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

Abstract

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 effectively utilize PROs data in their clinical encounters.The implementation of PROs in patient care represents a significant change to clinical practice of individual clinicians and health organisations. 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 health care systems, thus providing a rare opportunity to pull out common approaches whilst recognizing specific settings. For each program we describe the clinical and organisational 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. The common successful components are identified, leading to discussion and future recommendations.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement in Clinical Dermatological Practice: Relevance and Feasibility of a Web-Based Portal

“…lack of a control group, we are unable to conclude whether the moderate feasibility we found refers to PRO measurement in general or specifically to electronic PRO measurement. Moreover, our physicians were not adequately trained in the use of PROs, whereas this was previously identified as critical for the implementation of a PRO intervention [7,26,27]. Our study does not answer the question whether physicians actually use PRO results, and if so, how.…”

AO Patient Outcomes Center: Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Software Application for the Collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopedic Outpatient Clinics (Preprint)

“…Aligning the assessment content with the clinical purpose (e.g., screening versus monitoring a primary outcome of care) [23,25] and making PRO results more interpretable and actionable [26][27][28][29] have been recommended. Clinician training programs have also been successful in improving interpretation and use of PRO results [30].…”

Routine Outcome Monitoring in Mental Health Care and Particularly in Addiction Treatment: Evidence-Based Clinical and Research Recommendations

“…However, research showed that ROM feedback reports were often not used by therapists [11,66,82]. So, more attention may be needed for recurrent training of therapists on the use of ROM as an opportunity to discuss treatment progress, stagnation, or decline with the patient and to set common treatment goals together [4, 79,83]. Moreover, ROM results could be integrated in the treatment plan of a patient [25].…”