Literature DB >> 17117444

Patient-reported outcome I: measuring what matters in musculoskeletal care.

Kirstie L Haywood1.   

Abstract

Patients have an important role to play in communicating the impact of disease and the effectiveness of health care. Well-developed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide a clinically relevant and scientifically rigorous resource for including the patient perspective in decisions about health care and subsequent evaluation. This article will introduce readers to the field of health outcome assessment, and specifically to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The reasons for measuring health, different types of PROMs and potential applications will be discussed. A second article will present important information for users of PROMs to consider when selecting and using PROMs in research, routine practice or quality assurance. Copyright (c) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17117444     DOI: 10.1002/msc.94

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Musculoskeletal Care        ISSN: 1478-2189


  16 in total

1.  Continence specialists use of quality of life information in routine practice: a national survey of practitioners.

Authors:  Kirstie L Haywood; Andrew M Garratt; Sandra Carrivick; Joanne Mangnall; Suzanne M Skevington
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-03-07       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  A comparison of telephone interview versus on-site completion of Lysholm knee score in patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction: are the results equivalent?

Authors:  Ozkan Kose; Gokmen Deniz; Hakan Ozcan; Ferhat Guler
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-01-31

3.  Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome questionnaires for patients with musculoskeletal disorders of the shoulder.

Authors:  Ertan Şahinoğlu; Gülbin Ergin; Bayram Ünver
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-02-09       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Outcome measures in chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Elaine F Maughan; Jeremy S Lewis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-04-17       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Donor-site-related functional problems following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: development of a self-administered questionnaire.

Authors:  Susanna Aufwerber; Maria Hagströmer; Annette Heijne
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-12-11       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Association Between the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.

Authors:  Brian Pietrosimone; Brittney A Luc; Austin Duncan; Susan A Saliba; Joseph M Hart; Christopher D Ingersoll
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  Prioritizing Parental Worry Associated with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Using Best-Worst Scaling.

Authors:  Holly Landrum Peay; I L Hollin; J F P Bridges
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Minimal Important Difference (MID) of two commonly used outcome measures for foot problems.

Authors:  Karl B Landorf; Joel A Radford; Susie Hudson
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2010-05-14       Impact factor: 2.303

9.  The rheumatoid foot: a systematic literature review of patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Steven Walmsley; Anita E Williams; Mike Ravey; Andrea Graham
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2010-07-09       Impact factor: 2.303

10.  Titanium elastic nails, open reduction internal fixation and non-operative management for middle third clavicle fractures: a comparative study.

Authors:  Luke D Jones; George Grammatopoulos; Gregoris Kambouroglou
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2013-02-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.