scholarly journals Standardizing Health Outcomes for Lung Cancer. Adaptation of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Set to the Spanish Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vicente Escudero-Vilaplana ◽  
Antonio Calles ◽  
Roberto Collado-Borrell ◽  
María Belén Marzal-Alfaro ◽  
Carlos Polanco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium

scholarly journals International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM): Standardized Patient-Centered Outcomes Measurement Set for Heart Failure Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J.P. Burns ◽  
Jason Arora ◽  
Oluwakemi Okunade ◽  
John F. Beltrame ◽  
Sabrina Bernardez-Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Standardized Patient ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium ◽  
Heart Failure Patients

scholarly journals Development of an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) atrial fibrillation working group

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (10) ◽  
pp. 1132-1140 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H Seligman ◽  
Zofia Das-Gupta ◽  
Adedayo O Jobi-Odeneye ◽  
Elena Arbelo ◽  
Amitava Banerjee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Case Mix ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Icd Codes ◽  
Standard Set

Abstract Aims As health systems around the world increasingly look to measure and improve the value of care that they provide to patients, being able to measure the outcomes that matter most to patients is vital. To support the shift towards value-based health care in atrial fibrillation (AF), the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled an international Working Group (WG) of 30 volunteers, including health professionals and patient representatives to develop a standardized minimum set of outcomes for benchmarking care delivery in clinical settings. Methods and results Using an online-modified Delphi process, outcomes important to patients and health professionals were selected and categorized into (i) long-term consequences of disease outcomes, (ii) complications of treatment outcomes, and (iii) patient-reported outcomes. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, comorbidities, cognitive function, date of diagnosis, disease duration, medications prescribed and AF procedures, as well as smoking, body mass index (BMI), alcohol intake, and physical activity. Where appropriate, and for ease of implementation, standardization of outcomes and case-mix variables was achieved using ICD codes. The standard set underwent an open review process in which over 80% of patients surveyed agreed with the outcomes captured by the standard set. Conclusion Implementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of chronic AF care. Their consistent definition and collection, using ICD codes where applicable, could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research in AF.

scholarly journals A Consensus Set of Outcomes for Parkinson’s Disease from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 533-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul de Roos ◽  
Bastiaan R. Bloem ◽  
Thomas A. Kelley ◽  
Angelo Antonini ◽  
Richard Dodel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium

scholarly journals Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e051065
Author(s):  
William H Seligman ◽  
Luz Fialho ◽  
Nick Sillett ◽  
Christina Nielsen ◽  
Farhala M Baloch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Delivery Of Care ◽  
Outcomes Measurement ◽  
International Consortium ◽  
Treatment Practices

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in widespread morbidity and mortality with the consequences expected to be felt for many years. Significant variation exists in the care even of similar patients with COVID-19, including treatment practices within and between institutions. Outcome measures vary among clinical trials on the same therapies. Understanding which therapies are of most value is not possible unless consensus can be reached on which outcomes are most important to measure. Furthermore, consensus on the most important outcomes may enable patients to monitor and track their care, and may help providers to improve the care they offer through quality improvement. To develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes for clinical care, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) assembled a working group (WG) of 28 volunteers, including health professionals, patients and patient representatives.DesignA list of outcomes important to patients and professionals was generated from a systematic review of the published literature using the MEDLINE database, from review of outcomes being measured in ongoing clinical trials, from a survey distributed to patients and patient networks, and from previously published ICHOM standard sets in other disease areas. Using an online-modified Delphi process, the WG selected outcomes of greatest importance.ResultsThe outcomes considered by the WG to be most important were selected and categorised into five domains: (1) functional status and quality of life, (2) mental functioning, (3) social functioning, (4) clinical outcomes and (5) symptoms. The WG identified demographic and clinical variables for use as case-mix risk adjusters. These included baseline demographics, clinical factors and treatment-related factors.ConclusionImplementation of these consensus recommendations could help institutions to monitor, compare and improve the quality and delivery of care to patients with COVID-19. Their consistent definition and collection could also broaden the implementation of more patient-centric clinical outcomes research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document