Y Claire Dorsey1, Erin J Song2, David A Leiman3,4. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 200 Morris Street, Durham, NC, 27701, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. 3. Division of Gastroenterology, Duke University School of Medicine, Duke Clinical Research Institute, 200 Morris Street, Durham, NC, 27701, USA. david.leiman@duke.edu. 4. Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA. david.leiman@duke.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and summarize their role in assessing undifferentiated dysphagia and common esophageal disorders, including achalasia, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). RECENT FINDINGS: Given the subjective nature of swallowing disorders, accurate diagnoses often rely on capturing the patient experience. As a result, the number of PROMs used to characterize esophageal symptoms is increasing with a recent particular emphasis on EoE. Overall, esophageal-focused PROMs are used to interpret patient symptoms and quality of life, diagnosis, and symptom changes over time. There are limitations with each instrument, including factors affecting validity, reliability, accessibility, patient participation, and logistical implementation. PROM instruments can be helpful tools in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal disorders. Instruments should be chosen based on factors such as target population and setting, including research, clinical, and quality improvement efforts. Future research should address how best to implement PROMs and integrate the obtained data with patient care.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and summarize their role in assessing undifferentiated dysphagia and common esophageal disorders, including achalasia, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). RECENT FINDINGS: Given the subjective nature of swallowing disorders, accurate diagnoses often rely on capturing the patient experience. As a result, the number of PROMs used to characterize esophageal symptoms is increasing with a recent particular emphasis on EoE. Overall, esophageal-focused PROMs are used to interpret patient symptoms and quality of life, diagnosis, and symptom changes over time. There are limitations with each instrument, including factors affecting validity, reliability, accessibility, patient participation, and logistical implementation. PROM instruments can be helpful tools in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal disorders. Instruments should be chosen based on factors such as target population and setting, including research, clinical, and quality improvement efforts. Future research should address how best to implement PROMs and integrate the obtained data with patient care.
Authors: Neil Aaronson; Jordi Alonso; Audrey Burnam; Kathleen N Lohr; Donald L Patrick; Edward Perrin; Ruth E Stein Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Fraukje A Ponds; Paul Fockens; Aaltje Lei; Horst Neuhaus; Torsten Beyna; Jennis Kandler; Thomas Frieling; Philip W Y Chiu; Justin C Y Wu; Vivien W Y Wong; Guido Costamagna; Pietro Familiari; Peter J Kahrilas; John E Pandolfino; André J P M Smout; Albert J Bredenoord Journal: JAMA Date: 2019-07-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Brennan M R Spiegel; Ron D Hays; Roger Bolus; Gil Y Melmed; Lin Chang; Cynthia Whitman; Puja P Khanna; Sylvia H Paz; Tonya Hays; Steve Reise; Dinesh Khanna Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-09-09 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: A B M Grudell; J A Alexander; F B Enders; R Pacifico; M Fredericksen; J L Wise; G R Locke; A Arora; T Zais; N J Talley; Y Romero Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2007 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Rhiannon C Macefield; Marc Jacobs; Ida J Korfage; Joanna Nicklin; Robert N Whistance; Sara T Brookes; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Jane M Blazeby Journal: Trials Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 2.279