Assessing the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in the Routine Clinical Care of Chronic Rhinosinusitis Patients: A Canadian Perspective

Hugh Andrew Jinwook Kim,Daniel J Lee,Dongho Shin,Garret Horton,Monique Gignac,John M Lee,Yvonne Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/19160216241288806

Abstract:Importance: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a common inflammatory disease of the paranasal sinuses with significant quality of life impairments. There is a need to implement outcome-based metrics to evaluate the outcomes of CRS treatment with endoscopic sinus surgery or biologics. Objective: We aimed to understand Canadian otolaryngologists' opinions on patient-related outcome measures (PROM) for CRS and identify potential barriers to implementation. Design: Qualitative research. Setting and participants: A cross-sectional survey was distributed via the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and direct emailing. Measures: Participants' demographics, practice information, and opinions on PROM were collected. Results: Of 346 (23%) Canadian otolaryngologists, 78 responded to the survey (26 rhinology fellowship-trained, 51 non-fellowship-trained, and 1 missing data). Thirty-eight responded that they collect PROM (69% with fellowship-trained, 39% non-fellowship-trained, P = .029). Regarding opinions on PROM, 74% of respondents agreed that it helps patients report their symptoms, 42% agreed that it improves the efficiency of the patient encounter, 54% agreed that it is easy for patients to understand, 62% agreed that it improves management and monitoring of clinical outcomes, and 71% disagreed that PROM is not helpful. Fellowship-trained otolaryngologists were 4 times more likely to agree that PROM improves management and monitoring of clinical outcomes (P = .014), and no other differences in opinions were significant. The most-frequently-identified barriers to PROM usage were lack of time for 67% of respondents, difficulty integrating into clinical workflow for 64%, and lack of integration into the electronic medical record for 47%. If these barriers were addressed, 86% of respondents said they would use PROM in their practice. Conclusions and relevance: Despite the low uptake of PROM among otolaryngologists without rhinology fellowship, opinions were generally favorable. We identified barriers that, if addressed, may increase their use in clinical practice. As resource-limited therapies such as biologics become more prevalent in CRS management, PROM may find more applications in shared clinical decision making.