BACKGROUND: The PatientViewpoint website collects patient-reported outcomes and links them with the electronic health record to aid patient management. This pilot test evaluated PatientViewpoint's use, usefulness, and acceptability to patients and clinicians. METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective study that enrolled breast and prostate cancer patients undergoing treatment and the clinicians who managed them. Patients completed patient-reported outcomes every 2 weeks, and clinicians could access the results for patient visits. Scores that were poor relative to norms or substantially worse than the previous assessment were highlighted. After three on-study visits, we assessed patient and clinician perspectives on PatientViewpoint using close-ended and open-ended questions. RESULTS: Eleven out of 12 eligible clinicians (92%) and 52/76 eligible patients (68%) enrolled. Patients completed a median of 71% of assigned questionnaires; clinicians reported using the information for 79% of patients, most commonly as a source of additional information (51%). At the median, score reports identified three potential issues, of which 1 was discussed during the visit. Patients reported the system was easy to use (92%), useful (70%), aided recall of symptoms/side effects (72%), helped them feel more in control of their care (60%), improved discussions with their provider (49%), and improved care quality (39%). Patients and clinicians desired more information on score interpretation and minor adjustments to site navigation. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the feasibility and value of PatientViewpoint. An ongoing study is using a continuous quality improvement approach to further refine PatientViewpoint. Future studies will evaluate its impact on patient care and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The PatientViewpoint website collects patient-reported outcomes and links them with the electronic health record to aid patient management. This pilot test evaluated PatientViewpoint's use, usefulness, and acceptability to patients and clinicians. METHODS: This was a single-arm prospective study that enrolled breast and prostate cancerpatients undergoing treatment and the clinicians who managed them. Patients completed patient-reported outcomes every 2 weeks, and clinicians could access the results for patient visits. Scores that were poor relative to norms or substantially worse than the previous assessment were highlighted. After three on-study visits, we assessed patient and clinician perspectives on PatientViewpoint using close-ended and open-ended questions. RESULTS: Eleven out of 12 eligible clinicians (92%) and 52/76 eligible patients (68%) enrolled. Patients completed a median of 71% of assigned questionnaires; clinicians reported using the information for 79% of patients, most commonly as a source of additional information (51%). At the median, score reports identified three potential issues, of which 1 was discussed during the visit. Patients reported the system was easy to use (92%), useful (70%), aided recall of symptoms/side effects (72%), helped them feel more in control of their care (60%), improved discussions with their provider (49%), and improved care quality (39%). Patients and clinicians desired more information on score interpretation and minor adjustments to site navigation. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the feasibility and value of PatientViewpoint. An ongoing study is using a continuous quality improvement approach to further refine PatientViewpoint. Future studies will evaluate its impact on patient care and outcomes.
Authors: M A Sprangers; M Groenvold; J I Arraras; J Franklin; A te Velde; M Muller; L Franzini; A Williams; H C de Haes; P Hopwood; A Cull; N K Aaronson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: S A McLachlan; A Allenby; J Matthews; A Wirth; D Kissane; M Bishop; J Beresford; J Zalcberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ethan Basch; David Artz; Alexia Iasonos; John Speakman; Kevin Shannon; Kai Lin; Charmaine Pun; Henry Yong; Paul Fearn; Allison Barz; Howard I Scher; Mary McCabe; Deborah Schrag Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2007-02-28 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: L V Rubenstein; J M McCoy; D W Cope; P A Barrett; S H Hirsch; K S Messer; R T Young Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 1995-11 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Galina Velikova; Laura Booth; Adam B Smith; Paul M Brown; Pamela Lynch; Julia M Brown; Peter J Selby Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David Cella; Susan Yount; Nan Rothrock; Richard Gershon; Karon Cook; Bryce Reeve; Deborah Ader; James F Fries; Bonnie Bruce; Mattias Rose Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Amanda L Blackford; Jonathan Sussman; Daryl Bainbridge; Doris Howell; Hsien Y Seow; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Barbara S Thomley; Saswati Mahapatra; Brent A Bauer; Molly J Mallory; Guang-Xi Li; Alexander Do; Tony Y Chon Journal: Chin J Integr Med Date: 2017-10-28 Impact factor: 1.978
Authors: Katherine C Smith; Michael D Brundage; Elliott Tolbert; Emily A Little; Elissa T Bantug; Claire F Snyder Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Joseph M Herman; Sharon M White; Brandon S Luber; Amanda L Blackford; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Keiki Hinami; Jennifer Smith; Catherine D Deamant; Romina Kee; Diana Garcia; William E Trick Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-12-07 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Claire F Snyder; Amanda L Blackford; Toru Okuyama; Tatsuo Akechi; Hiroko Yamashita; Tatsuya Toyama; Michael A Carducci; Albert W Wu Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Darren Desantis; Richard J Baverstock; Andrea Civitarese; R Trafford Crump; Kevin V Carlson Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Sandra D Griffith; Nicolas R Thompson; Jaivir S Rathore; Lara E Jehi; George E Tesar; Irene L Katzan Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-08-07 Impact factor: 4.147