Use Of Patient-reported Outcome Measures Research Articles

How patient-reported outcomes and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) are implemented in healthcare professional and patient organizations? An environmental scan.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are becoming essential parts of a learning health system, and using these measures is a promising approach for value-based healthcare. However, evidence regarding healthcare professional and patient organizations' knowledge, use and perception of PROMs and PREMs is lacking. The objectives of the study were to: 1- Describe the current knowledge and use of PROMs and PREMs by healthcare professional and patient organizations, 2- Describe the determinants of PROMs and PREMs implementation according to healthcare professional and patient organizations. We conducted an environmental scan using semi-structured interviews with representatives from healthcare professional and patient organizations. Interviews were recorded and live coded based on the Franklin framework. We used inductive and deductive thematic analysis to extract information about the main themes addressed during the interview (awareness of PROMs and PREMs, examples of implementation and use of PROMs and PREMs, tools used, vision for future implementation, barriers and facilitators to implementation and the best way to collect PROMs and PREMs data). 63% of healthcare professional organizations (n = 19) and 41% of patient organizations (n = 9) that were contacted agreed to have a representative interviewed. The representatives from both the healthcare professional and patient organizations acknowledged the importance of assessing patients' experience and outcomes. However, they considered the implementation of PROMs and PREMs tools to be scarce within their organizations, in clinical practice and in the education system. Patient organizations were worried that overuse of PROMs and PREMs could lead to depersonalization of practice. Barriers to implementing PROMs and PREMs included lack of awareness of tools, resistance to change and lack of motivation to complete or explain the questionnaire. Barriers also included factors such as lack of financial, technological and human resources and issues with integration of data and inconsistency of digital platforms. This environmental scan revealed a lack of awareness of tools by healthcare professional and patient organizations' representatives and limited implementation. Adequate training, technological integration, and demonstration of PROMs and PREMs benefits to foster broader adoption in clinical and organizational settings is dearly needed. Addressing these challenges is essential for enhancing value-based care.

The use of PROMs (patient-reported outcome measures) and PREMs (patient-reported experience measures) in Cardiology: current state and applications to improve patient care

The integration of patient-reported outcomes and experiences through PROMs and PREMs tools represents a significant evolution in the quality of care and clinical practice. This article reviews the state of the art and the application experiences of these tools, focusing on their impact on the management of cardiovascular diseases. The use of PROMs and PREMs allows for a more comprehensive assessment of patient well-being by integrating with traditional clinical indicators. An increasing number of studies suggests that the systematic collection of these data can help physicians in better identifying individual patient's needs, improving doctor-patient communication, and personalizing therapies. In aggregate form, these data can be used to improve the quality of services. This article explores the main international experiences, starting from the activities carried out in this field by the European Society of Cardiology, the challenges in implementing such tools, and the prospects for a more widespread adoption in daily clinical practice. It emphasizes the activities carried out in Italy by the Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio and the Management and Healthcare Laboratory of the Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, highlighting the importance of validated tools, appropriate technologies, and a cultural change to promote patient-centered care.

Identifying Clusters of Curatively-Treated Esophageal Cancer Patients Using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures at Three Months from Discharge: A Secondary Analysis from a Longitudinal Single Center Study.

This study aims to identify meaningful clusters based on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in curatively-treated esophageal cancer patients at three months post-discharge. This secondary analysis of a longitudinal single-center study included 46 esophageal cancer patients who underwent curative surgery. Patients were selected based on their completion of PROMs surveys at three months post-discharge, were aged 18 years or older, and had undergone surgical resection (esophagectomy) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The analysis utilized t-distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) for dimensionality reduction and hierarchical clustering to analyze PROMs data collected three months post-discharge. Clustering was performed on physical, emotional, cognitive, and social functioning variables, symptom burden, and health literacy. Three distinct clusters were identified: Cluster 1 (n = 24) with higher functioning and moderate symptoms, Cluster 2 (n = 14) with moderate functioning, higher symptoms, and lower health literacy, and Cluster 3 (n = 8) with the highest functioning, lowest symptoms, and highest health literacy. Significant differences between squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subtypes were observed across several PROMs domains, including critical health literacy, general health status/quality of life, nausea and vomiting, and insomnia. These clusters provide an exploratory framework for tailoring post-operative interventions to enhance patient recovery, which necessitates further confirmatory investigations, including outcomes such as complications and mortality, in the analysis. This study fills a research gap by demonstrating the utility of PROMs in identifying distinct recovery patterns in esophageal cancer patients post-surgery. The findings support the use of PROMs to guide personalized post-operative care, potentially improving patient outcomes and quality of life. Further research is needed to validate these findings in larger, diverse populations.

Enhancing Clinicians' Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study.

Despite the increasing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for collecting self-reported data among hospital outpatients, clinicians' use of these data remains suboptimal. Insight into this issue and strategies to enhance the use of PROMs are critical but limited. This study aimed to examine clinicians' use of PROM data for value-based outpatient consultations and identify efforts to enhance their use of PROMs in a Dutch university hospital. First, we aimed to investigate clinicians' use of outpatients' PROM data in 2023, focusing on adoption, implementation, and maintenance. Second, we aimed to develop insights into the organizational-level strategies implemented to enhance clinicians' use of PROM data from 2020 to 2023. This included understanding the underlying rationales for these strategies and identifying strategies that appeared to be missing to address barriers or leverage facilitators. Third, we aimed to explore the key factors driving and constraining clinicians' use of PROMs in 2023. We integrated data from 4 sources: 1-year performance data on clinicians' use of PROMs (n=70 subdepartments), internal hospital documents from a central support team (n=56), a survey among clinicians (n=47), and interviews with individuals contributing to the organizational-level implementation of PROMs (n=20). The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework was used to analyze clinicians' adoption, implementation, and maintenance of PROMs. Strategies were analyzed using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change taxonomy, and results were structured around the constructs of capability, opportunity, and motivation. On average, around 2023, clinicians accessed PROM data for approximately 3 of 20 (14%) patients during their outpatient consultation, despite numerous strategies to improve this practice. We identified issues in adoption, implementation, and maintenance. The hospital's strategies, shaped organically and pragmatically, were related to 27 (37%) out of 73 Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies. These strategies focused on enhancing clinicians' capability, opportunity, and motivation. We found shortcomings in the quality of execution and completeness of strategies in relation to addressing all barriers and leveraging facilitators. We identified variations in the factors influencing the use of PROMs among frequent PROM users, occasional users, and nonusers. Challenges to effective facilitation were apparent, with certain desired strategies being unfeasible or impeded. Enhancing clinicians' use of PROMs has remained challenging despite various strategies aimed at improving their capability, opportunity, and motivation. The use of PROMs may require more substantial changes than initially expected, necessitating a shift in clinicians' professional attitudes and practices. Hospitals can facilitate rather than manage clinicians' genuine use of PROMs. They must prioritize efforts to engage clinicians with PROMs for value-based outpatient care. Specific attention to their professionalization may be warranted. Tailored strategies, designed to address within-group differences in clinicians' needs and motivation, hold promise for future efforts.

The patient-reported outcome measure for older people living with frailty receiving acute care (PROM-OPAC): field-testing and validation

BackgroundCurrent acute healthcare service metrics are not meaningful for older people living with frailty. Healthcare knowledge, situational security, and physical and psychosocial function are important outcomes typically not collected. The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could support these assessments. Existing instruments are not comprehensive as they typically consider function, while older people with frailty also value enablement (self-determination and security in health and healthcare). This study field-tested and validated a PROM for older people with frailty receiving acute care (PROM-OPAC) to measure enablement.MethodsPeople aged 65+ with Clinical Frailty Scale 5–8 were recruited within seventy-two hours of an emergency attendance. Iterations of the novel instrument were administered over three stages: (1) preliminary field-testing for reliability (response distribution and internal consistency) and structure (exploratory factor analysis, EFA); (2) intermediate field-testing of an improved instrument for reliability and structure; (3) final draft validation assessing reliability, structure (confirmatory factor analysis, CFA), and construct validity based on a priori hypotheses. Feasibility was appraised throughout using data completeness and response rates and times.Results241 people participated. Three items of a preliminary seven-item measure had poor response distribution or loading and were accordingly improved. The intermediate instrument had interpretability issues and three items required further improvement. The final eight-item draft had acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.71), structure (two factors for self-determination and security; RMSEA: 0.065; TLI: 0.917; CFI: 0.944), and construct validity (lower scores from respondents waiting longer and requiring admission). Feasibility was promising (response rate 39%; 98% responses complete; median completion time 11 (IQR: 12) minutes).ConclusionsAdministration of the PROM-OPAC appeared feasible and the instrument had acceptable psychometric properties. Further evaluation is required to assess generalisability.

The use of respiratory patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of COPD: Perceptions of Australian osteopaths

BackgroundPatient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely used to capture patients' perspectives of their health status and treatment outcomes and to enable practitioners to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. The aim of this study was to explore Australian osteopaths’ perceptions of the use of respiratory PROMS in the management of chronic lung conditions. MethodsThis study drew on the social ecological model (SEM), which highlights the interdependence of contextual structures and processes. Osteopaths who were initially part of a larger mixed-methods study were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were thematically analysed using the SEM. ResultsSeven of the original study osteopaths were interviewed. When presented with a patient who had a co-morbid respiratory condition, they focused on the musculoskeletal aspects of that condition (intrapersonal factors). Participants described sporadic use of musculoskeletal and quality of life PROMs in practice, and scarce use of respiratory PROMs (intrapersonal and organizational factors). Participants’ perceptions of their scope of practice strongly influenced their use of respiratory PROMs (environmental factors). ConclusionIntrapersonal and environmental factors were dominant drivers for participants’ scant use of respiratory PROMs. Further education on the scope and contribution of osteopaths to the management of chronic lung conditions and the use of respiratory PROMS is called for to promote multidisciplinary patient care.

MyMS: An Interface for Patient-Reported Outcomes for Finnish Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis.

Patient-generated data are a cornerstone of individualized multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment. MyMS, an interface for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was developed by the Finnish MS Register to enable systematic collection of PROs. MyMS collects data on demographics, lifestyle factors, disease-related factors, and validated questionnaires, including the Quality of Life Questionnaire (15D), the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29), and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). At the end of 2020, the patient-reported Expanded Disability Status Scale (PREDSS), the EuroQOL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), the Fatigue Scale for Motor and Cognitive Functions (FSMC), and the Multiple Sclerosis Neuropsychological Questionnaire (MSNQ) were added. As of January 1, 2023, 1201 individuals with MS (79% female) have added data to MyMS. Of the validated PRO measures (PROMs), the 15D, MSIS-29, and FSS are the most used. The mean PREDSS score is 3.0 and median disease duration is 6.4 years. According to the existing PROMs, patients report mildly compromised quality of life and problems with fatigue and cognition. The patient interface of the Finnish MS Register consists of data from 17 of 21 counties with well-being services. The interface is used by 10% of Finnish individuals with MS. The addition of the PREDSS, EQ-5D, FSMC, and MSNQ to the interface has increased health care professional and patient interest in the use of PROMs. We suggest that PROs should be integrated into electronic health records to improve shared decision-making and diminish documentation burden.

Using Implementation Science to Evaluate the Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in a Clinical Heart Failure Care Setting

BackgroundPatients with heart failure (HF) can experience a poor quality-of-life (QOL), recurring hospitalizations, and progressive disease symptoms. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) include integration of patients’ voices into clinical care, by assessing patient symptoms, function, and QOL. In 2022, PROMs were incorporated into the electronic health record system (Epic) at a large academic hospital in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to use implementation-science frameworks to systematically evaluate the uptake and integration of PROMs into clinical HF care. MethodsThe Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework guided this mixed-methods, 1-year, quality-improvement project. Data sources included the following: clinician use of PROMs; patient-level data on completed PROMs; and semistructured interviews with clinicians. The PROM was the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12, which captures 4 domains related to HF—symptom frequency, physical limitations, social limitations, and QOL. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were analyzed using behaviour-change frameworks and latent content analysis. ResultsOver the course of 1 year, more patients were assigned to PROMs, a higher proportion of patients completed PROMs, and approximately 80% of patients had high scores on the questionnaire. Clinicians experience barriers—related to attention and decision processes, the environmental context, and their professional role—to integrating PROMs into practice. Suggested changes to improve PROM uptake include adding language licenses for PROM translations, reducing cognitive load for clinicians who are assigning and interpreting PROMs in the Epic system, and championing modelling of use of PROMs in practice. ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the benefit of using implementation science frameworks, to evaluate the implementation of PROMs in practice and provide actionable recommendations to health systems.

Breast-cancer specific comprehensive archive of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for clinical research and clinical practice in oncology: Results from the PRO4All project

BackgroundInclusion of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in oncology clinical trials is strongly recommended. However, selecting the most appropriate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is not easy. This study aimed to develop a breast cancer (BC) specific comprehensive archive of PROMs. MethodsAs part of the PRO4All project, we identified available PROMs in oncology by searching facit.org, eortc.org, eprovide.mapi-trust.org, PubMed, ema.europa.eu (European Public Assessment Reports) and published reviews. For this analysis, only BC tools were extracted. We described information about PROM name, type of questionnaire, questionnaire variant(s), recall period, number of items, and presence of minimum clinically important difference (MCID) reference in literature. Then, we assigned each item to a specific domain according to a predefined taxonomy of 38 items for outcome classification. ResultsWe identified and analyzed 383 PROMs. Of these, 29 were BC specific, but 2 were excluded because the questionnaires description was not available. 6 (22.2 %) were variants of another questionnaire. All questionnaires were self-reported. In 6 cases (22.2 %) the recall period to consider was the “last week”. The mean number of items per questionnaire was 25.81 (range 6–71). 602 items were assigned to an outcome domain: emotional functioning/wellbeing in 26.6 % of cases, physical functioning in 14.1 %, delivery of care in 10.8 %, and general outcomes in 10.5 %. MCID reference was found only in 4 (14.8 %) cases. ConclusionsThe newly developed archive represents a useful tool to optimize the use of PROMs in the evaluation of treatments in BC patients, promoting a patient-centered approach both in clinical research and practice.

Patient-reported outcome measures for acute rhinosinusitis in adults and children: a systematic review of the quality of existing instruments

BackgroundAcute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is a self-limiting inflammation of the nose and sinuses caused by viral or bacterial infections that requires primarily symptomatic treatment. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are suitable tools for the assessment of the effectiveness of remedies for ARS from the patient’s perspective in clinical trials and real-world studies. Data regarding the quality of existing PROMs for ARS are limited.PurposeTo conduct a systematic review of the quality of existing disease-specific PROMs for use in adults and children with ARS according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to derive recommendations for use of the identified instruments in future clinical studies.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science and Embase for studies reporting on the development and/or validation of PROMs for ARS. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study, evaluated the quality of measurement properties per PROM and study, and graded the evidence. Based on the overall evidence, we derived recommendations for use of the instruments.ResultsWe identified four studies on three PROMs measuring symptoms of ARS and quality of life in adults (Sinonasal Outcome Test-16, SNOT-16; Measurement of Acute Rhinosinusitis, MARS; Rhinosinusitis Quality-of-Life Assessment, RhinoQoL). For ARS in children, we identified two studies on two PROMs measuring symptoms of ARS (Pediatric Rhinosinusitis Symptom Scale, PRSS; Sinus Symptom Questionnaire, S5). Our assessment of measurement properties indicates that all instruments require further validation before they can be unrestrictedly recommended for use in future research (COSMIN category B). In particular, there were no content validity studies for any of the identified instruments, but also data on other important measurement properties, e.g., structural validity, are lacking.ConclusionCurrently, no PROM for ARS in adults and children can be unrestrictedly recommended based on the evaluation of their quality. Further validation is required for all identified PROMs. Content validation involving patients and experts should be given priority.Systematic review registrationOSF (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VAP8U).

1852P The use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess toxicities and quality of life associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: A systematic review

1852P The use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess toxicities and quality of life associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: A systematic review

COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures version 2.0

PurposeSystematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools to select the most suitable PROM for a study or clinical application. Conducting these reviews is challenging, and the quality of these reviews needs to be improved. We updated the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs, including the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, and the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.MethodsAdaptations to the methodology were based on our experience with applying the COSMIN guideline, through discussions among the authors, and results from two related Delphi studies.ResultsThe updated guideline places more emphasis on key aspects that are often missing or sub optimally conducted in published systematic reviews of PROMs, such as formulating a well-defined research question and developing a comprehensive search strategy, assessing risk of bias, applying criteria for good measurement properties, summarizing results, and grading the quality of the evidence. We also stress the importance of evaluating the measurement properties of each subscale of a PROM separately and evaluating content validity of all included PROMs.ConclusionThe quality of systematic reviews of PROMs can be improved by using this updated version of the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. Improved quality will lead to better PROM selection and increased standardization of PROM use.

Current Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Ignores Functional Demand.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used in orthopaedic surgery to measure aspects of musculoskeletal function that are important to patients, such as disability and pain. However, current assessments of function using PROMs do not necessarily consider a patient's functional demands in detail. A patient's functional demands could serve as a confounder to their perception of their functional ability. Hence, functional demands may need to be adjusted for when PROMs are used to measure musculoskeletal function. We conducted a cross-sectional study in which new orthopaedic patients completed a questionnaire regarding demographics, function [Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System], functional demand (Tegner Activity Level Scale), pain self-efficacy, and symptoms of depression. 169 eligible patients with diverse orthopaedic conditions were enrolled in the study from an orthopaedic clinic, and 19 were excluded for incomplete questionnaires. The mean Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System score was 36.5 ± 9.1, and the mean Tegner score was 2.6 ± 2.0. In the multivariable regression model, patient-reported function was significantly associated with functional demand (β = 0.17, P < 0.001). Significant associations were observed for pain self-efficacy (β = 0.15, P < 0.001), acuity (β = -0.10, P = 0.004), and age 80 years or older (β = -0.16, P = 0.004). No notable association was observed with depression or age 65 to 79 years. Higher patient-reported physical function is associated with higher levels of functional demand when controlling for psychosocial factors, acuity, and age. Because of its confounding effect on measuring physical function, functional demand should be assessed and included in models using PROMs before and after surgery. For example, payment models using improvements in PROMs, such as the short form of the Hip dysfunction and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score after joint arthroplasty, should include functional demand in the model when assessing quality of care. Level II.

Heterogeneity of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical research

BackgroundThe use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical research increases and use of heterogeneous instruments reflects how well diverse traits are captured by a medical specialty. In order to reflect the heterogeneity of current PROM use in ophthalmology, we reviewed the available literature.MethodsThe medical literature database Web of Science was searched for the most cited articles in clinical ophthalmology. Titles, abstracts and full text articles were reviewed for the use of PROMs and a list of the 100 most cited articles using PROMs was obtained and stratified by year of publication.ResultsA total of 1,996 articles were screened. Seventy-seven out of the 100 articles identified included one PROM, and the average number of instruments was 1.5 ± 1.1. The most widely used PROMs were the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire (33%), the Ocular Surface Disease Index (14%) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form (13%). A simulation analysis suggested that the distribution of PROM use in ophthalmology study did not significantly differ from a power law distribution. Twenty-two percent and fifteen percent of articles did not reference and did not specify the PROM used, respectively. This rate decreased in the more recently published articles (p = 0.041).ConclusionsOur data suggest that the heterogeneity of PROMs applied in ophthalmology studies is low. The selection of PROMs for clinical studies should be done carefully, depending on the research goal.

Measuring successful conversations in couples with and without aphasia: A scoping review.

Aphasia impacts communication and relationships. While counselling is increasingly recognised as a component of the speech-language therapy role, the success of conversation partner training is typically measured in terms of communication alone. This scoping review aimed to describe how successful conversation is currently measured with couples-with and without aphasia, to inform the development of an ecologically valid measure for couples with aphasia. The scoping review was reported in alignment with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases were searched for conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were extracted from included studies and screened against the three-tier model of situated language to shortlist those that measure everyday communication. Items within shortlisted PROMs were further described using the refined International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health linking rules. Following screening and full-text review, 46 studies were included, consisting of 24 studies conducted with couples with aphasia and 22 studies conducted with couples without aphasia. For couples with aphasia, 13 PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication. Of these, 23% were dyadic (i.e., measured from the perspectives of both members of the couple); however, they usually only appraised the communication behaviours of the person with aphasia. For couples without aphasia, eight PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication; all were dyadic and measured both attitudes and communication behaviours of both partners. Conversation relies on the interaction of two people, and success in conversation is best rated by those having the conversation. The use of PROMs is recommended as part of person and relationship-centred practice; however, there is currently no validated PROM for conversation in aphasia that considers the perspectives and behaviours of both the person with aphasia and their communication partner. The PROM items identified in this study will form the basis of future research to develop a PROM for couples' conversations in aphasia. What is already known on the subject Communication partner training (CPT) for couples, where one person has aphasia, can improve conversation skills and enhance relationships. Clinician-rated measures, such as conversation analysis, have been used to measure the outcomes of CPT. However, there is a lack of person-centred or self-rated outcome measurement instruments. that is, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for couples' conversations in aphasia. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We have identified outcome measurement instruments used in conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. We found that most PROMs used in aphasia treatment studies were not dyadic, that is, they did not include the self-report of both communication partners. In contrast, the PROMs used with couples without aphasia were dyadic and contained items that measured a more complex range of both partners' emotions, behaviours and attitudes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study provides insights into the content and characteristics of PROMs for couples' conversation therapy and may assist clinicians in selecting outcome measurement instruments in their practice.

Current use of patient-reported outcome measures by musculoskeletal physiotherapists in Portugal.

Musculoskeletal conditions are the leading cause of disability, requiring continuous outcome measurement, including the utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The aims of the study were a) to characterize the use PROMs by Portuguese physiotherapists in patients with musculoskeletal conditions; b) to analyze the associated factors of their use and; c) to identify the barriers and facilitators to their implementation. A cross-sectional online survey was carried out with musculoskeletal physiotherapists working in Portugal. Closed questions were used to describe the use of PROMs. The factors associated with the non-use of PROMs were analysed through logistic regression models (p= 0.05). Barriers and facilitators were assessed through open questions and analyzed using thematic analysis. One hundred and fifty-six physiotherapists answered the online survey. Most physiotherapists do not use outcome measures consistently and physical tests are often chosen (70.5%) over PROMs (17.3%). The work sector (p= 0.01; p= 0.015; p= 0.009). the workplace stimulus (p= 0.001) and the physiotherapists' knowledge about PROMs (p= 0.017) were identified as factors associated with the non-use of PROMs. Barriers and facilitators to the use of PROMs are related to physiotherapists' skills, the patients' characteristics, the workplace conditions, and the instruments' characteristics. This study showed the poor use of PROMs by musculoskeletal physiotherapists and identified the associated factors, barriers, and facilitators that should be considered to increase its future use by musculoskeletal physiotherapists in Portugal.

Patient-reported outcomes-the role of the patient's subjective perspective for research and clinical care

Because only patients can adequately assess symptoms, disability, and quality of life, concordance between apatient's and physician's assessment is often low. Accordingly, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in research and routine clinical care. In daily practice, PROs are not only applied to measure the patient's perceived outcome of medical treatments, but also to assess their health status before intervention starts. Typically, several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are reliable and valid, are available for the assessment of the most important PROMs. In daily clinical practice, the integration of PROs can be useful for clinical assessment and treatment planning or for quality management. Currently, the most promising application is routine patient monitoring using digital PROMs (ePROMs). Systematic reviews have revealed that the routine use of PROMs in daily clinical care is associated with, among others, improved physician-patient communication, higher patient satisfaction, reduced symptom burden, higher quality of life, and improved survival. This effect is especially strong if health care professionals continuously receive the results of the PRO monitoring. Patients are usually inclined to disclose their health status, and the positive effects of routine patient monitoring are widely recognized. However, several barriers to using PROs and PROMs still exist.

Impact of Gender-confirming Chest Surgery on Sexual Health: A Prospective Study.

Few studies have evaluated the improvement of the sexual well-being of transgender patients after breast augmentation or bilateral mastectomy. This prospective study aims to assess the potential improvement in body awareness during sexual intercourse, as well as the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) sensitivity recovery after gender-confirming chest surgery. From October 2019 up to April 2021, all transgender patients eligible for gender-confirming chest surgery in our institution were asked to fill out two questionnaires, namely BREAST-Q (a patient-reported outcome measure for use in reconstructive breast surgery and clinical practice) and Body Exposure during Sexual Activities Questionnaire (scientifically validated self-report assessments of body-image experiences in the context of sexual relations). The Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test was used to evaluate NAC sensitivity recovery. Different follow-ups were considered: preoperative and 4 and 12 months postoperative. Twenty-one transmasculine and 12 transfeminine patients met the inclusion criteria. For both groups, the preliminary 4-month postoperative evaluations showed significant improvement in psychological well-being and chest/breast satisfaction compared with preoperative values. Body awareness during sexual intercourse improved significantly at 4 months postoperative in the transmasculine groups (P ≤ 0.001) and at 12 months postoperative in the transfeminine group (P ≤ 0.01). No correlation between body awareness during sexual intercourse and NAC sensitivity was observed among either group, transmasculine and transfeminine patients. Although aesthetic and psychological well-being increased quickly postoperatively, sexual health remained low among transfeminine patients until they completed their transition with vaginoplasty. NAC sensitivity recovery was found to not contribute to the improvement of the sexual health of transgender patients.

Associations of cognitive appraisal and patient activation on disability and mental health outcomes: a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing spine surgery

BackgroundWith the increased use of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) to assess spine surgery outcomes, it is important to understand how patients interpret their health changes over time. The measurement of cognitive-appraisal processes enables the quantification of how individuals think about quality of life (QOL). This study examined how appraisal processes were associated with patients’ views of their role in managing their health—patient activation.MethodsThis longitudinal cohort study from August 2019 to January 2022 included 222 adults undergoing spine surgery for cervical (n = 107) and/or lumbar (n = 148) pathology at an academic medical center. PROMs assessed disability (Neck Disability Index for cervical or Oswestry Disability Index for lumbar) and mental health (PROMIS-29 v2.0), cognitive-appraisal processes (QOLAPv2-SF), and patient activation (Patient Activation Measure). ANOVA models were used to examine the relationships between QOL and cognitive appraisal processes before and after surgery, overall and stratified by patient-activation stage. Effect sizes facilitated interpretation.ResultsThere were significant improvements in pain-related disability and mental health following surgery. Cognitive appraisal processes explained substantial amounts of variance, particularly with changes in mental health (45% before surgery, 75% at three months, and 63%, at 12-months after surgery). With respect to physical disability, less disability was associated with a lesser focus on negative aspects of QOL. Appraisal explained the most variance before surgery for high-activation patients. At 12-months post-surgery, however, appraisal explained the most variance for the low-activation patients. Appraisal explained similar amounts of variance in mental health at baseline and three-months post-surgery for all activation groups, but substantially more variance in the low-activation group at 12-months post-surgery. There were differences in the direction of appraisal-outcome associations by activation group in selected appraisal items/domains.ConclusionsCognitive-appraisal processes demonstrate a significant relationship with QOL among spine surgery patients. These processes explain substantial variance in pain-related disability and mental health, especially among those high in activation before surgery and those low in activation at 12-months post-surgery. Our findings suggest that patients’ ways of thinking about their health may be effective targets of motivational coaching, to help them become more engaged over the recovery trajectory.

Second opinion machine learning for fast-track pathway assignment in hip and knee replacement surgery: the use of patient-reported outcome measures

BackgroundThe frequency of hip and knee arthroplasty surgeries has been rising steadily in recent decades. This trend is attributed to an aging population, leading to increased demands on healthcare systems. Fast Track (FT) surgical protocols, perioperative procedures designed to expedite patient recovery and early mobilization, have demonstrated efficacy in reducing hospital stays, convalescence periods, and associated costs. However, the criteria for selecting patients for FT procedures have not fully capitalized on the available patient data, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).MethodsOur study focused on developing machine learning (ML) models to support decision making in assigning patients to FT procedures, utilizing data from patients’ self-reported health status. These models are specifically designed to predict the potential health status improvement in patients initially selected for FT. Our approach focused on techniques inspired by the concept of controllable AI. This includes eXplainable AI (XAI), which aims to make the model’s recommendations comprehensible to clinicians, and cautious prediction, a method used to alert clinicians about potential control losses, thereby enhancing the models’ trustworthiness and reliability.ResultsOur models were trained and tested using a dataset comprising 899 records from individual patients admitted to the FT program at IRCCS Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant’Ambrogio. After training and selecting hyper-parameters, the models were assessed using a separate internal test set. The interpretable models demonstrated performance on par or even better than the most effective ‘black-box’ model (Random Forest). These models achieved sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) exceeding 70%, with an area under the curve (AUC) greater than 80%. The cautious prediction models exhibited enhanced performance while maintaining satisfactory coverage (over 50%). Further, when externally validated on a separate cohort from the same hospital-comprising patients from a subsequent time period-the models showed no pragmatically notable decline in performance.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate the effectiveness of utilizing PROMs as basis to develop ML models for planning assignments to FT procedures. Notably, the application of controllable AI techniques, particularly those based on XAI and cautious prediction, emerges as a promising approach. These techniques provide reliable and interpretable support, essential for informed decision-making in clinical processes.