Vanessa K Noonan1, Anne Lyddiatt2, Patrick Ware3, Susan B Jaglal4, Richard J Riopelle5, Clifton O Bingham6, Sabrina Figueiredo3, Richard Sawatzky7, Maria Santana8, Susan J Bartlett9, Sara Ahmed10. 1. Blusson Spinal Cord Centre, Rick Hansen Institute, 818 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V5Z 1M9; Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 3114-910 West 10th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V5Z 1M9. Electronic address: vnoonan@rickhanseninstitute.org. 2. CIHR SPOR National Steering Committee. 3. School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, 3654 Prom Sir-William-Osler, Montreal, Québec, Canada H3G 1Y5. 4. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Toronto, 500 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1V7. 5. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, McGill University, 3801 University Street, Montreal, Québec, Canada H3A 2B4. 6. Division of Rheumatology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 5200 Eastern Avenue #4100, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA. 7. School of Nursing, Trinity Western University, 7600 Glover Road, Langley, British Columbia, Canada V2Y 1Y1; Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care, 588-1081 Burrard Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6Z 1Y6. 8. O'Brien Institute for Public Health, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr. NW, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4. 9. Division of Rheumatology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, 5200 Eastern Avenue #4100, Baltimore, MD 21224, USA; Department of Medicine, McGill University/McGill University Health Center (RVH), 687 Pine Avenue W, Ross Pavilion R4.29, Montreal, Québec, Canada H3A 1A1. 10. School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, 3654 Prom Sir-William-Osler, Montreal, Québec, Canada H3G 1Y5; Divisions of Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University Health Center, 687 Pine Avenue W, Montreal, Québec, Canada H3A 1A1; Centre de recherche interdisciplinaire en réadaptation (CRIR), Constance-Lethbridge Rehabilitation Center, 2275 Laurier Ave E, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H2H 2N8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a shift toward making health care patient centered, whereby patients are part of medical decision-making and take responsibility for managing their health. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) capture the patient voice and can be used to engage patients in medical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to present important factors from patients', clinicians', researchers', and decision-makers' perspectives that influence successful adoption of PROs in clinical practice. Factors recommended in this paper were informed by a patient partner. DISCUSSION: Based on themes arising from the Montreal Accord proceedings, we describe factors that influence the adoption of PROs and how PROs can have a positive effect by enhancing communication and providing opportunities to engage patients, carers, and clinicians in care. Consideration of patient factors (e.g., health literacy), family support and networks (e.g., peer-support networks), technology (e.g., e-health), and health care system factors (e.g., resources to implement PROs) is necessary to ensure PROs are successfully adopted. PRO evaluation plans most likely to succeed over the long term are those incorporating PROs identified by patients as necessary for self-management and that coincide with providers' needs for collaboratively developing treatment plans with patients and families.
BACKGROUND: There is a shift toward making health care patient centered, whereby patients are part of medical decision-making and take responsibility for managing their health. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) capture the patient voice and can be used to engage patients in medical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this paper is to present important factors from patients', clinicians', researchers', and decision-makers' perspectives that influence successful adoption of PROs in clinical practice. Factors recommended in this paper were informed by a patient partner. DISCUSSION: Based on themes arising from the Montreal Accord proceedings, we describe factors that influence the adoption of PROs and how PROs can have a positive effect by enhancing communication and providing opportunities to engage patients, carers, and clinicians in care. Consideration of patient factors (e.g., health literacy), family support and networks (e.g., peer-support networks), technology (e.g., e-health), and health care system factors (e.g., resources to implement PROs) is necessary to ensure PROs are successfully adopted. PRO evaluation plans most likely to succeed over the long term are those incorporating PROs identified by patients as necessary for self-management and that coincide with providers' needs for collaboratively developing treatment plans with patients and families.
Authors: Michael A Kallen; Karon F Cook; Dagmar Amtmann; Elizabeth Knowlton; Richard C Gershon Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-05-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Ellen B M Elsman; Lidwine B Mokkink; Marlous Langendoen-Gort; Femke Rutters; Joline Beulens; Petra J M Elders; Caroline B Terwee Journal: BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care Date: 2022-06
Authors: Dane J Brodke; Chong Zhang; Jeremy D Shaw; Amy M Cizik; Charles L Saltzman; Darrel S Brodke Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Lisette M van Leeuwen; Marieke Pronk; Paul Merkus; S Theo Goverts; Johannes R Anema; Sophia E Kramer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 3.240