Advertisement

Advancing the use of patient-reported outcomes in practice: understanding challenges, opportunities, and the potential of health information technology

  • Chun-Ju HsiaoEmail author
  • Christine Dymek
  • Bryan Kim
  • Brigid Russell
Article

Abstract

Purpose

The effective use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can play a critical role in improving health care delivery and patient experience with care. However, PROs are not widely collected and used in clinical practice. This study aims to understand current opportunities and challenges with the use of PROs and the potential for health information technology (IT) to advance their use.

Methods

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality held two technical expert panel (TEP) meetings to discuss the current use of PROs, challenges, and opportunities in implementation, and how health IT can be leveraged to support effective PRO use in clinical practice. Results were synthesized to identify major themes and takeaways based on different stages of PRO data utilization.

Results

Findings from the TEP meetings indicated varying degrees of PRO usage in ambulatory care settings. Practices often lack a business case to collect PROs. Primary care physicians face more challenges than specialists in selecting appropriate PRO measures due to extensive variation in their patient populations. Providers also need training to use PRO data for shared decision making and population health management. Potential research areas to address PRO implementation challenges include measures harmonization, implementation process and workflow, electronic data collection and integration, and user-friendly data displays.

Conclusions

Opportunities exist during different stages of PRO implementation to advance the use of PROs in clinical practice. Health IT can be utilized to address challenges in data collection, integration, and visualization to make PRO data accessible and understandable to patients and providers.

Keywords

Health information technology Patient-reported outcomes Ambulatory care Primary care 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Arlene Bierman, Director of the Center for Evidence and Practice Improvement at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), for her guidance in conceptualizing the two technical expert panel meetings and providing strategic direction for AHRQ’s efforts to advance the use of patient-reported outcomes in practice.

Funding

No funding was received for this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The technical expert panel meetings were conducted as a consultation exercise with individuals who have expertise in PROs and health IT. Ethical approval was therefore not obtained.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

References

  1. 1.
    Lavallee, D. C., Chenok, K. E., Love, R. M., Petersen, C., Holve, E., Segal, C. D., et al. (2016). Incorporating patient-reported outcomes into health care to engage patients and enhance care. Health Affairs (Millwood), 35(4), 575–582.  https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basch, E. (2017). Patient-reported outcomes—harnessing patients’ voices to improve clinical care. New England Journal of Medicine, 376(2), 105–108.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1611252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blumenthal, K. J., Chang, Y., Ferris, T. G., Spirt, J. C., Vogeli, C., Wagle, N., et al. (2017). Using a self-reported global health measure to identify patients at high risk for future healthcare utilization. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 32(8), 877–882.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4041-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baumhauer, J. F. (2017). Patient-reported outcomes—are they living up to their potential? The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(1), 6–9.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1702978.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Working Group on Health Outcomes for Older Persons with Multiple Chronic, C. (2012). Universal health outcome measures for older persons with multiple chronic conditions. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60(12), 2333–2341.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2012.04240.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2009). Guidance for industry, patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed 6 Apr 2017.
  7. 7.
    Philpot, L. M., Barnes, S. A., Brown, R. M., Austin, J. A., James, C. S., Stanford, R. H., et al. (2017). Barriers and benefits to the use of patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical care: a qualitative study. American Journal of Medical Quality.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1062860617745986.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    National Insititue of Health Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System. http://www.healthmeasures.net/explore-measurement-systems/promis. Accessed 6 Apr 2017.
  9. 9.
    Roos, E. M., & Lohmander, L. S. (2003). The knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 64.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1-64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nilsdotter, A. K., Lohmander, L. S., Klassbo, M., & Roos, E. M. (2003). Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)—validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 4, 10.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-4-10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (2016). CMS quality measure development plan: supporting the transition to the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) and alternative payment models (APMs). Baltimore: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Franklin, P. D., Allison, J. J., & Ayers, D. C. (2012). Beyond joint implant registries: a patient-centered research consortium for comparative effectiveness in total joint replacement. JAMA, 308(12), 1217–1218.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.12568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    MN Community Measurement (2013). 2013 health care quality report: compare clinic, medical group and hospital performance. http://mncm.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/2013-HCQR-Final-2.4.2014.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2017.
  14. 14.
    Pitzen, C., & Larson, J. (2016). Patient-reported outcome measures and integration into electronic health records. Journal of Oncology Practice, 12(10), 867–872.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.2016.014118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Porter, M. E., Larsson, S., & Lee, T. H. (2016). Standardizing patient outcomes measurement. New England Journal of Medicine, 374(6), 504–506.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1511701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2017). Implementation and evaluation of new health information technology (IT) strategies for collecting and using patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (U18). https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/pa-17-247.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2018.
  17. 17.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2017). Utilizing health information technology to scale and spread successful practice models using patient-reported outcomes (R18). https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/pa-17-077.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2018.
  18. 18.
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (2018). AHRQ step up app challenge: advancing care through patient assessments. https://www.ahrq.gov/stepupappchallenge/index.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2018.
  19. 19.
    Sittig, D. F., & Singh, H. (2010). A new sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems. Quality and Safety Health Care, 19(Suppl 3), i68–i74.  https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2010.042085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ciemins, E. (October 2016). What patients know: patient-reported outcomes. Group Practice Journalhttp://www.amga.org/wcm/GPJ/RCV/wcm/PI/GPJ/Archives/2016/10.aspx. Accessed 14 Mar 2017.
  21. 21.
    Abernethy, A. P., Ahmad, A., Zafar, S. Y., Wheeler, J. L., Reese, J. B., & Lyerly, H. K. (2010). Electronic patient-reported data capture as a foundation of rapid learning cancer care. Medical Care, 48(6 Suppl), 32–38.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181db53a4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arcia, A., Velez, M., & Bakken, S. (2015). Style guide: an interdisciplinary communication tool to support the process of generating tailored infographics from electronic health data using EnTICE3. EGEMS (Wash DC), 3(1), 1120.  https://doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1120.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Benze, G., Nauck, F., Alt-Epping, B., Gianni, G., Bauknecht, T., Ettl, J., et al. (2017). PROutine: a feasibility study assessing surveillance of electronic patient reported outcomes and adherence via smartphone app in advanced cancer. Annals of Palliative Medicine.  https://doi.org/10.21037/apm.2017.07.05.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bliven, B. D., Kaufman, S. E., & Spertus, J. A. (2001). Electronic collection of health-related quality of life data: validity, time benefits, and patient preference. Quality of Life Research, 10(1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Colaianni, C. A., Levesque, P. A., & Lindsay, R. W. (2017). Integrating data collection into office work flow and electronic health records for clinical outcomes research. JAMA Facial Plastic Surgery, 19(6), 528–532.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2017.1344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fredericksen, R., Crane, P. K., Tufano, J., Ralston, J., Schmidt, S., Brown, T., et al. (2012). Integrating a web-based, patient-administered assessment into primary care for HIV-infected adults. Journal of AIDS and HIV Research, 4(2), 47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gurland, B., Alves-Ferreira, P. C., Sobol, T., & Kiran, R. P. (2010). Using technology to improve data capture and integration of patient-reported outcomes into clinical care: pilot results in a busy colorectal unit. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 53(8), 1168–1175.  https://doi.org/10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181d87468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hartzler, A. L., Chaudhuri, S., Fey, B. C., Flum, D. R., & Lavallee, D. (2015). Integrating patient-reported outcomes into spine surgical care through visual dashboards: lessons learned from human-centered design. EGEMS (Wash DC), 3(2), 1133.  https://doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1133.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lucas, S. M., Kim, T. K., Ghani, K. R., Miller, D. C., Linsell, S., Starr, J., et al. (2017). Establishment of a web-based system for collection of patient-reported outcomes after radical prostatectomy in a statewide quality improvement collaborative. Urology, 107, 96–102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2017.04.058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tirosh, O., Tran, P., Renouf, J., Pergaminelis, N., Purdie, C. N., Ho, A., et al. (2017). PROMsBase: Web-based repository portal for patient-reported outcome measures in orthopaedics. Health Informatics Journal.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458217725904.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Valuck, R. J., Anderson, H. O., Libby, A. M., Brandt, E., Bryan, C., Allen, R. R., et al. (2012). Enhancing electronic health record measurement of depression severity and suicide ideation: a distributed ambulatory research in therapeutics network (DARTNet) study. The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 25(5), 582–593.  https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2012.05.110053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wu, A. W., Jensen, R. E., Salzberg, C., & Snyder, C. (2013). Advances in the use of patient reported outcome measures in electronic health records. In support of the PCORI National Workshop to Advance the Use of PRO measures in Electronic Health Records. Atlanta.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Baumhauer, J. F., Dasilva, C., Mitten, D., Rubery, P., & Rotondo, M. (2018). The cost of patient-reported outcomes in medicine. NEJM Catalysthttps://catalyst.nejm.org/cost-pro-collection-patient-reported-outcomes/. Accessed 2 Oct 2018.
  34. 34.
    Kotronoulas, G., Connaghan, J., Grenfell, J., Gupta, G., Smith, L., Simpson, M., et al. (2017). Employing patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures to support newly diagnosed patients with melanoma: feasibility and acceptability of a holistic needs assessment intervention. European Journal of Oncology Nursing, 31, 59–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2017.10.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityRockvilleUSA
  2. 2.The Joint CommissionWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations