Eric K H Chan1,2, Todd C Edwards3, Kirstie Haywood4, Sean P Mikles5, Louise Newton6. 1. Measurement, Evaluation, and Research Methodology (MERM) Program, University of British Columbia, 2125 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada. 2. Janssen Global Services, LLC, Raritan, NJ, 08869, USA. 3. Department of Health Services, University of Washington, 4333 Brooklyn Ave NE, Seattle, WA, 98195-9455, USA. 4. Warwick Research in Nursing, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. 5. Department of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, Box 357240, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA. 6. Clinical Outcomes Solutions, Unit 68, Folkestone Enterprise Centre, Shearway Business Park, Shearway Road, Folkestone, Kent, CT19 4RH, UK. louise.newton@clinoutsolutions.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice is increasing. Following the creation of a 'User's Guide to Implementing PRO Assessment in Clinical Practice' by the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL), volunteers from ISOQOL sought to create a Companion Guide to assist health care providers with the scientific and practical considerations involved in implementing and using PRO measures in clinical care by using information from real-world case studies. This paper summarizes the key issues presented in the Companion Guide. METHODS: Ten respondents, who were members of the ISOQOL's CP-SIG and worked in various clinical areas, participated in a survey or telephone interview. Participants were from Canada (n = 2), Denmark (n = 1), England (n = 2), Holland (n = 1), and the United States (n = 4). RESULTS: Based on the information provided by respondents, a Companion Guide was produced, organized according to the nine questions presented in the User's Guide. An additional section for key take-home messages was also provided. This guide provides examples of issues and considerations related to the implementation of PRO measures in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents provided insight into their experiences and emphasized that PRO initiatives were likely to be more successful if there is purposeful, designed integration into clinical practice, meaningful substantive engagement with all stakeholders and access to necessary organizational resources. The ability to leverage existing technology as well as realistic and stakeholder consensus-driven expectations for planning and timing were also key to the successful implementation of PRO measures.
PURPOSE: The use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice is increasing. Following the creation of a 'User's Guide to Implementing PRO Assessment in Clinical Practice' by the International Society for Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL), volunteers from ISOQOL sought to create a Companion Guide to assist health care providers with the scientific and practical considerations involved in implementing and using PRO measures in clinical care by using information from real-world case studies. This paper summarizes the key issues presented in the Companion Guide. METHODS: Ten respondents, who were members of the ISOQOL's CP-SIG and worked in various clinical areas, participated in a survey or telephone interview. Participants were from Canada (n = 2), Denmark (n = 1), England (n = 2), Holland (n = 1), and the United States (n = 4). RESULTS: Based on the information provided by respondents, a Companion Guide was produced, organized according to the nine questions presented in the User's Guide. An additional section for key take-home messages was also provided. This guide provides examples of issues and considerations related to the implementation of PRO measures in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents provided insight into their experiences and emphasized that PRO initiatives were likely to be more successful if there is purposeful, designed integration into clinical practice, meaningful substantive engagement with all stakeholders and access to necessary organizational resources. The ability to leverage existing technology as well as realistic and stakeholder consensus-driven expectations for planning and timing were also key to the successful implementation of PRO measures.
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
Authors: J M Valderas; A Kotzeva; M Espallargues; G Guyatt; C E Ferrans; M Y Halyard; D A Revicki; T Symonds; A Parada; J Alonso Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2008-01-04 Impact factor: 4.147
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: Elizabeth D Cox; Sarah K Dobrozsi; Christopher B Forrest; Wendy E Gerhardt; Harald Kliems; Bryce B Reeve; Nan E Rothrock; Jin-Shei Lai; Jacob M Svenson; Lindsay A Thompson; Thuy Dan N Tran; Carole A Tucker Journal: J Pediatr Date: 2020-11-30 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Guillaume Mouillet; Joëlle Fritzsch; Sophie Paget-Bailly; Astrid Pozet; Ikram Es-Saad; Aurelia Meurisse; Dewi Vernerey; Kristina Mouyabi; Diane Berthod; Franck Bonnetain; Amélie Anota; Antoine Thiery-Vuillemin Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Therese A Nelson; Brigitte Anderson; Jiang Bian; Andrew D Boyd; Shirley V Burton; Kristina Davis; Yi Guo; Bhrandon A Harris; Kelly Hynes; Karl M Kochendorfer; David Liebovitz; Kayla Martin; François Modave; John Moses; Nicholas D Soulakis; Donald Weinbrenner; Sonya H White; Nan E Rothrock; Annette L Valenta; Justin B Starren Journal: J Clin Transl Sci Date: 2020-04-06
Authors: Marie A Flannery; Supriya Mohile; Eva Culakova; Sally Norton; Charles Kamen; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Grace DiGiovanni; Lorraine Griggs; Thomas Bradley; Judith O Hopkins; Jane Jijun Liu; Kah Poh Loh Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2021-08-08 Impact factor: 3.612