Background Measurement-based care (MBC) is the practice of routinely administering standardized measures to support clinical decision-making and monitor treatment progress. Despite evidence of its effectiveness, MBC is rarely adopted in routine substance use disorder (SUD) treatment settings and little is known about the factors that may improve its adoptability in these settings. The current study gathered qualitative data from SUD treatment clinicians about their perceptions of MBC, the clinical outcomes they would most like to monitor in MBC, and suggestions for the design and implementation of MBC systems in their settings. Methods Fifteen clinicians from one publicly-funded and two privately-funded outpatient SUD treatment clinics participated in one-on-one research interviews. Interviews focused on clinicians’ perceived benefits, drawbacks, and ideas related to implementing MBC technology into their clinical workflows. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded to allow for thematic analysis using a mixed deductive and inductive approach. Clinicians also completed a card sorting task to rate the perceived helpfulness of routinely measuring and monitoring different treatment outcomes. Results Clinicians reported several potential benefits of MBC, including improved patient-provider communication, client empowerment, and improved communication between clinicians. Clinicians also expressed potential drawbacks, including concerns about subjectivity in patient self-reports, limits to personalization, increased time burdens, and needing to learn to use new technologies. Clinicians generated several ideas and preferences aimed at minimizing burden of MBC, illustrating clinical changes over time, improving ease of use, and improving personalization. Numerous patient outcomes were identified as “very helpful” to track, including coping skills, social support, and motivation for change. Conclusions MBC may be a beneficial tool for improving clinical care in SUD treatment settings. MBC tools may be particularly adoptable if they are compatible with existing workflows, help illustrate gradual and nonlinear progress in SUD treatment, measure outcomes perceived as clinically useful, accommodate multiple use cases and stakeholder groups, and are framed as an additional source of information meant to augment, rather than replace, existing practices and information sources.

BACKGROUND While sexual dysfunction (SD) in men following traumatic pelvic fracture is common, little is known of how men experience changes in their sexual health after injury. The aims of the present study were to explore the personal and interpersonal impacts of SD in men after pelvic injury and to understood how interactions with the health care system can be optimized to improve patient-centered trauma survivorship care. METHODS Fifteen semistructured interviews were conducted with men who had a history of traumatic pelvic fracture and self-reported SD. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and uploaded to a web-based qualitative analysis platform. A codebook was developed, and intercoder reliability was verified. Inductive thematic analysis was performed to identify notable themes related to patient postinjury sexual health experiences. RESULTS Median age of interviewees was 46 years (interquartile range, 44–54 years), with a median time since injury of 41 months (interquartile range, 22–55 months). Five primary themes were identified from the analysis: (1) effects on self-image and romantic relationships, (2) unknown care pathways and lack of communication, (3) inconsistencies with health care provider priorities, (4) provision of sexual health information and resources, and (5) the importance of setting expectations. Interviewees suggested that improved communication, provision of information related to possible adverse effects of their injuries, and expectation setting would improve posttrauma experiences. CONCLUSION Men’s experiences with SD after pelvic trauma can be heavily influenced by their interactions with health care providers and the value that is placed on sexual health as a component of survivorship. Incorporating these findings into a patient-centered trauma survivorship program may improve patient experiences. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, level V.