Tiffany C Liu1, Chelsi W Ohueri2, Eric M Schryver3, Kevin J Bozic1, Karl M Koenig1. 1. Department of Surgery and Perioperative Care, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas. 2. Department of Population Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas. 3. University of Texas Medical Branch School of Medicine, Galveston, Texas.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) provide valuable health information and aid medical decision making for patients with hip and knee arthritis, survey completion rates remain low. The purpose of this study is to elucidate patient preferences regarding location of completion, delivery method, and barriers or facilitators to pre-visit completion. METHODS: Patients with hip and/or knee pain who were asked to complete pre-visit PROMs at 2 urban arthroplasty clinics were recruited. In-person, semi-structured, audio-recorded interviews were conducted, transcribed, and coded for thematic analysis. Codes were developed using a data-driven approach. RESULTS: We analyzed 51 interviews. The mean age was 57 years, 57% were women, and 45% had private or Medicare insurance. Prevalent themes regarding location preferences were convenience and communication preferences. Thirty-four patients stated a preference for completing pre-visit PROMs at home, 19 for in-office completion, and 10 stated no preference. Prevalent themes around delivery methods included technology access and familiarity. Of the 43 patients asked to select their preferred pre-visit PROM delivery method (phone call, email, text message, or postal mail), 31 (72%) preferred email or text messaging. Barriers to completing pre-visit PROMs were technological issues, recognizing the message was healthcare-related, and being too busy or forgetting. Twenty patients identified no barriers. CONCLUSION: Electronic PROM collection is favored by many patients, but alternative methods for patients without access to or familiarity with technology remain important. Clear recognition that the message is from a physician's office and physician communication of the utility of PROMs in clinical decision making may increase pre-visit completion.
BACKGROUND: Although patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) provide valuable health information and aid medical decision making for patients with hip and knee arthritis, survey completion rates remain low. The purpose of this study is to elucidate patient preferences regarding location of completion, delivery method, and barriers or facilitators to pre-visit completion. METHODS:Patients with hip and/or knee pain who were asked to complete pre-visit PROMs at 2 urban arthroplasty clinics were recruited. In-person, semi-structured, audio-recorded interviews were conducted, transcribed, and coded for thematic analysis. Codes were developed using a data-driven approach. RESULTS: We analyzed 51 interviews. The mean age was 57 years, 57% were women, and 45% had private or Medicare insurance. Prevalent themes regarding location preferences were convenience and communication preferences. Thirty-four patients stated a preference for completing pre-visit PROMs at home, 19 for in-office completion, and 10 stated no preference. Prevalent themes around delivery methods included technology access and familiarity. Of the 43 patients asked to select their preferred pre-visit PROM delivery method (phone call, email, text message, or postal mail), 31 (72%) preferred email or text messaging. Barriers to completing pre-visit PROMs were technological issues, recognizing the message was healthcare-related, and being too busy or forgetting. Twenty patients identified no barriers. CONCLUSION: Electronic PROM collection is favored by many patients, but alternative methods for patients without access to or familiarity with technology remain important. Clear recognition that the message is from a physician's office and physician communication of the utility of PROMs in clinical decision making may increase pre-visit completion.
Authors: Robin R Whitebird; Leif I Solberg; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Christine K Norton; Ella A Chrenka; Marc Swiontkowski; Megan Reams; Elizabeth S Grossman Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 4.755
Authors: Chris A Anthony; Edward Octavio Rojas; Valerie Keffala; Natalie Ann Glass; Apurva S Shah; Benjamin J Miller; Matthew Hogue; Michael C Willey; Matthew Karam; John Lawrence Marsh Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 5.428