Patients’ Views on Routine Collection of Patient‐Reported Outcomes in Rheumatology Outpatient Care: A Multicenter Focus Group Study

Abstract

Objective To explore the patients’ views of the collection and use of patient‐reported outcomes as part of routine care in patients with inflammatory arthritis. Methods We conducted a qualitative focus group study based on interviews in each of the 5 geographical regions of Denmark. The analysis was based on content analysis. Four patient research partners were involved in the study. Results In total, 32 adult patients (21 female) with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 21), psoriatic arthritis (n = 6), and axial spondyloarthritis (n = 5) participated. The mean age was 60 years (range 32–80 years). Five themes were derived from the analysis: 1) a need for information about why the data are collected, reflecting patients’ uncertainty as to whether the collection of patient‐reported outcomes primarily served to monitor their own disease, to save money, or to gather data for research purposes; 2) inclusion of patient‐reported outcomes in the consultation, encompassing patients’ expectations of active use of the patient‐reported outcomes data during talks with rheumatologists or nurses; 3) reflections on how to respond to the patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) to obtain high quality data, referring to patients’ concerns about how to respond “correctly” and about issues that could affect their responses; 4) addressing patient‐reported outcomes to the individual's challenges, reflecting the need for a more individualized approach; and 5) possibilities for improvement in the use of patient‐reported outcomes, referring to patients’ ideas for the future use of patient‐reported outcomes. Conclusion Information and dialogue regarding the purpose of patient‐reported outcomes collection, how to respond to PROMs correctly, and inclusion of the patient‐reported outcomes data in the consultation are of importance to patients with inflammatory arthritis who routinely complete patient‐reported outcomes.

Patient perceptions of an electronic-health-record-based rheumatoid arthritis outcomes dashboard: a mixed-methods study

“…Our findings expand upon these findings, as patients stated that the RA PRO dashboard is not merely a tool for providing clinicians with easier and faster access to their RA outcomes data but empowers them to analyze and use their own data to guide selfmanagement. Our findings also align with prior qualitative studies, which emphasized that patients value clear communication about the purpose of PROs, their integration in consultations, and guidance on how to complete PRO forms correctly [37].…”

A Preference-Sensitive Online Instrument to Support Shared Decision Making for Patients With Pelvic Organ Prolapse

“…Patients in rheumatology outpatient care report the importance of being informed about the purpose of data collection. 38 Our findings support this as women with POP, who were presented with the graphic presentation during their consultations, in general, were more positive toward the developed instrument. They also felt a higher degree of SDM, indicating a higher sense of involvement.…”

“…The majority of the included women assessed the instrument as supportive in relation to decision-making, and even more so if the graphic presentation of their preferences was discussed during their consultation. Patients in rheumatology outpatient care report the importance of being informed about the purpose of data collection 38 . Our findings support this as women with POP, who were presented with the graphic presentation during their consultations, in general, were more positive toward the developed instrument.…”

Patient-reported outcome measures for clinical decision-making in outpatient follow-up: validity and reliability of a renal disease questionnaire

“…Patients emphasised the importance of knowing the purpose and clinical use of the questionnaire, which is crucial when implementing PRO measures in a clinical setting [11,58]. Similar findings have been reported in previous studies [18,19,59,60]. A recent systematic review found strong evidence supporting internal consistency and moderate evidence for construct validity for the KDQOL-36 in pre-dialysis patients [24], which formed the basis of the questionnaire in our study.…”