Implementation Of Patient-reported Outcome Measures Research Articles

Patient-reported outcome measures as a new application in the Swedish Renal Registry: health-related quality of life through RAND-36.

BackgroundAlthough patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining increased interest in developing health care quality and are a useful tool in person-centered care, their use in routine care is still limited. The aim of this study is to describe the implementation and initial results of PROMs via the Swedish Renal Registry (SRR) on a national level.MethodsAfter testing and piloting the electronic PROM application, nationwide measures were carried out in 2017 for completing the RAND-36 questionnaire online or by paper in a wide range of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients (Stages 3–5, dialysis and transplantation) through the SRR. Cross-sectional results during the first year were analyzed by descriptive statistics and stratified by treatment modality.ResultsA total of 1378 patients from 26 of 68 renal units (39%) completed the questionnaire. The response rate for all participating hemodialysis units was 38.9%. The CKD patients had an impaired health profile compared with a Swedish general population, especially regarding physical functions and assessed general health (GH). Transplanted patients had the highest scores, whereas patients on dialysis treatment had the lowest scores. The youngest age group assessed their physical function higher and experienced fewer physical limitations and less bodily pain than the other age groups but assessed their GH and vitality (VT) relatively low. The oldest age group demonstrated the lowest health profile but rated their mental health higher than the other age groups. The older the patient, the smaller the difference compared with persons of the same age in the general population.ConclusionsNationwide, routine collection of PROMs is feasible in Sweden. However, greater emphasis is needed on motivating clinical staff to embrace the tool and its possibilities in executing person-centered care. CKD patients demonstrate impaired health-related quality of life, especially regarding limitations related to physical problems, GH and VT/energy/fatigue.

PROMs data: can it be used to make decisions for individual patients? A narrative review.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical practice providing health care professionals with patients’ perceptions and views of their health. They have traditionally been utilized in health research and health service evaluation and are now starting to be used in routine clinical practice with individual patients. The repeated administration of PROMs over the course of care with individual patients has a role in patient assessment, assisting clinical decision-making, and tracking patient progress. This approach can influence the patient–clinician encounter impacting the therapeutic alliance and increasing patient engagement with care. It is also theorized to improve patient outcomes and satisfaction with care. Advances in technologies and innovations in methodology have led to the use of electronic systems to simplify the collection and reporting of PROMs. Challenges of using PROMs with individual patients include clinician knowledge and skills, and access to appropriate technology. This paper reviews the use of PROMs with individual patients, illustrating how they may affect the patient–clinician encounter impact satisfaction and health outcomes. The routine use of PROMs during a course of care rather than just at the start and end provides additional opportunity to inform clinician and patient with benefits to both. The adoption of PROMs in clinical practice can help health care professionals to make decisions for individual patients. Further work is needed to examine the implementation of PROMs and benefits of PROMs in different clinical contexts.

Patient-reported outcome measures within pediatric solid organ transplantation: A systematic review.

Subjective evaluation of medical care and disease outcomes from patients' perspectives has become increasingly important. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) play a prominent role in engaging patients, capturing their experiences and improving patient care. This systematic review sought to identify PROMs that are used in the field of pediatric solid organ transplantation, with the aim to inform the implementation of PROMs into clinical practice for this population. A systematic review of English language, peer-reviewed articles was performed on key health science databases to identify publications using PROMs in pediatric solid organ transplantation. The search yielded 3670 articles, with a final data set of 62 articles that included 47 different PROMs. The three most frequently used PROMs included the following: (a) PedsQL™ Generic Core Scales (n=25); (b) Children's Depression Inventory (n=6); and (c) Child Health Questionnaire (n=6). Of the 47 PROMs, 42 were generic and five were disease-specific; only six PROMS had a documented psychometric evaluation within a pediatric solid organ transplant population. This review outlines the attributes of the instruments (eg, domains captured), as well as the psychometric properties of those evaluated. PROMs are increasingly used in the field of pediatric transplantation; however, there are limited details in the current literature about their conceptual underpinnings and psychometric properties. This review highlights the need for additional psychometric evaluation of identified measures to establish the necessary foundation to inform the implementation of PROMs into clinical care for pediatric solid organ transplant patients.

Outcome measurement-a scoping review of the literature and future developments in palliative care clinical practice.

The aim of this scoping review is to give an overview and appraisal of the development of outcome measurement throughout time and its present importance to healthcare and specifically to palliative care clinical practice. It is based on a search and search results of a published systematic review on implementing patient reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice. Medline, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase and British Nursing Index were systematically searched from 1985. Hand searching of reference lists for all included articles and relevant review articles was performed. A total of 3,863 articles were screened. Sixty were included in this scoping review. Outcome measurement has a long history in health care and some of the strongest advocates were Florence Nightingale for using patient outcomes besides mortality rates, Codman for the "end result idea" of evaluating the patient status one year after orthopaedic surgery, and Donabedian for taking Codman's work further and developing the structure-process-outcome model. The contribution of patient-centred outcome measurement is vast and paramount in education, audit and as an informative tool for healthcare professionals and decision makers. It is possible to collect these data nationwide which would then allow for cross country comparisons, as well as, economic evaluations in palliative care interventions to contribute to appropriate resource allocation.

Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures in appropriateness criteria of surgery for degenerative lumbar scoliosis

BACKGROUND CONTEXTDegenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) is an increasingly common spinal disorder of which current management is characterized by a substantial variety in treatment advice. To improve evidence-based clinical decision-making and increase uniformity and transparency of care, the Scoliosis Research Society established appropriateness criteria for surgery for DLS. In these criteria, however, the patient perspective was not formally incorporated. Since patient perspective is an increasingly important consideration in informed decision-making, embedding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the appropriateness criteria would allow for an objective and transparent patient-centered approach. PURPOSETo evaluate the extent that patient perspective is integrated into the appropriateness criteria of surgery for DLS. STUDY DESIGNSingle center, retrospective, cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE150 patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Outcome MeasuresThe association between appropriateness for surgery and various PROMs [Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Short Form 36 (SF-36), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)]. METHODSMedical records of all patients with symptomatic DLS were reviewed and scored according to the appropriateness criteria. To assess the association between the appropriateness criteria and the validated PROMs, analysis of variance was used to test for differences in PROMS for each of the three categories resulting from the appropriateness criteria. To assess how well PROMs can discriminate between appropriate and inappropriate, we used a logistic regression analysis. Discriminative ability was subsequently determined by computing the area under the curve (AUC), resulting from the logistic regression analysis. Spearman rank analysis was used to establish a correlation pattern between the PROMs used and the appropriateness criteria. RESULTSThere was a significant association between the appropriateness of surgery and the PROMs. The discriminative ability for appropriateness of surgery for PROMs as a group was strong (AUC of 0.83). However, when considered in isolation, the predictive power of any individual PROMs was poor. The different categories of the appropriateness criteria significantly coincided with the PROMs used. CONCLUSIONThere is a statistically significant association between the appropriateness criteria of surgery for DLS and PROMs. Implementation of PROMs into the appropriateness criteria may lead to more transparent, quantifiable and uniform clinical decision making for DLS.

Usage of glaucoma-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the Singapore context: a qualitative scoping exercise

BackgroundDespite the increasing emphasis on the role of glaucoma-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as relevant outcome measures for the impact of glaucoma and its intervention on patients' daily lives, the feasibility of implementing PROMs in the routine clinical setting in Singapore remains undefined. We aim to evaluate the comprehensibility, acceptability, and relevance of four glaucoma-specific PROMs at healthcare professionals' and patients' level in a Singapore context.MethodsSixteen ophthalmic healthcare professionals and 24 glaucoma patients, with average age 60 years (SD = 15), were invited from a tertiary hospital in Singapore. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore participants’ perceptions on the content and administration of four glaucoma-specific PROMs - the Glaucoma Quality of Life-15, Glaucoma Symptom Identifier, Independent Mobility Questionnaire and Treatment Satisfaction Survey of Intra-ocular Pressure. Semi-structured interviews were hand transcribed, and analysed thematically. Each participant filled out a feasibility survey at the end of interview.Results79% of glaucoma patients and 94% of glaucoma healthcare professionals felt selected PROMs relevant to patients. 63% of glaucoma patients and 50% of healthcare professionals felt that selected PROMs were sufficiently comprehensive for clinical use. 46% of glaucoma patients and 56% of healthcare professionals felt selected PROMs were user-friendly.ConclusionsUsing PROMs in the Singapore clinical setting receives promising support from both healthcare professionals and patients. The identified potential barriers tailored to Singapore clinical setting will help successful implementation of PROMs into routine clinical care.

Patient-reported outcome measurements in clinical routine of trauma, spine and craniomaxillofacial surgeons: between expectations and reality: a survey among 1212 surgeons

ObjectiveTo gain information about the advantages/disadvantages of an implementation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) into the clinical routine of trauma/orthopaedic surgeons, and to identify the technical constraints confronting a successful...

Using Patient Reported Outcomes Measures to Promote Integrated Care.

Introduction:Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been introduced as standardised outcomes, but have not been implemented widely for disease targeted pathways of care, nor for geriatric patients who prefer functional performance and quality of life.Discussion:We describe innovative multipurpose implementation of PROMs as evidenced by two best practices of PROMs application in geriatric and physiotherapy practice. We show that PROMs can show meaningful outcomes in older subjects’ patient journeys, which can at the same time serve individuals and groups of both patients and professionals.Key lesson:PROMs can deliver generic outcomes relevant for older patients, may improve patient-physician relationship, quality of care and prediction of future outcomes in geriatric care, if they are valid, reliable and responsive, but still short and simple. A precondition to make the hard tip from research to practice is that PROMs are carefully positioned in the clinical encounters and in electronic health records.

The challenges and opportunities of using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice

From the standpoint of the healthcare provider, multiple contributors to a patients' clinical presentation, difficulty with translating research trials into one's practice, conflicting clinical practice guidelines, and an ever-increasing volume of literature compounds the difficulty for clinicians to determine best care, which addresses the biological, psychological and sociological health domains. If clinicians are adopting a patient centred model of care – routine use of validated patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) which elicit patients' views of their symptoms, their functional status, their health-related quality of life (HRQoL), all of which encompass several domains – are paramount. This commentary advocates for the use of PROMs on a wider scale than is currently described in the literature. Background information on PROMs is provided along with suggesting important questions to ask as a clinician when implementing these in practice. The current commentary addresses these questions and describes the implementation of PROMs using published case studies that describe osteopathy management for a variety of conditions.

HOUT-13. PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES IN BRAIN METASTASES PATIENTS – A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Brain metastases (BMs) represent an important health care problem, with increasing incidence rates over time. Due to the heterogeneity of patient and tumor characteristics, it is hard to find consensus on optimal treatment strategy. Especially in palliative care, it is important to measure treatment effects on quality of life (QOL) from the patients’ perspective. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) can facilitate optimal treatment choice and even improve outcome in BMs patients. The aim of this review was to systematically analyze implementation and validity of different PROMs in BMs patients. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies on PROMs in patients with BMs. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed independently by two investigators. Quality of PRO reporting was determined using the ISOQOL-recommended PRO reporting standards and each questionnaire was assessed using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) grading criteria. In total, 53 studies were included, comprising 5358 patients with primary tumor types: lung (61%), breast (16%), gastrointestinal (4%), renal (3%), melanoma (2%), urogenital (2%), other (8%), and unknown (4%). Nine different PROMs were applied, ranging from general cancer (FACT-G, EORTC-QLQ-C15-PAL, ESAS, SF-36, McGill QOL, EuroQol-5D) to brain specific (FACT-Br, BASIQ, EORTC-QLQ-BN20) questionnaires. Half of the general cancer questionnaires (n=3) were not validated among BM patients. According to a predefined cut-off point in line with previous work, 22 studies had insufficient quality of PRO reporting. A variety of PROMs are used in BM patients, including questionnaires intended for general cancer and general patient populations, which have not been validated in patients with BMs. Given the unique clinical considerations in patients with brain metastases, our results indicate the need for a standardized and validated questionnaire with high level of reporting for BM patients.

Framework To Guide The Collection And Use Of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures In The Learning Healthcare System.

Background:Web-based collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice is expanding rapidly as electronic health records include web portals for patients to report standardized assessments of their symptoms. As the value of PROMs in patient care expands, a framework to guide the implementation planning, collection, and use of PROs to serve multiple goals and stakeholders is needed.Methods:We identified diverse clinical, quality, and research settings where PROMs have been successfully integrated into care and routinely collected and analyzed drivers of successful implementation. Findings are based on key informant interviews with 46 individuals representing 38 organizations, of whom 40 participated in a webinars series, and 25 attended an in-person workshop designed to enable broad stakeholder input, review and refinement of the proposed PROMs implementation model. Stakeholders identified differing uses of PROMs to support: 1) individual patient care decisions, 2) quality improvement initiatives, 3) payer mandates, and 4) population health and research.Results:The implementation framework and steps that are consistently identified by stakeholders as best practices to guide PROM capture and use are described. Of note, participants indicate that web-based informatics tools are necessary but not sufficient for PROM use, suggesting that successful PROM implementation requires integration into clinic operations and careful planning for user’s analytic needs. Each of the four identified uses may require implementation modifications at each step to assure optimal use.Conclusions:The proposed framework will guide future PROM implementation efforts across learning health care systems to assure that complete PROMs are captured at the correct time, and with associated risk factors, to generate meaningful information to serve diverse stakeholders.

Patient-reported outcome measures in urology

Many urologic treatments have similar clinical outcomes, necessitating alternative methods to discriminate between options. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become the new standard for evaluating the patient experience, and their use has drastically increased over the past decade. The purpose of this review is to discuss the status of PROMs in urology, highlight commonly used tools and address their future direction. An increasing number of urology-specific PROMs tools have been developed and validated. An increased focus on patient-centered care has provided an impetus for their rise in use. Implementation of PROMs has transitioned from being primarily descriptive in nature to producing actionable findings. Many PROMs are now implemented in daily clinical practice. The future of PROMs will involve new instrument development, integration into clinical practice and the use of PROMs as performance measures. PROMs are effective tools for characterizing symptom burden and health-related quality of life. With increasing clinical implementation, PROMs are playing an increasing role in patients' clinical decision-making.

Identifying barriers to the implementation of patient-reported outcome measures using a theory-based approach

Rationale, aims and objectives: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining increasing attention within mental healthcare, yet can be difficult to implement into routine practice. To increase uptake, it is recommended to explore the barriers to uptake guided by a theory base, with this information then used to design a tailored improvement strategy. The aim of this study was to explore the barriers to collecting and using a specific PROM within a single setting to inform the design of PROMs promotion strategies.Methods: Staff perceptions of relative advantage and the compatibility with norms and complexity of using the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (SWEMWBS) in routine practice were explored through structured group discussions with mental healthcare teams within one Foundation Trust guided by diffusion of innovation theory. Results: Respondents perceived some advantages to using SWEMWBS, notably patient involvement, but also highlighted the burden of paper-based data collection and the poor quality of feedback reports. There was also scepticism regarding the suitability of the tool, particularly for certain groups of patients and concerns regarding use of PROMs for performance management. Views were mixed regarding compatibility with existing norms. Conclusions: To increase uptake, it is recommended that the positive perceptions of relative advantage, compatibility and ease of use identified in this study should be promoted, including through messages delivered by senior staff and tailored educational strategies. Negative (mis)perceptions should be similarly challenged and barriers around paper-based data collection and feedback reports systematically targeted.

A qualitative study of emergency physicians’ perspectives on PROMS in the emergency department

IntroductionThere is a growing emphasis on including patients' perspectives on outcomes as a measure of quality care. To date, this has been challenging in the emergency department (ED) setting. To...

Implementation of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) has emerged as a strategy to improve the outcome of total knee arthroplasty. The use of PROMs in routine clinical practice has accelerated because health care in the United States is shifting from a volume-based to a value-based reimbursement system in which quality is increasingly being measured using PROMs. Electronic, internet-based platforms, such as Functional and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement, currently exist which offer turn-key solutions for PROM collection, trending, analysis, and benchmarking for busy clinicians. Successful systems provide real-time trended PROM scores that inform shared decision making, optimize patient care, and enable comparisons among practices.

The Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Yoga Therapy

Yoga therapists are interested in knowing whether their therapeutic interventions are helpful in improving health and wellbeing in their yoga therapy clients. However, few yoga therapists use standardized, reliable, and valid questionnaires to determine the therapeutic effectiveness of their treatments. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are paper or web-based questionnaires used to assess an individual's perceptions of their symptoms and/or quality of life. In 2004, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched the PROMIS® initiative to standardize and simplify the collection of PROs in research and in clinical practice. The PROMIS® initiative launched a multicenter cooperative group that collected and reviewed thousands of PROs, then extensively tested them in over 20,000 research participants. The result was a web-based collection of item banks of the best questions or "items" within three domains of interest: physical, mental, and social health. These item banks are housed in the Assessment Center, a free online resource for collecting PROs.1 Incorporating PROMIS® outcomes into yoga therapy streamlines and optimizes the collection of PROs by enabling access to reliable and valid questionnaires that are easy to read, simple to complete, and are available in multiple languages as well as in both adult and pediatric versions. The use of standardized PROs may improve yoga therapy implementation in healthcare and accelerate translation of clinical research by allowing yoga therapists to conduct indepth symptom assessments using tools that allow for comparisons to other therapeutic clinical and research interventions. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the development of the NIH PROMIS® initiative and to provide suggestions for incorporating PRO collection into yoga therapy. Important considerations to consider when implementing PROs into yoga therapy are discussed, including the choice of questionnaires and method of delivery (paper or web-based), frequency of PRO administration, interpretation and management of PRO results, and the management of problematic issues that arise.

Multi-site implementation of patient-reported outcome measures for personalized care and patient activation in symptom management.

e21665Background: The Improving Patient Experience and Health Outcomes Collaborative (iPEHOC) is a multi-site quality improvement initiative in six cancer programs across Quebec, Ontario and remote...

The Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Yoga Therapy.

Yoga therapists are interested in knowing whether their therapeutic interventions are helpful in improving health and wellbeing in their yoga therapy clients. However, few yoga therapists use standardized, reliable, and valid questionnaires to determine the therapeutic effectiveness of their treatments. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are paper or web-based questionnaires used to assess an individual's perceptions of their symptoms and/or quality of life. In 2004, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) launched the PROMIS® initiative to standardize and simplify the collection of PROs in research and in clinical practice. The PROMIS® initiative launched a multicenter cooperative group that collected and reviewed thousands of PROs, then extensively tested them in over 20,000 research participants. The result was a web-based collection of item banks of the best questions or "items" within three domains of interest: physical, mental, and social health. These item banks are housed in the Assessment Center, a free online resource for collecting PROs.1 Incorporating PROMIS® outcomes into yoga therapy streamlines and optimizes the collection of PROs by enabling access to reliable and valid questionnaires that are easy to read, simple to complete, and are available in multiple languages as well as in both adult and pediatric versions. The use of standardized PROs may improve yoga therapy implementation in healthcare and accelerate translation of clinical research by allowing yoga therapists to conduct indepth symptom assessments using tools that allow for comparisons to other therapeutic clinical and research interventions. The purpose of this paper is to summarize the development of the NIH PROMIS® initiative and to provide suggestions for incorporating PRO collection into yoga therapy. Important considerations to consider when implementing PROs into yoga therapy are discussed, including the choice of questionnaires and method of delivery (paper or web-based), frequency of PRO administration, interpretation and management of PRO results, and the management of problematic issues that arise.

How should we manage information needs, family anxiety, depression, and breathlessness for those affected by advanced disease: development of a Clinical Decision Support Tool using a Delphi design.

BackgroundClinicians request guidance to aid the routine use and interpretation of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), but tools are lacking. We aimed to develop a Clinical Decision Support Tool (CDST) focused on information needs, family anxiety, depression, and breathlessness (measured using the Palliative care Outcome Scale (POS)) and related PROM implementation guidance.MethodsWe drafted recommendations based on findings from systematic literature searches. In a modified online Delphi study, 38 experts from 12 countries with different professional backgrounds, including four patient/carer representatives, were invited to rate the appropriateness of these recommendations for problems of varying severity in the CDST. The quality of evidence was added for each recommendation, and the final draft CDST reappraised by the experts. The accompanying implementation guidance was built on data from literature scoping with expert revision (n = 11 invited experts).ResultsThe systematic literature searches identified over 560 potential references, of which 43 met the inclusion criteria. Two Delphi rounds (response rate 66 % and 62 %; n = 25 and 23) found that good patient care, psychosocial support and empathy, and open communication were central to supporting patients and families affected by all POS concerns as a core requirement. Assessment was recommended for increasing problems (i.e. scores), followed by non-pharmacological interventions and for breathlessness and depression, pharmacological interventions. Accompanying PROM implementation guidance was built based on the 8-step International Society for Quality of Life Research framework, as revised by nine (response rate 82 %) experts.ConclusionsThis CDST provides a straightforward guide to help support clinical care and improve evidence-based outcomes for patients with progressive illness and their families, addressing four areas of clinical uncertainty. Recommendations should be used flexibly, alongside skilled individual clinical assessment and knowledge, taking into account patients’ and families’ individual preferences, circumstances, and resources. The CDST is provided with accompanying implementation guidance to facilitate PROM use and is ready for further development and evaluation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0449-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in U.S. Total Joint Replacement Registries: Rationale, Status, and Plans

In the U.S. and abroad, the use of patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate the impact of total joint replacement surgery on patient quality of life is increasingly common. Analyses of patient-reported outcomes have documented substantial pain relief and functional gain among the vast majority of patients managed with total joint replacement. In addition, postoperative patient-reported outcomes are useful to identify persistent pain and suboptimal outcomes in the minority of patients who have them. The leaders of five U.S. total joint replacement registries report the rationale, current status, and vision for the use of patient-reported outcome measures in U.S. total joint replacement registries. Surgeon leaders of the Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement registry, American Joint Replacement Registry, California Joint Replacement Registry, Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative, and Virginia Joint Registry report the rationale supporting the adoption of patient-reported outcome measures, factors associated with the selection and successful implementation of patient-reported outcome measures, and barriers to complete and valid data. U.S. registries are at varied stages of implementation of preoperative surveys and postoperative total joint replacement outcome measures. Surgeon leaders report unified rationales for adopting patient-reported outcome measures: to capture data on pain relief and functional gain following total joint replacement as well as to identify suboptimal implant performance. Key considerations in the selection of a patient-reported outcome measure include its ability to measure both joint pain and physical function while limiting any burden on patients and surgeons related to its use. Complete patient-reported outcomes data will be associated with varied modes of survey completion, including options for home-based completion, to ensure consistent timing and data capture. The current stage of implementation of patient-reported outcome measures varies widely among U.S. registries. Nonetheless, evidence from the Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement registry supports the feasibility of successful implementation of patient-reported outcome measures with careful attention to the selection of the outcome measure, mode and timing of postoperative administration, and minimization of any burden on the patient and surgeon.