A review of the barriers to using Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in routine cancer care

被引:142
|
作者
Hanh Nguyen [1 ]
Butow, Phyllis [2 ]
Dhillon, Haryana [2 ]
Sundaresan, Puma [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Radiat Oncol Network, Western Sydney Local Hlth Dist, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Sydney, Ctr Med Psychol & Evidence Based Decis Making, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, Sydney Med Sch, Sydney, NSW, Australia
关键词
patient-reported outcomes; patient-reported outcome measures; barriers; cancer; oncology; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; CLINICAL-PRACTICE; TOXICITIES; IMPLEMENTATION; DOCTORS; HEAD; SURVEILLANCE; FEASIBILITY; EXPERIENCES; SYSTEM;
D O I
10.1002/jmrs.421
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Introduction: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are direct reports from patients about the status of their health condition without amendment or interpretation by others. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the tools used to measure PROs; they are usually validated questionnaires patients complete by self-assessing their health status. Whilst the benefits of using PROs and PROMs to guide real-time patient care are well established, they have not been adopted by many oncology institutions worldwide. This literature review aimed to examine the barriers associated with using PROs and PROMs in routine oncology care. Methods: A literature search was conducted across EMBASE, Medline and CINAHL databases. Studies detailing barriers to routine PRO use for real-time patient care were included; those focusing on PRO collection in the research setting were excluded. Results: Of 1165 records captured, 14 studies informed this review. At the patient level, patient time, incapacity and difficulty using electronic devices to complete PROMs were prominent barriers. At the health professional level, major barriers included health professionals' lack of time and knowledge to meaningfully interpret and integrate PRO data into their clinical practice and the inability for PRO data to be acted upon. Prominent barriers at the service level included difficulties integrating PROs and PROMs into clinical workflows and inadequate information technology (IT) infrastructures for easy PRO collection. Conclusion: This review has outlined potential barriers to routine PRO use in the oncology setting. Such barriers should be considered when implementing PROs into routine clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页码:186 / 195
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Patient-Reported Outcomes (Pros) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (Proms)
    Weldring, Theresa
    Smith, Sheree M. S.
    [J]. HEALTH SERVICES INSIGHTS, 2013, 6 : 61 - 68
  • [2] Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) versus patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)Is there a difference?
    Jokstad, Asbjorn
    [J]. CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL DENTAL RESEARCH, 2018, 4 (03): : 61 - 62
  • [3] Using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine head and neck cancer care: What do health professionals perceive as barriers and facilitators?
    Nguyen, Hanh
    Butow, Phyllis
    Dhillon, Haryana
    Morris, Lucinda
    Brown, Alison
    West, Katrina
    Sundaresan, Puma
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2020, 64 (05) : 704 - 710
  • [4] Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in routine care palliative radiotherapy
    Schuler, Thilo
    Hruby, George
    Eade, Thomas
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2021, 154 : E10 - E11
  • [5] Patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators associated with the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cancer care: a systematic review
    Caitlin Graupner
    Merel L. Kimman
    Suzanne Mul
    Annerika H. M. Slok
    Danny Claessens
    Jos Kleijnen
    Carmen D. Dirksen
    Stéphanie O. Breukink
    [J]. Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021, 29 : 573 - 593
  • [6] Patient outcomes, patient experiences and process indicators associated with the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in cancer care: a systematic review
    Graupner, Caitlin
    Kimman, Merel L.
    Mul, Suzanne
    Slok, Annerika H. M.
    Claessens, Danny
    Kleijnen, Jos
    Dirksen, Carmen D.
    Breukink, Stephanie O.
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2021, 29 (02) : 573 - 593
  • [7] Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review
    Maharaj, Ashika D.
    Samoborec, Stella
    Evans, Sue M.
    Zalcberg, John
    Neale, Rachel E.
    Goldstein, David
    Merrett, Neil
    White, Kate
    Croagh, Daniel
    Pilgrim, Charles H. C.
    Evans, Peter
    Knowles, Brett
    Leong, Trevor
    Philip, Jennifer
    Smith, Marty
    Ioannou, Liane
    [J]. HPB, 2020, 22 (02) : 187 - 203
  • [8] EVALUATION OF PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES (PROMS)
    Barnard, K.
    [J]. DIABETES TECHNOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2019, 21 : A7 - A7
  • [9] Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures in liver transplantation: a scoping review
    Vedadi, Ali
    Khairalla, Roula
    Che, Adrian
    Nagee, Ahsas
    Saqib, Mohammed
    Ayub, Ali
    Wasim, Aghna
    Macanovic, Sara
    Orchanian-Cheff, Ani
    Selzner-Malekkiani, Nazia
    Bartlett, Susan
    Mucsi, Istvan
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2023, 32 (09) : 2435 - 2445
  • [10] Patient-reported outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures in liver transplantation: a scoping review
    Ali Vedadi
    Roula Khairalla
    Adrian Che
    Ahsas Nagee
    Mohammed Saqib
    Ali Ayub
    Aghna Wasim
    Sara Macanovic
    Ani Orchanian-Cheff
    Nazia Selzner-Malekkiani
    Susan Bartlett
    Istvan Mucsi
    [J]. Quality of Life Research, 2023, 32 : 2435 - 2445