Learning to Overcome Barriers to Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: Lessons From the Field

Nicole L. Henderson,Ethan M. Basch,Gabrielle B. Rocque

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.24.00104

2024-03-19

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:#Implementation of #ePROs in real world settings, lessons learned

oncology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Strategies for implementing an electronic patient-reported outcomes-based symptom management program across six cancer centers

Michael Hassett,Samira Dias,Christine Cronin,Deborah Schrag,Nadine McCleary,Jaclyn Simpson,Tiana Poirier-Shelton,Jessica Bian,James Reich,Don Dizon,Megan Begnoche,Hannah Hazard Jenkins,Laura Tasker,Sandra Wong,Loretta Pearson,Roshan Paudel,Raymond U. Osarogiagbon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11536-5

2024-11-16

BMC Health Services Research

Abstract:Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO)-based symptom management improves cancer patients' outcomes. However, implementation of ePROs is challenging, requiring technical resources for integration into clinical systems, substantial buy-in from clinicians and patients, novel workflows to support between-visit symptom management, and institutional investment.

health care sciences & services
Using Implementation Science Frameworks to Guide the Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring in Routine Cancer Care

Julia Lai-Kwon,Claudia Rutherford,Michael Jefford,Claire Gore,Stephanie Best

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.23.00462

2024-01-10

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:PURPOSE Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are an evidence-based means of detecting symptoms earlier and improving patient outcomes. However, there are few examples of successful implementation in routine cancer care. We conducted a qualitative study to identify barriers and facilitators to implementing ePRO symptom monitoring in routine cancer care using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS Participants were adult patients with cancer, their caregivers, or health care professionals involved in ePRO monitoring or processes. Focus groups or individual interviews were conducted using a semistructured approach informed by the CFIR. Data were analyzed deductively using the CFIR. Barriers were matched to theory-informed implementation strategies using the CFIR-Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) matching tool. RESULTS Thirty participants were interviewed: 22 females (73%), aged 31-70 years (28, 94%), comprising patients (n = 8), caregivers (n = 2), medical oncologists (n = 4), nurses (n = 4), hospital leaders (n = 6), clinic administrators (n = 2), pharmacists (n = 2), and information technology specialists (n = 2). Barriers pertaining to four CFIR domains were identified and several were novel, including the challenge of adapting ePROs for different anticancer treatments. Facilitators pertaining to all CFIR domains were identified, such as leveraging acceptability of remote care post–COVID-19 to drive implementation. Conducting consensus discussions with stakeholders to tailor ePROs to the local setting, identifying/preparing individual and group-level champions, and assessing readiness for change (including leveraging technological advances and increased confidence in using remote monitoring post–COVID-19) were the most frequently recommended implementation strategies. CONCLUSION The CFIR facilitated identification of known and novel barriers and facilitators to implementing ePRO symptom monitoring in routine cancer care. Implementation strategies summarized in a conceptual framework will be used to codesign an ePRO symptom monitoring system for immunotherapy side effects.

oncology
Developing an implementation blueprint: Lessons learned from integrating electronic patient-reported outcomes in HIV clinics in Alabama

Kelly W. Gagnon,Kaylee Burgan,Morgan Mulrain,Stefan Baral,Karen Cropsey,Michael Mugavero,Ellen Eaton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312782

IF: 3.7

2024-10-31

PLoS ONE

Abstract:People living with HIV are disproportionately affected by depression, anxiety, and substance use which impede engagement with HIV treatment services and can increase risks of HIV-related morbidity and mortality. Capturing timely, accurate patient data at point of care is recommended to inform clinical decision-making and retain patients on the HIV care continuum. Currently, there is limited use of validated screening tools for substance use and mental health at the point of care in HIV clinics, even though people with HIV (PWH) have a high prevalence of these comorbidities. Even fewer clinics screen in a manner that encourages disclosure of stigmatized substance use, depression, and anxiety. Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are an evidence-based modality to overcome such limitations by eliciting responses directly from patients via tablet, smartphone, or computer. To date, there is limited consensus on how to implement ePROs into non-academic settings and enhance uptake. Our team sought to address this gap by examining the implementation of ePROs, previously implemented in an academic clinic, to enhance screening and treatment of mental health (MH) and substance use at five Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program-funded clinics in Alabama. The ePROs were delivered through a multi-component intervention titled HIV + Service delivery and Telemedicine through Effective Patient Reported Outcomes (+STEP), which also provides targeted training to frontline clinicians, and resources for MH and substance use treatment for PWH without access to care. The objective of this study is to provide an implementation blueprint that can be tested and utilized in other HIV clinics to integrate ePROs and increase evidence-based screening for depression, anxiety, and substance use among PWH, as well as outline lessons learned from implementation to date. The findings from this study provide practical steps and advice based on our experience in implementing electronic patient-reported outcomes in HIV clinics in the US Deep South.

multidisciplinary sciences
A Qualitative Study of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring After Thoracic Surgery

Alix Boisson-Walsh,Chase Cox,Meghan O'Leary,Sachita Shrestha,Philip Carr,Amanda L Gentry,Lauren Hill,Bernice Newsome,Jason Long,Benjamin Haithcock,Angela M Stover,Ethan Basch,Jennifer Leeman,Gita N Mody

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2024.09.051

2024-10-25

Abstract:Introduction: Thoracic surgery is a mainstay of therapy for lung cancer and other chronic pulmonary conditions, but recovery is often complicated. Digital health systems can facilitate remote postoperative symptom management yet obstacles persist in their routine clinical adoption. This study aimed to identify patient-perceived barriers and facilitators to using an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) monitoring platform specially designed to detect complications from thoracic surgery postdischarge. Methods: Patients (n = 16) who underwent thoracic surgery and participated in an ePRO parent study completed semistructured interviews, which were analyzed using thematic content analysis and iterative team-based coding. Themes were mapped onto the three domains of the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation Model of behavior framework to inform ePRO design and implementation improvements. Results: Analysis demonstrated seven dominant themes, including barriers (1. postoperative patient physical and mental health, 2. lack of access to email and poor internet connectivity, 3. lack of clarity on ePRO use in routine clinical care, and 4. symptom item redundancy) as well as facilitators (5. ease of the ePRO assessment completion, 6. engagement with the surgical care team on ePRO use, and 7. increased awareness of symptom experience through ePRO use). Suggested ePRO improvements included offering alternatives to web-based completion, tailoring symptom assessments to individual patients, and the need for patient education on ePROs for perioperative care. Conclusions: Addressable barriers and facilitators to implementation of ePRO symptom monitoring in the thoracic surgical patient population postdischarge have been identified. Future work will test the impact of design improvements on implementation outcomes of feasibility and acceptability.
Using Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring to Navigate Patients to Supportive Care Services

Tara L. Kaufmann,Gabrielle B. Rocque

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.24.00270

2024-06-25

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:Dr Kaufmann and Dr Rocque envision how #ePRO symptom monitoring can link patients to supportive care services. #pallonc #supponc #patientreportedoutcomes #PROS #cancer #oncology

oncology
Automating Patient-reported Data Collection: Does it Work?

Sayah Bogor,Kian Niknam,Justin Less,Veronica Andaya,Ishaan Swarup

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/bpo.0000000000002678

2024-04-11

Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics

Abstract:Objective: There are several electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) vendors that are being used at institutions to automate data collection. However, there is little known about their success in collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and it is unknown which patients are more likely to complete these surveys. In this study, we assessed rates of PRO completion, as well as determined factors that contributed to the completion of baseline and follow-up surveys. Methods: We queried our ePRO platform to assess rates of completion for baseline and follow-up surveys for patients from October 2019 to June 2022. All baseline surveys were administered before pediatric orthopaedic procedures, and follow-up surveys were sent at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery to patients with baseline data. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess differences in patients who did and did not complete surveys. Results: This study included 1313 patients during the study period. Baseline surveys were completed by 66% of the cohort (n = 873 patients). There was a significant difference in race/ethnicity and language spoken in the patients who did and did not complete baseline surveys ( P < 0.01) with lower rates of completion in African American, Hispanic, and Spanish-speaking patients. At least one follow-up was obtained for 68% of patients with baseline surveys (n = 597 patients). There were significant differences in completion rates based on race/ethnicity ( P = 0.03) and language spoken ( P = 0.01). There were lower rates of baseline completion for patients with government insurance in our multivariate analysis (odds ratio: 0.6, P < 0.01). Conclusion: Baseline and follow-up PRO data can be obtained from the majority of patients using automated ePRO platforms. However, additional focus is needed on collecting data from traditionally underrepresented patient groups to better understand outcomes in these patient populations. Level of Evidence: Level III—retrospective cohort study.

pediatrics,orthopedics
Planning for Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: Development of Decision Tools and Practical Experience Across Four Clinics

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

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/cts.2020.37

2020-01-01

Journal of Clinical and Translational Science

Abstract:Introduction: Many institutions are attempting to implement patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Because PROs often change clinical workflows significantly for patients and providers, implementation choices can have major impact. While various implementation guides exist, a stepwise list of decision points covering the full implementation process and drawing explicitly on a sociotechnical conceptual framework does not exist. Methods: To facilitate real-world implementation of PROs in electronic health records (EHRs) for use in clinical practice, members of the EHR Access to Seamless Integration of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Consortium developed structured PRO implementation planning tools. Each institution pilot tested the tools. Joint meetings led to the identification of critical sociotechnical success factors. Results: Three tools were developed and tested: (1) a PRO Planning Guide summarizes the empirical knowledge and guidance about PRO implementation in routine clinical care; (2) a Decision Log allows decision tracking; and (3) an Implementation Plan Template simplifies creation of a sharable implementation plan. Seven lessons learned during implementation underscore the iterative nature of planning and the importance of the clinician champion, as well as the need to understand aims, manage implementation barriers, minimize disruption, provide ample discussion time, and continuously engage key stakeholders. Conclusions: Highly structured planning tools, informed by a sociotechnical perspective, enabled the construction of clear, clinic-specific plans. By developing and testing three reusable tools (freely available for immediate use), our project addressed the need for consolidated guidance and created new materials for PRO implementation planning. We identified seven important lessons that, while common to technology implementation, are especially critical in PRO implementation.
Seamless Integration of Computer-Adaptive Patient Reported Outcomes into an Electronic Health Record

Kyle Nolla,Luke V Rasmussen,Nan E Rothrock,Zeeshan Butt,Michael Bass,Kristina Davis,David Cella,Richard Gershon,Cynthia Barnard,Ryan Chmiel,Federico Almaraz,Michael Schachter,Therese Nelson,Michelle Langer,Justin Starren

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2235-9557

Abstract:Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures have become an essential component of quality measurement, quality improvement, and capturing the voice of the patient in clinical care. In 2004, the National Institutes of Health endorsed the importance of PROs by initiating the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), which leverages computer-adaptive tests (CATs) to reduce patient burden while maintaining measurement precision. Historically, PROMIS CATs have been used in a large number of research studies outside the electronic health record (EHR), but growing demand for clinical use of PROs requires creative information technology solutions for integration into the EHR. Objectives: This paper describes the introduction of PROMIS CATs into the Epic Systems EHR at a large academic medical center using a tight integration; we describe the process of creating a secure, automatic connection between the application programming interface (API) which scores and selects CAT items and Epic. Methods: The overarching strategy was to make CATs appear indistinguishable from conventional measures to clinical users, patients, and the EHR software itself. We implemented CATs in Epic without compromising patient data security by creating custom middleware software within the organization's existing middleware framework. This software communicated between the Assessment Center API for item selection and scoring and Epic for item presentation and results. The middleware software seamlessly administered CATs alongside fixed-length, conventional PROs while maintaining the display characteristics and functions of other Epic measures, including automatic display of PROMIS scores in the patient's chart. Pilot implementation revealed differing workflows for clinicians using the software. Results: The middleware software was adopted in 27 clinics across the hospital system. In the first 2 years of hospital-wide implementation, 793 providers collected 70,446 PROs from patients using this system. Conclusion: This project demonstrated the importance of regular communication across interdisciplinary teams in the design and development of clinical software. It also demonstrated that implementation relies on buy-in from clinical partners as they integrate new tools into their existing clinical workflow.
The Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Tool: Testing Usability and Feasibility of a Mobile App and Portal to Support Care for Patients With Complex Chronic Disease and Disability in Primary Care Settings

Carolyn Steele Gray,Ashlinder Gill,Anum Irfan Khan,Parminder Kaur Hans,Kerry Kuluski,Cheryl Cott

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/mhealth.5331

2016-06-02

JMIR mhealth and uhealth

Abstract:BACKGROUND: People experiencing complex chronic disease and disability (CCDD) face some of the greatest challenges of any patient population. Primary care providers find it difficult to manage multiple discordant conditions and symptoms and often complex social challenges experienced by these patients. The electronic Patient Reported Outcome (ePRO) tool is designed to overcome some of these challenges by supporting goal-oriented primary care delivery. Using the tool, patients and providers collaboratively develop health care goals on a portal linked to a mobile device to help patients and providers track progress between visits.OBJECTIVES: This study tested the usability and feasibility of adopting the ePRO tool into a single interdisciplinary primary health care practice in Toronto, Canada. The Fit between Individuals, Fask, and Technology (FITT) framework was used to guide our assessment and explore whether the ePRO tool is: (1) feasible for adoption in interdisciplinary primary health care practices and (2) usable from both the patient and provider perspectives. This usability pilot is part of a broader user-centered design development strategy.METHODS: A 4-week pilot study was conducted in which patients and providers used the ePRO tool to develop health-related goals, which patients then monitored using a mobile device. Patients and providers collaboratively set goals using the system during an initial visit and had at least 1 follow-up visit at the end of the pilot to discuss progress. Focus groups and interviews were conducted with patients and providers to capture usability and feasibility measures. Data from the ePRO system were extracted to provide information regarding tool usage.RESULTS: Six providers and 11 patients participated in the study; 3 patients dropped out mainly owing to health issues. The remaining 8 patients completed 210 monitoring protocols, equal to over 1300 questions, with patients often answering questions daily. Providers and patients accessed the portal on an average of 10 and 1.5 times, respectively. Users found the system easy to use, some patients reporting that the tool helped in their ability to self-manage, catalyzed a sense of responsibility over their care, and improved patient-centered care delivery. Some providers found that the tool helped focus conversations on goal setting. However, the tool did not fit well with provider workflows, monitoring questions were not adequately tailored to individual patient needs, and daily reporting became tedious and time-consuming for patients.CONCLUSIONS: Although our study suggests relatively low usability and feasibility of the ePRO tool, we are encouraged by the early impact on patient outcomes and generally positive responses from both user groups regarding the potential of the tool to improve care for patients with CCDD. As is consistent with our user-centered design development approach, we have modified the tool based on user feedback, and are now testing the redeveloped tool through an exploratory trial.

health care sciences & services,medical informatics
Facilitators and barriers to implementing electronic patient-reported outcome and experience measures in a health care setting: a systematic review

Ben G. Glenwright,Joshua Simmich,Michelle Cottrell,Shaun P. O'Leary,Clair Sullivan,Jason D. Pole and Trevor Russell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00554-2

2023-02-17

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes

Abstract:This systematic literature review aimed to identify factors that influence the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (ePREMs) in healthcare settings.
Facilitators and Barriers in the Implementation and Adoption of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurements in Daily Practice

Anouk S Huberts,Linetta B Koppert,Joica A M Benschop,Jelle W Meerstra,Adriaan van 't Spijker,Céline van Lint,Nadia C W Kamminga,Monique S den Hollander,Ingrid A Peters,Christien J van der Woude

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.020

Abstract:Objectives: At the Erasmus Medical Center, patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) are implemented on a hospital-wide scale. However, less than half of the patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) use these PROMs. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate facilitators and barriers for adoption of PROMs to develop guidance around implementation. Methods: A mixed-methods study with a combination of interviews and focus groups and questionnaires was conducted, involving patients, both PROM nonresponders and PROM responders, HCPs, and medicine students and nurse specialists in training (hereafter "students"). Interview transcripts were subjected to thematic content analysis. Subsequently, questionnaires were developed and presented to all stakeholders to validate the findings. Finally, identified themes and implementation recommendations were presented in a final questionnaire to the Value-Based Healthcare Erasmus Medical Center expert group to prioritize findings. Results: Interviews were conducted with 15 patients, 14 HCPs and 4 students, and 2 focus groups with 5 students. The questionnaire was completed by 370 of 999 responders (37.0%), 173 of 1395 nonresponders (12.5%), and 44 of 194 HCPs (22.7%), and 40 students were reached via an open link. The identified facilitators and barriers were grouped into 4 overarching themes: training on PROMs at different levels in the education of (future) HCPs, motivate and reduce the burden for the HCP, implement generic and disease-specific PROMs simultaneously, and motivate, activate, and reduce the patient burden. Conclusions: Providing end users with digital tools, implementation support, and a clear hospital-wide vision is important, yet this does not guarantee successful adoption of PROMs. Successful adoption necessitates ongoing efforts to engage, motivate, and train end users.
Perceived Barriers Toward Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation in Cancer Care: An International Scoping Survey

Lawson Eng,Raymond J. Chan,Alexandre Chan,Andreas Charalambous,H.S. Darling,Lisa Grech,Corina J.G. van den Hurk,Deborah Kirk,Sandra A. Mitchell,Dagmara Poprawski,Elke Rammant,Imogen Ramsey,Margaret I. Fitch,Yin Ting Cheung

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.23.00715

2024-03-08

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:PURPOSE Implementation of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) collection is an important priority in cancer care. We examined perceived barriers toward implementing PRO collection between centers with and without PRO infrastructure and administrators and nonadministrators. PATIENTS AND METHODS We performed a multinational survey of oncology practitioners on their perceived barriers to PRO implementations. Multivariable regression models evaluated for differences in perceived barriers to PRO implementation between groups, adjusted for demographic and institutional variables. RESULTS Among 358 oncology practitioners representing six geographic regions, 31% worked at centers that did not have PRO infrastructure and 26% self-reported as administrators. Administrators were more likely to perceive concerns with liability issues (aOR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.12 to 3.57]; P = .02) while having nonsignificant trend toward less likely perceiving concerns with disruption of workflow (aOR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.32 to 1.03]; P = .06) and nonadherence of PRO reporting (aOR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.26 to 1.08]; P = .08) as barriers. Respondents from centers without PRO infrastructure were more likely to perceive that not having access to a local PRO expert (aOR, 6.59 [95% CI, 3.81 to 11.42]; P < .001), being unsure how to apply PROs in clinical decisions (aOR, 4.20 [95% CI, 2.32 to 7.63]; P < .001), and being unsure about selecting PRO measures (aOR, 3.36 [95% CI, 2.00 to 5.66]; P < .001) as barriers. Heat map analyses identified the largest differences between participants from centers with and without PRO infrastructure in agreed-upon barriers were (1) not having a local PRO expert, (2) being unsure about selecting PRO measures, and (3) not recognizing the role of PROs at the institutional level. CONCLUSION Perceived barriers toward PRO implementation differ between administrators and nonadministrators and practitioners at centers with and without PRO infrastructure. PRO implementation teams should consider as part of a comprehensive strategy including frontline clinicians and administrators and members with PRO experience within teams.

oncology
Let's talk about it: an exploration of the comparative use of three different digital platforms to gather patient-reported outcome measures

Anna Hundt Golden,Meghan Hufstader Gabriel,Jon Russo,Mark Price,Stephen Ruhmel,Ami Nilsson,Patricia Shepherd Delong,Jennifer Jelsma,Michelle Carty

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00666-9

2023-12-12

Abstract:Background: Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures provide valuable evidence in clinical trials; however, poor compliance with PRO measures is a notable and long-standing problem, resulting in missing data that potentially impact the interpretation of trial results. Interactive, patient-centric platforms may increase participants' motivation to complete PRO measures over the course of a clinical trial. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate and optimize the usability of 3 popular consumer technologies-a traditional app-based interface, a chatbot interface, and a speech-operated interface-that may be used to improve user engagement and compliance with PRO measures. Methods: Participants aged 18-75 years from the general United States population tested the usability of 3 ePRO platforms: a traditional app-based interface using Datacubed Health Platform (Datacubed), a web-based chatbot interface using the Orbita platform, and a speech-operated Alexa interface using an Alexa Skill called "My Daily Wellness." The usability of these platforms was tested with 2 PRO measures: the EQ-5D-5 L and the SF-12v2 Health Survey (SF-12v2), Daily recall. Using a crossover design, 3 cohorts of participants tested each ePRO platform daily for 1 week. After testing, interviews were conducted regarding the participants' experience with each platform. Results: A total of 24 adults participated in the study. The mean age of participants was 45 years (range, 21-71 years), and half were female (n = 12; 50%). Overall, participants prioritized speed, ease of use, and device portability in selecting their preferred platform. The Datacubed app met these criteria and was the preferred platform among most participants (n = 20; 83%). Participants also suggested various modifications to the platforms, such as programmable notifications, adjustable speed, and additional daily reminders. Conclusions: These data demonstrate the importance of speed, ease of use, and device portability, features that are currently incorporated in the Datacubed app, in ePRO platforms used in future clinical trials. Additionally, the usability of ePRO platforms may be optimized by adding programmable notifications, adjustable speed, and increased daily reminders. The results of this study may be used to enhance the usability and patient centricity of these platforms to improve user compliance and engagement during clinical trials.
Clinic-based perspectives on the integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a tertiary cancer center

Nada Al-Antary,Kelly A. Hirko,Farah Elsiss,Theresa Zatirka,Michael Ryan,Benjamin Movsas,Steven S. Chang,Eric Adjei Boakye,Samantha H. Tam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-024-08353-1

IF: 3.1

2024-02-09

Supportive Care in Cancer

Abstract:This study examines providers' and clinic staff's perspectives on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) implementation at an academic medical center.

oncology,health care sciences & services,rehabilitation
Improving Adherence to electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes: Study Protocol for a Systematic Literature Review and subsequent qualitative Interviews

Rebecca Mukowski,Lisa Otto,Alze Rogge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.13.24308883

2024-06-13

Abstract:Background: Electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) are frequently used to include the patients' perspective in clinical trials and routine clinical care. In contrast to data collected in clinical trials, PRO response rates tend to decrease drastically overtime in routine clinical care, leading to missing data and questionable validity of results reported. This study aims to investigate factors influencing patient adherence to digitally collected PROs. Method: The study comprises of three steps: (1) a systematic literature review (SLR) focusing on factors increasing PRO response rates, (2) focus group interviews with patients to develop criteria on how to increase response rates for real-world evidence (RWE), and subsequently, (3) an anonymous online survey to evaluate developed criteria. The SLR will follow the PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria for the review encompass studies focusing exclusively on patients or people recruited via medical personnel. The literature review will include studies from various settings, encompassing publications in German or English language published within the past 10 years (2014-2024). Participants for the focus group interviews (n = 6-8/group) will be recruited via patient advisory boards or groups/organisations. The findings of the SLR and the focus group form the basis for the anonymous online survey to include more patients. Outlook: The results of the study can be incorporated into the development and implementation of digital collection methods for PROs, with the aim of improving adherence to PROs and thus robustness of RWE data.

Health Systems and Quality Improvement
Benefits and Disadvantages of Electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

Jill Meirte,Nick Hellemans,Mieke Anthonissen,Lenie Denteneer,Koen Maertens,Peter Moortgat,Ulrike Van Daele

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/15588

2020-04-03

JMIR Perioperative Medicine

Abstract:Background Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important in clinical practice and research. The growth of electronic health technologies provides unprecedented opportunities to systematically collect information via PROMs. Objective The aim of this study was to provide an objective and comprehensive overview of the benefits, barriers, and disadvantages of the digital collection of qualitative electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs). Methods We performed a systematic review of articles retrieved from PubMED and Web of Science. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed during all stages. The search strategy yielded a total of 2333 records, from which 32 met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The relevant ePROM-related information was extracted from each study. Results Results were clustered as benefits and disadvantages. Reported benefits of ePROMs were greater patient preference and acceptability, lower costs, similar or faster completion time, higher data quality and response rates, and facilitated symptom management and patient-clinician communication. Tablets were the most used ePROM modality (14/32, 44%), and, as a platform, Web-based systems were used the most (26/32, 81%). Potential disadvantages of ePROMs include privacy protection, a possible large initial financial investment, and exclusion of certain populations or the “digital divide.” Conclusions In conclusion, ePROMs offer many advantages over paper-based collection of patient-reported outcomes. Overall, ePROMs are preferred over paper-based methods, improve data quality, result in similar or faster completion time, decrease costs, and facilitate clinical decision making and symptom management. Disadvantages regarding ePROMs have been outlined, and suggestions are provided to overcome the barriers. We provide a path forward for researchers and clinicians interested in implementing ePROMs. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42018094795; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=94795
A mixed methods evaluation of patient perspectives on the implementation of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program in cancer care

Madison J Lyleroehr,Kimberly A Webster,Laura M Perry,Elijah A Patten,Jackelyn Cantoral,Justin D Smith,David Cella,Frank J Penedo,Sofia F Garcia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00742-8

2024-07-02

Abstract:Background: As cancer centers have increased focus on patient-centered, evidenced-based care, implementing efficient programs that facilitate effective patient-clinician communication remains critical. We implemented an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program ('cPRO' for cancer patient-reported outcomes). To aid evaluation of cPRO implementation, we asked patients receiving care in one of three geographical regions of an academic healthcare system about their experiences. Methods: Using a sequential mixed-methods approach, we collected feedback in two waves. Wave 1 included virtual focus groups and interviews with patients who had completed cPRO. In Wave 2, we administered a structured survey to systematically examine Wave 1 themes. All participants had a diagnosed malignancy and received at least 2 invitations to complete cPRO. We used rapid and traditional qualitative methods to analyze Wave 1 data and focused on identifying facilitators and barriers to cPRO implementation. Wave 2 data were analyzed descriptively. Results: Participants (n = 180) were on average 62.9 years old; were majority female, White, non-Hispanic, and married; and represented various cancer types and phases of treatment. Wave 1 participants (n = 37) identified facilitators, including cPRO's perceived value and favorable usability, and barriers, including confusion about cPRO's purpose and various considerations for responding. High levels of clinician engagement with, and patient education on, cPRO were described as facilitators while low levels were described as barriers. Wave 2 (n = 143) data demonstrated high endorsement rates of cPRO's usability on domains such as navigability (91.6%), comprehensibility (98.7%), and relevance (82.4%). Wave 2 data also indicated low rates of understanding cPRO's purpose (56.7%), education from care teams about cPRO (22.5%), and discussing results of cPRO with care teams (16.3%). Conclusions: While patients reported high value and ease of use when completing cPRO, they also reported areas of confusion, emphasizing the importance of patient education on the purpose and use of cPRO and clinician engagement to sustain participation. These results guided successful implementation changes and will inform future improvements.
Prospective application of implementation science theories and frameworks to inform use of PROMs in routine clinical care within an integrated pain network

Sara Ahmed,Diana Zidarov,Owis Eilayyan,Regina Visca

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02600-8

2020-09-02

Quality of Life Research

Abstract:Abstract Purpose The objective of this study is to present the implementation science approaches that were used before implementing electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) across an integrated chronic pain network that includes primary, rehabilitation, and hospital-based care. Methods The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to identify potential barriers and enablers to the use of ePROMS by primary care clinicians. In rehabilitation and tertiary care, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation (CFIR) was used to guide the identification of determinants of implementations, through observation of workflow, patient and clinician surveys, and clinician interviews. A mixed-method concurrent design comprising a quantitative and qualitative analysis was used. The results were reviewed by a steering committee to iteratively inform the ePROM implementation plan. The Proctor framework of evaluation was used to guide the development of an evaluation plan for the implementation of ePROMs in the integrated chronic pain network. Results Both frameworks provided similar results with respect to healthcare provider knowledge, behaviour, and experience interpreting PROM scores. The TDF and CFIR frameworks differed in identifying organizational-level determinants. The resultant implementation plan was structured around the adoption of PROMs to inform individual treatment planning and quality improvement. The evaluation plan focused on implementation and impact outcomes to evaluate the ePROM intervention. Conclusions The TDF and CFIR guided the development of a multi-component knowledge translation and training intervention that will address multiple gaps and barriers to implementation of PROMs across the integrated network. The ePROM intervention will aim to increase clinicians’ knowledge and skills and foster best practices.

public, environmental & occupational health,health care sciences & services,health policy & services
Patient motivators of postoperative electronic patient-reported outcome symptom monitoring use in thoracic surgery patients: a qualitative study

Meghan C O'Leary,Elizabeth Kwong,Chase Cox,Amanda L Gentry,Angela M Stover,Maihan B Vu,Jessica Carda-Auten,Jennifer Leeman,Gita N Mody

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00766-0

2024-07-25

Abstract:Background: Electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems can be used to engage patients in remote symptom monitoring to support postoperative care. We interviewed thoracic surgery patients with ePRO experience to identify factors that influenced use of ePROs to report their symptoms post-discharge. Method: This qualitative study used semi-structured telephone interviews with adults who underwent major thoracic surgery at an academic medical center in North Carolina. Individuals who enrolled in symptom monitoring, completed at least one ePRO survey, and were reachable by phone for the interview were included. The ePRO surveys assessed 10 symptoms, including validated Patient-Reported Outcome Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) measures and thoracic surgery-specific questions. Surveys, offered via web-based and automated telephone options, were administered for four weeks post-discharge with alerts sent to clinicians for concerning symptoms. The interviews were guided by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation model for behavior change (COM-B) and examined factors that influenced patients' completion of ePRO surveys post-discharge. Team members independently coded interviews and identified themes, informed by COM-B. We report descriptive statistics (demographics, number of surveys completed) and themes organized by COM-B components. Results: Of 28 patients invited, 25 (89%) completed interviews from July to October 2022. Participants were a median 58 years, 56% female, 80% White, and 56% had a history of malignancy. They completed 131/150 (87%) possible ePRO surveys. For capability, participants reported building ePROs into their routine and having the skills and knowledge, but lacking physical and emotional energy, to complete ePROs. For opportunity, participants identified the ease and convenience of accessing ePROs and providers' validation of ePROs. Motivators were perceived benefits of a deepening connection to their clinical team, improved symptom management for themselves and others, and self-reflection about their recovery. Factors limiting motivation included lack of clarity about the purpose of ePROs and a disconnect between symptom items and individual recovery experience. Conclusions: Patients described being motivated to complete ePROs when reinforced by clinicians and considered ePROs as valuable to their post-discharge experience. Future work should enhance ePRO patient education, improve provider alerts and communications about ePROs, and integrate options to capture patients' complex health journeys.
Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Driven Symptom Management by Oncology Pharmacists in a Majority-Minority Population: An Implementation Study

Alexandre Chan,Ding Quan Ng,Daniela Arcos,Matthew Heshmatipour,Benjamin J. Lee,Alison Chen,Lan Duong,Linda Van,Thomas Nguyen,Vuong Green,Daniel Hoang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/op.24.00050

2024-07-15

JCO Oncology Practice

Abstract:PURPOSE There is a lack of systematic solutions to manage supportive care issues in racial/ethnic minorities (REM) receiving treatment for cancer. We developed and implemented an electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO)–driven symptom management tool led by oncology pharmacists in a majority-minority cancer center located in Southern California. This study was designed to evaluate the implementation outcomes of our multilevel intervention. METHODS This was a prospective, pragmatic, implementation study conducted between July 2021 and June 2023. Newly diagnosed adult patients with cancer receiving intravenous anticancer therapies completed symptom screening using ePRO that consists of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System measures at each infusion visit during the study. ePRO results were presented to an oncologist pharmacist for personalized symptom management and treatment counseling. The RE-AIM framework was used to guide implementation outcomes. Differences in symptom trajectories and clinical outcomes between groups were tested using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS We screened 388 patients of whom 250 were enrolled (acceptance rate: 64.4%), with 564 assessments being completed. The sample consisted of non-Hispanic White (NHW, 42.4%), Hispanic/Latinx (H/L, 30.8%), and non-Hispanic Asian (20.4%), with one (21.6%) of five participants preferring speaking Spanish. Compared with NHW, H/L participants had greater odds of reporting mild to severe pain interference (odds ratio [OR], 1.91 [95% CI, 1.18 to 3.08]; P = .008) and nausea and vomiting (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.21 to 3.58]; P = .008), and higher rates of urgent care utilization (OR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.04 to 3.61]; P = .04) within 30 days. Nausea and vomiting (n = 131, 23.2%), pain (n = 91, 16.1%), and fatigue (n = 72, 12.8%) were most likely to be intervened, with 90% of the participants expressing satisfaction across all visits. CONCLUSION Our multilevel ePRO-driven intervention led by oncology pharmacists helps facilitate symptom assessments and management and potentially reduce health disparities among REM.

oncology

Learning to Overcome Barriers to Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: Lessons From the Field

Strategies for implementing an electronic patient-reported outcomes-based symptom management program across six cancer centers

Using Implementation Science Frameworks to Guide the Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring in Routine Cancer Care

Developing an implementation blueprint: Lessons learned from integrating electronic patient-reported outcomes in HIV clinics in Alabama

A Qualitative Study of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Symptom Monitoring After Thoracic Surgery

Using Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Monitoring to Navigate Patients to Supportive Care Services

Automating Patient-reported Data Collection: Does it Work?

Planning for Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: Development of Decision Tools and Practical Experience Across Four Clinics

Seamless Integration of Computer-Adaptive Patient Reported Outcomes into an Electronic Health Record

The Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Tool: Testing Usability and Feasibility of a Mobile App and Portal to Support Care for Patients With Complex Chronic Disease and Disability in Primary Care Settings

Facilitators and barriers to implementing electronic patient-reported outcome and experience measures in a health care setting: a systematic review

Facilitators and Barriers in the Implementation and Adoption of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurements in Daily Practice

Perceived Barriers Toward Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation in Cancer Care: An International Scoping Survey

Let's talk about it: an exploration of the comparative use of three different digital platforms to gather patient-reported outcome measures

Clinic-based perspectives on the integration of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a tertiary cancer center

Improving Adherence to electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes: Study Protocol for a Systematic Literature Review and subsequent qualitative Interviews

Benefits and Disadvantages of Electronic Patient-reported Outcome Measures: Systematic Review

A mixed methods evaluation of patient perspectives on the implementation of an electronic health record-integrated patient-reported symptom and needs monitoring program in cancer care

Prospective application of implementation science theories and frameworks to inform use of PROMs in routine clinical care within an integrated pain network

Patient motivators of postoperative electronic patient-reported outcome symptom monitoring use in thoracic surgery patients: a qualitative study

Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome-Driven Symptom Management by Oncology Pharmacists in a Majority-Minority Population: An Implementation Study