Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) were originally developed for comparing groups of people in clinical trials and population studies, and the results were used to support treatment recommendations or inform health policy, but there was not direct benefit for the participants providing PROs data. However, as the experience in using those measures increased, it became obvious the clinical value in using individual patient PROs profiles in daily practice to identify/monitor symptoms, evaluate treatment outcomes and support shared decision-making. A key issue limiting successful implementation is clinicians’ lack of knowledge on how to effectively utilize PROs data in their clinical encounters.

Methods

Using a change management theoretical framework, this paper describes the development and implementation of three programs for training clinicians to effectively use PRO data in routine practice. The training programs are in three diverse clinical areas (adult oncology, lung transplant and paediatrics), in three countries with different healthcare systems, thus providing a rare opportunity to pull out common approaches whilst recognizing specific settings. For each program, we describe the clinical and organizational setting, the program planning and development, the content of the training session with supporting material, subsequent monitoring of PROs use and evidence of adoption. The common successful components and practical steps are identified, leading to discussion and future recommendations.

Results

The results of the three training programs are described as the implementation. In the oncology program, PRO data have been developed and are currently evaluated; in the lung transplant program, PRO data are used in daily practice and the integration with electronic patient records is under development; and in the paediatric program, PRO data are fully implemented with around 7,600 consultations since the start of the implementation.

Conclusion

Adult learning programs teaching clinicians how to use and act on PROs in clinical practice are a key steps in supporting patient engagement and participation in shared decision-making. Researchers and clinicians from different clinical areas should collaborate to share ideas, develop guidelines and promote good practice in patient-centred care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. US Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. (2014) Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims.

  2. Jensen, R. E., Snyder, C. F., Abernethy, A. P., et al. (2013). Review of electronic patient-reported outcomes systems used in cancer clinical care. Journal of Oncology Practice, 10, 215–222.

  3. Wu, A. W., Kharrazi, H., Boulware, L. E., & Snyder, C. F. (2013). Measure once, cut twice—Adding patient-reported outcome measures to the electronic health record for comparative effectiveness research. Journal Clinical Epidemiology, 66, S12–S20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ahmed, S., Berzon, R. A., Revicki, D. A., et al. (2012). The use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) within comparative effectiveness research: Implications for clinical practice and health care policy. Medical Care, 50, 1060–1070.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Snyder, C. F., Jensen, R. E., Segal, J. B., & Wu, A. W. (2013). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs): putting the patient perspective in patient-centered outcomes research. Medical Care, 51, S73–S79.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Banerjee, A. K., Okun, S., Edwards, I. R., et al. (2013). Patient-reported outcome measures in safety event reporting: PROSPER consortium guidance. Drug Safety, 36, 1129–1149.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Deyo, R. A., & Patrick, D. L. (1989). Barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research. Medical Care, 27, S254–S268.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boyce, M. B., Browne, J. P., & Greenhalgh, J. (2014). The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Quality & Safety, 23, 508–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Greenhalgh, J., & Meadows, K. (1999). The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: A literature review. Journal Evaluation Clinical Practice, 5, 401–416.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Santana, M. J., Feeny, D., Johnson, J. A., et al. (2010). Assessing the use of health-related quality of life measures in the routine clinical care of lung-transplant patients. Quality Life Research, 19, 371–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Engelen, V., Detmar, S., Koopman, H., et al. (2012). Reporting health-related quality of life scores to physicians during routine follow-up visits of pediatric oncology patients: is it effective? Pediatric Blood Cancer, 58, 766–774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Greenhalgh, J., Abhyankar, P., McCluskey, S., Takeuchi, E., & Velikova, G. (2013). How do doctors refer to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) in oncology consultations? Quality Life Research, 22, 939–950.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Velikova, G., Sheppard, S., Campbell, L., Smith, A., Awad, N., Selby, P., & Brown, J. (2008). Randomized trial of quality-of-life measurement in oncology practice: Do oncologists need to know. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26, 15S.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Berwick, D. M. (2003). Disseminating innovations in health care. JAMA, 289, 1969–1975.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fleuren, M., Wiefferink, K., & Paulussen, T. (2004). Determinants of innovation within health care organizations: Literature review and Delphi study. International Journal Quality Health Care, 16, 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Grol, R. (1997). Personal paper. Beliefs and evidence in changing clinical practice. BMJ, 315, 418–421.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Velikova, G., Awad, N., Coles-Gale, R., Wright, E. P., Brown, J. M., & Selby, P. J. (2008). The clinical value of quality of life assessment in oncology practice—A qualitative study of patient and physician views. Psychooncology, 17, 690–698.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Velikova, G., Booth, L., Smith, A. B., et al. (2004). Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. Journal Clinical Oncology, 22, 714–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wright, P., Marshall, L., Smith, A. B., Velikova, G., & Selby, P. (2008). Measurement and interpretation of social distress using the social difficulties inventory (SDI). European Journal Cancer, 44, 1529–1535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Knowles, M. (1978). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston: Gulf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become (pp. 114, 199–217). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.

  22. Holch, P., Absolom, K., & Velikova, G. (2014). Development and preliminary evaluation of guidelines for emotional distress management in oncology practise. Psychooncology, 23(suppl. 2), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Absolom, K., Takeuchi, E., Warrington, L., et al. (2014). Using a patient reported outcome measure in chemotherapy review consultations: The impact of an interactive doctor training session. Quality of Life Research (Submitted).

  24. Santana, M. J., & Feeny, D. (2013). Framework to assess the effects of using patient-reported outcome measures in chronic care management. Quality Life Research, 9(3), 371–379.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Santana, M. J., & Feeny, D. H. (2009). Using the health utilities index in routine clinical care: Process, feasibility, and acceptability: A randomized controlled trial. Patient, 2, 159–167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Haverman, L., & Engelen, V. (2011). Van Rossum MA, Heymans HS, Grootenhuis MA (2011) Monitoring health-related quality of life in paediatric practice: Development of an innovative web-based application. BMC Pediatrics, 11, 3–10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Leaf, P. J., Owens, P. L., Leventhal, J. M., et al. (2004). Pediatricians’ training and identification and management of psychosocial problems. Clinical Pediatrics (Phila), 43, 355–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Baars, R. M., van der Pal, S. M., Koopman, H. M., & Wit, J. M. (2004). Clinicians’ perspective on quality of life assessment in paediatric clinical practice. Acta Paediatrica, 93, 1356–1362.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Engelen, V., Haverman, L., Koopman, H., et al. (2010). Development and implementation of a patient reported outcome intervention (QLIC-ON PROfile) in clinical paediatric oncology practice. Patient Education and Counseling, 81, 235–244.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wallander, J. L., & Varni, J. W. (1998). Effects of pediatric chronic physical disorders on child and family adjustment. Journal Child Psychology Psychiatry, 39, 29–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Stam, H., Grootenhuis, M. A., Brons, P. P., Caron, H. N., & Last, B. F. (2006). Health-related quality of life in children and emotional reactions of parents following completion of cancer treatment. Pediatric Blood Cancer, 47, 312–319.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Varni, J. W., Burwinkle, T. M., & Lane, M. M. (2005). Health-related quality of life measurement in pediatric clinical practice: An appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health Quality Life Outcomes, 3, 34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Detmar, S. B., Muller, M. J., Schornagel, J. H., Wever, L. D., & Aaronson, N. K. (2002). Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient-physician communication: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 288, 3027–3034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Snyder, C. F., Aaronson, N. K., Choucair, A. K., et al. (2012). Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: A review of the options and considerations. Quality Life Research, 21, 1305–1314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Greenhalgh, J., Long, A. F., & Flynn, R. (2005). The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: Lack of impact or lack of theory? Social Science and Medicine, 60, 833–843.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Judson, T. J., Bennett, A. V., Rogak, L. J., et al. (2013). Feasibility of long-term patient self-reporting of toxicities from home via the Internet during routine chemotherapy. Journal Clinical Oncology, 31, 2580–2585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to our colleagues for their interest and participation in the training sessions. Dr. David Feeny has a proprietary interest in Health Utilities Incorporated (HUInc), Dundas, Ontario, Canada. HUInc distributes copyrighted HUI materials and provides methodological advice on the use of HUI. The other co-authors report no other conflict of interest in this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria J. Santana.

Additional information

Maria J. Santana and Lotte Haverman are the first co-authors.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 2.

Table 2 Overview of the three programs based on theoretical approaches

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Santana, M.J., Haverman, L., Absolom, K. et al. Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice. Qual Life Res 24, 1707–1718 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0903-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0903-5

Keywords

Navigation