are provided to overcome the barriers. We provide a path forward for researchers and clinicians interested in implementing ePROMs. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42018094795; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=94795

scholarly journals Lessons learned from the development and implementation of a patient-reported outcome and experience measure (POEM) in an Australian glaucoma practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Fraenkel ◽  
Graham A. Lee ◽  
Stephen J Vincent ◽  
Roslyn A. Vincent ◽  
Rupert R. A. Bourne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Experience Measure

Quality of Life after Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Using a Digital Patient-Reported Outcome Tool

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-314.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Riad Salem ◽  
Shahzeb Hassan ◽  
Robert J. Lewandowski ◽  
Karen Grace ◽  
Robert C.G. Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Outcome Tool

Standards for evaluating patient-reported outcome (PRO)-based performance measures.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 45-45
Author(s):  
Ethan M. Basch ◽  
Christine Goertz ◽  
Keri Christenson ◽  
Amaris Crawford ◽  
R. Adams Dudley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Improvement ◽  
Performance Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Perspective ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Use Cases ◽  
Use Case ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Measurement Strategies

45 Background: There is growing interest to use performance measures that integrate patient-reported outcomes (PROs), but there are no existing methodological standards for developing, implementing, or analyzing such measures in this context. Methods: To develop standards for evaluating PRO-based performance measures submitted to or developed by the American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement, a multi-disciplinary expert technical panel was assembled. A systematic literature review and landscape overview were conducted to identify use cases and existing PRO standards in related contexts. Lessons learned from use cases and existing standards guided development of discrete methodological standards. Results: The systematic review identified only one use case, whereas the landscape overview identified eight. Five purposes were identified for which PROs might be measured to assess performance, including one categorized as process and four as outcome. Eight discrete methodological standards were developed which will be detailed at the meeting. Conclusions: The patient perspective is an essential but missing component of performance evaluation. When appropriately elicited, data from patients can be informative. Lack of adherence to good practices and inadequate patient input when developing measurement strategies are potential pitfalls to be avoided.

Short-Term Outcomes of Open Hip Preservation Surgery for Symptomatic Extraarticular Femoroacetabular Impingement

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 599-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin F. Ricciardi ◽  
Kara G. Fields ◽  
Catherine Wentzel ◽  
Bryan T. Kelly ◽  
Ernest L. Sink
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Open Treatment ◽  
Outcome Tool

Introduction The purposes of this study were to describe: (i) short-term disease-specific patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs); and (ii) factors associated with reoperation or treatment failure in patients undergoing open hip preservation surgery for symptomatic extraarticular FAI. Methods Patients undergoing open hip preservation surgery for symptomatic extraarticular FAI were identified from a prospective, single-centre hip preservation registry (n = 51 patients; median clinical follow-up 24 [range 11-49] months). Hip-specific PROMs were assessed preoperatively, 6 months, and each year subsequently. Patients undergoing reoperation or treatment failure (<10 point improvement in iHOT-33 postoperatively) over the study period were identified. Preoperative associated factors were explored on a univariate basis. Results International Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33) improved from 33 (standard deviation [SD] 18) to 62 (26) at most recent follow-up and 76% of patients improved by minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Harris Hip Score improved from 53 (15) to 75 (17) at most recent follow-up and 79% of patients improved by MCID. Hip Outcome Score (HOS) Sport improved from 45 (26) to 66 (28) at most recent follow-up and 60% of patients improved by MCID. Continued improvements in mean follow-up scores were seen from 1 year to 2 years. Overall, 7 patients underwent reoperation and 9 patients failed to improve by MCID. Preoperative HOS Sport was higher in patients experiencing reoperation or treatment failure (58 [SD 19] vs. 40 [SD 27] respectively; p = 0.03). No other associated demographic, physical examination, or radiographic factors were found. Conclusions Open treatment of extraarticular FAI results in short-term improvements in hip-specific PROMs in most patients. Higher HOS Sport scores were associated with reoperation or treatment failure. Longer-term follow-up is necessary to define maximum improvements in this challenging patient population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document