The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why?

被引:425
作者
Greenhalgh, Joanne [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leeds, Sch Healthcare, Leeds LS2 9UT, W Yorkshire, England
关键词
Patient-reported outcome measure; Clinical practice; Decision making; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES PROFILE; PATIENT-PHYSICIAN COMMUNICATION; REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES; PRIMARY-CARE PATIENTS; DECISION-MAKING; HEALTH-STATUS; FOCUSED RESEARCH; ROUTINE PRACTICE; CONTROLLED-TRIAL;
D O I
10.1007/s11136-008-9430-6
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Precisely defining the different applications of patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) in clinical practice can be difficult. This is because the intervention is complex and varies amongst different studies in terms of the type of PRO used, how the PRO is fed back, and to whom it is fed back. A theory-driven approach is used to describe six different applications of PROs in clinical practice. The evidence for the impact of these applications on the process and outcomes of care are summarised. Possible explanations for the limited impact of PROs on patient management are then discussed and directions for future research are highlighted. The applications of PROs in clinical practice include screening tools, monitoring tools, as a method of promoting patient-centred care, as a decision aid, as a method of facilitating communication amongst multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), and as a means of monitoring the quality of patient care. Evidence from randomised controlled trials suggests that the use of PROs in clinical practice is valuable in improving the discussion and detection of HRQoL problems but has less of an impact on how clinicians manage patient problems or on subsequent patient outcomes. Many of the reasons for this may lie in the ways in which PROs fit (or do not fit) into the routine ways in which patients and clinicians communicate with each other, how clinicians make decisions, and how healthcare as a whole is organised. Future research needs to identify ways in with PROs can be better incorporated into the routine care of patients by combining qualitative and quantitative methods and adopting appropriate trial designs.
引用
收藏
页码:115 / 123
页数:9
相关论文
共 87 条
[1]   A controlled trial of methods for managing pain in primary care patients with or without co-occurring psychosocial problems [J].
Ahles, Tim A. ;
Wasson, Jobn H. ;
Seville, Janette L. ;
Johnson, Deborah J. ;
Cole, Bernard F. ;
Hanscom, Brett ;
Stukel, Therese A. ;
McKinstry, Elizabeth .
ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2006, 4 (04) :341-350
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2004, PAT PUBL INV HLTH EV
[3]  
Appleby J., 2004, MEASURING SUCCESS NH
[4]   Using patient-focused research in evaluating treatment outcome in private practice [J].
Asay, TP ;
Lambert, MJ ;
Gregersen, AT ;
Goates, MK .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 58 (10) :1213-1225
[5]   The value of the Rehabilitation Activities Profile (RAP) as a quality sub-system in rehabilitation medicine [J].
Beckerman, H ;
Roelofsen, EE ;
Knol, DL ;
Lankhorst, GJ .
DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, 2004, 26 (07) :387-400
[6]  
Bekker H, 1999, Health Technol Assess, V3, P1
[7]   Case-mix & patients' reports of outcome in Independent Sector Treatment Centres: Comparison with NHS providers [J].
Browne, John ;
Jamieson, Liz ;
Lewsey, Jim ;
van der Meulen, Jan ;
Copley, Lynn ;
Black, Nick .
BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2008, 8 (1)
[8]   Communicating quality of life information to cancer patients: A study of six presentation formats [J].
Brundage, M ;
Feldman-Stewart, D ;
Leis, A ;
Bezjak, A ;
Degner, L ;
Velji, K ;
Zetes-Zanatta, L ;
Tu, D ;
Ritvo, P ;
Pater, J .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2005, 23 (28) :6949-6956
[9]   Cancer patients' preferences for communicating clinical trial quality of life information: A qualitative study [J].
Brundage, M ;
Leis, A ;
Bezjak, A ;
Feldman-Stewart, D ;
Degner, L ;
Velji, K ;
Zetes-Zanatta, L ;
Tu, D ;
Ritvo, P ;
Pater, J .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2003, 12 (04) :395-404
[10]  
BRUNDAGE M, 2006, QLR J A, V68