Utilization Of Patient-reported Outcome Measures Research Articles

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is the most common chronic liver disease worldwide and can progress to serious complications, including metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), cirrhosis, end-stage liver disease, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Predisposing risk factors for MASH include obesity, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome. Patients with MASH often experience significant impairments in their health-related quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), particularly in physical functioning domains, fatigue, and vitality. Incorporating PROs offers valuable insights into patients' perspectives on their symptoms, treatment efficacy, and overall well-being, thereby guiding more holistic and patient-centered care strategies. This review aims to investigate the utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the context of MASLD and MASH care, identify which PROMs are employed, and summarize the outcomes reported.

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.

Value-based healthcare as an opportunity for patient management at the individual and system level

Value-based healthcare (VBHC) aims to increase patient outcomes in relation to the costs incurred, with afocus on measuring these outcomes using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The German healthcare system faces the challenge of quality disparities in care amidst rising costs, making VBHC of interest. This paper aims to illustrate how VBHC principles are currently being implemented in the field of internal medicine in Germany and to identify the potential that can be derived from VBHC pioneering examples from the Netherlands. Selected case studies are presented to illustrate how VBHC principles are already being applied in internal medicine, focusing on where PROMs are utilized and how value-based reimbursement supports VBHC implementation-both in Germany and the Netherlands. In Germany, various cross-provider initiatives and individual providers implement the VBHC element of PROMs measurement. In addition, the Baden-Württemberg selective contract in cardiology demonstrates how financing VBHC elements in regular care was already made possible in Germany. Pioneers such as the Dutch center of excellence Diabeter and the multidisciplinary care network Netherlands Heart Network provide further inspiration for the implementation of VBHC in internal medicine. While various initiatives support the measurement of PROMs in the German context, the use of these results in care practice is not apparent. The utilization of PROMs and strategies identified in Dutch examples could be initial steps toward fostering VBHC in Germany.

The state of art on the use of patient reported outcomes in migraine.

This review aims to explore the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in migraine. Traditionally assessed through specific features, recent adoption of PROMs allows for a more objective and quantifiable evaluation. PROMs, which are standardized questionnaires collecting health information directly from a patients' perspective, cover various aspects, including migraine specific aspects. The review focuses on delineating the applications and interpretation of commonly used PROMs in migraine research, with an emphasis on their integration in clinical care. Generic and migraine-specific PROMs play a crucial role in clinical research, particularly in assessing health-related quality of life, disability, impact, and associated comorbidities. Some of these measures are strongly recommended to be used by the International Guidelines and are, in fact, mandated by the FDA for product labeling. Recently, there has been an expansion in the use of PROMs to assess migraine in diverse populations, in particular pediatric patients. However, the application of these measures in clinical care shows considerable heterogeneity, and some have not been validated specifically for migraine. The existing multitude of PROMs, coupled with ongoing development of new ones to better capture patient concerns, creates complexity in their research and clinical application. To address these challenges, it becomes imperative to streamline their use, focusing on those that are more validated and better aligned with the patients' perspective including different populations' needs. The utilization of PROMs in evaluating migraine enables a more holistic assessment, helps quantify the impact of the disease facilitating change measurement, improves communication between healthcare providers and patients and, guides treatment decisions for improved outcomes. However, the increasing number of PROMs questionnaires, underscores the importance of validating these tools for migraine and, the dynamic nature of the disease makes it relevant to decide with whom, why and when these should be used.

Patient-reported outcome measures in congenital heart surgery: a systematic review.

Patient-reported outcome measures are commonly used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments. CHD remains the most common congenital malformation. There has been a gradual shift in evaluating the outcome of surgery for CHD from mortality to morbidity and now to self-reported outcomes. We aimed to review studies assessing patient-reported outcome measures as a useful marker of outcome for patients, both children and adults, who underwent surgery for CHD. A systematic database search was conducted of original articles that explored the application of patient-reported outcome measures in the CHD surgical setting in PubMed and SCOPUS from inception to February 2022. Our search yielded 1511 papers, of which six studies were included in this review after screening abstract and full-text, with a total sample size of 5734 patients. The main areas of discussion were the utility of patient-reported outcome measures, determinants of patient-reported outcome measures, and the need for a congenital cardiac surgery-specific patient-reported outcome measure for paediatric patients and their parents/guardians and adult patients. This systematic review reports the use of patient-reported outcome measures to be a useful indicator to gain insight into the patients' perspective to provide holistic and patient-centred management. However, further studies are required to assess the utility of patient-reported outcome measures in a congenital cardiac surgical setting.

Clinical Utility of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used for Tendon and Nerve Transfers for Tetraplegia in New Zealand

This study determines the clinical utility of patient-reported outcome measures used to measure outcomes of upper extremity (UE) reconstructive procedures in individuals with tetraplegia. The patient-reported outcome measures are the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, the Capabilities of Upper Extremity Questionnaire (CUE-Q), and the Personal Wellbeing Index. Retrospective data of 43 individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) levels C4-C7 tetraplegia, and American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grades A-D who had upper limb reconstructive surgery were reviewed. Participants were grouped according to their SCI level and resultant surgical procedures into higher SCI severity and lower SCI severity groups. The mean age of participants was 26.3 years (SD 13.4; range 13-64 years). The higher-severity SCI group required elbow and hand reconstruction surgery, whereas the lower-severity group only required hand reconstruction surgery. Important differences in Canadian Occupational Performance Measure priorities were identified between the higher and lower SCI severity groups. Question redundancy was evident with the CUE-Q. The self-report Personal Wellbeing Index captures the possible impacts of improved UE function on an individual's perceived sense of personal wellbeing. In this patient-reported outcome measure analysis, we found that the level of impairment influences patient priorities. Functional measures ought to consider UE impairment and personal wellbeing as a construct in this population, given the demands of surgery. Prognostic II.

The utility of patient-reported outcome measures in orthopaedic trauma research: a systematic review

Background: Patient-reported outcome score measures (PROM) are valuable tools in assessing patient function following management of orthopaedic conditions. The purpose of this study was to investigate and characterize the use of PROM in the orthopaedic trauma literature. Methods: Articles published in the Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (JOT), Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (JBJS), Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (CORR), Foot and Ankle International (FAI), Journal of Hand Surgery (JHS), and Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (JSES) from 2011 to 2019 were reviewed. Publications pertaining to outcomes after trauma were included. Publication year, number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) used, and the specific PROMs published per study were recorded. Results: Of the 11,873 articles reviewed, 3,583 (30%) articles pertained to trauma. Twenty-nine percent of orthopaedic trauma articles utilized at least one PROM. There was a gradual increase in trauma publications with PROMs over 9 yr. An average of two PROMs were reported per publication. The percentage of trauma studies that included PROMs varied by journal. In JOT, 35% of trauma articles published included PROM, 30% of articles published in JBJS, 27% in CORR, 48% in JSES, 30% in JHS, and 49% of trauma articles in FAI utilized PROM. The most commonly used PROMs included: visual analog scale (VAS) (n=411), Disabilities of the Arm and Hand Score (DASH) (n=281), Constant-Murley Score (n=145), Short Form Survey-36 (n=123), the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (n=101), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment (n=93). Conclusions: Clinical outcome studies utilizing PROMs after orthopaedic trauma represented a minority of publications across six major journals between 2011 to 2019. Standardization of PROMs is lacking, making comparison between studies challenging. The VAS and DASH scores were the most frequently PROMs reported followed by additional PROMs for the upper extremity. Characterizing the use of PROMs directs future investigators toward selecting applicable PROMs to evaluate patient outcomes following orthopaedic trauma. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Collection and Utilization of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Colorectal Surgery Clinic

IntroductionThe routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) promises to improve patient care. However, in colorectal surgery, PROMs are uncommonly collected outside of clinical research studies and rarely used in clinical care. We designed and implemented a quality improvement project with the goals of routinely collecting PROMs and increasing the frequency that PROMs are utilized by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice. MethodsThis mixed-methods, quality improvement project was conducted in the colorectal surgery clinic of a tertiary academic medical center. Patients were administered up to five PROMs before each appointment. PROM completion rates were measured. Additionally, we performed two educational interventions to increase utilization of our electronic health record’s PROM dashboard by colorectal surgeons. Utilization rates and attitudes toward the PROM dashboard were measured. ResultsOverall, patients completed 3600 of 3977 (90.9%) administered PROMs during the study period. At baseline, colorectal surgeons reviewed 6.7% of completed PROMs. After two educational interventions, this increased to 39.3% (P = 0.004). Colorectal surgeons also felt that the PROM dashboard was easier to use. Barriers to greater PROM dashboard utilization included poor user interface/user experience and a perceived lack of knowledge, time, and relevance. ConclusionsThe collection of PROMs in colorectal surgery clinics is feasible and can result in high PROM completion rates. Educational interventions can improve the utilization of PROMs by colorectal surgeons in clinical practice. Our experience collecting PROMs through this quality improvement initiative can serve as a template for other colorectal surgery clinics interested in collecting and utilizing data from PROMs.

Moving towards patient-reported outcomes in routine clinical practice: implementation lessons from the BREAST-Q.

PurposeLongitudinal, routine utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical care has been challenging. The purpose of this study is to describe a quality improvement initiative to improve patient engagement with the BREAST-Q, a gold-standard PROM for breast reconstruction.MethodsIn 2011, we implemented the BREAST-Q as part of routine care. In 2018, we began a quality improvement initiative to increase BREAST-Q patient participation. The BREAST-Q was administered at every clinic visit via an institutional patient portal or an in-clinic tablet; digital dashboard technologies were used to improve workflow integration, real-time accountability, and immediate data availability at clinic visits. High clinical staff engagement was encouraged by assigning “BREAST-Q Champions.” BREAST-Q completion data and patient characteristics were examined to understand non-response to the assessment.ResultsFollowing quality improvement, the average annual BREAST-Q completion rate increased from 42.8% in 2011–2017 to 87.6% in 2019, the last full year of our study period. High completion rates were maintained January–July 2020; however, a significantly larger proportion of BREAST-Qs were completed at home in 2020 versus the same period in 2019 (49.7 vs. 38.8%, p < 0.001), potentially due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared with non-responders, responders were younger (49.7 vs. 52.2 years, p < 0.001), more likely to be white (76.9 vs. 73.6%, p < 0.001), and had private insurance (79.4 vs. 69.8%, p < 0.001).ConclusionOur quality improvement initiative successfully increased routine completion of the BREAST-Q. Similar implementation techniques may prove beneficial at other institutions interested in incorporating PROMs into routine care.

The utility of patient-reported outcome measures in mental health.

The utility of patient-reported outcome measures in mental health.

Failure to Achieve Threshold Scores on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Within 1 Year Has a Predictive Risk of Subsequent Hip Surgery Within 5 Years of Primary Hip Arthroscopy: A Case-Control Study.

Background:Research has identified factors that influence achievement rates of threshold scores on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after hip arthroscopy. However, little data exist on whether failure to achieve a threshold score (minimal clinically important difference [MCID] or substantial clinical benefit [SCB]) in the short term after hip arthroscopy predicts the risk of future hip surgery.Purpose/Hypothesis:The purpose of this study was to determine if failure to achieve the MCID or SCB on PROMs within 1 year of hip arthroscopy can be considered a risk factor for repeat surgery within 5 years of primary hip arthroscopy. It was hypothesized that failure to achieve threshold scores would increase the risk of subsequent hip surgery.Study Design:Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was completed. Four PROMs were collected preoperatively and within 1 year of hip arthroscopy: modified Harris Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score–Activities of Daily Living, Hip Outcome Score–Sports, and the 33-Item International Hip Outcome Tool.Results:Two cohorts were formed: (1) a study cohort (n = 88) composed of patients who underwent repeat hip surgery within 5 years of hip arthroscopy and (2) a control cohort (n = 288) composed of patients who did not require repeat hip surgery. The study cohort had significantly (P < .001) lower scores on all postoperative PROMs, and a significantly (P < .001) smaller percentage of the study cohort met the MCID and SCB. Multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that not achieving the MCID or SCB on each of the PROMs is an independent risk factor for repeat hip surgery. For every PROM in which a patient failed to achieve the MCID, the odds of subsequent surgery increased by 1.68 (95% CI, 1.42-1.98; P < .001). For every PROM in which a patient failed to achieve the SCB, the odds of subsequent surgery increased by 1.63 (95% CI, 1.35-1.97; P < .001).Conclusion:Failure to meet threshold scores on PROMs after hip arthroscopy was an independent risk factor for subsequent hip surgery. This study establishes a novel utility of PROMs and confirms the importance of these metrics in the orthopaedic literature.

Results from patient-reported outcome measures are inconsistently reported in inguinal hernia trials: a systematic review.

To evaluate the use, results, and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures specific to patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair. A systematic review was performed and reported according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. A protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021243468). Systematic searches were performed in PubMed and EMBASE. We only included randomized controlled trials that involved postoperative administration of a hernia-specific patient-reported outcome measure. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias-tool 2.0. Twenty trials and four different instruments were included: the Carolinas Comfort Scale (nine studies), Activities Assessment Scale (six studies), Inguinal Pain Questionnaire (seven studies), and Surgical Pain Scales (one study). Included trials used patient-reported outcome measures and compared either different surgical approaches (11 studies), types of mesh/fixation (seven studies), or types of anesthesia/analgesia (two studies). Results were reported using several different methods including means, medians, or proportions of either overall results, results from subscales, or results from single questionnaire items. Seven of the 20 included studies specified a patient-reported outcome measure as a primary outcome and provided clear reporting of sample size calculation. Reporting of results from patient-reported outcome measures in inguinal hernia research was characterized by heterogeneity. The results were reported using several different methods, which impedes proper evidence synthesis. Only half of the included studies applied a patient-reported outcome measure as primary outcome. Ultimately, the heterogeneity in outcome reporting is an important methodological problem obstructing the full utilization of patient-reported outcome measures in inguinal hernia research.

Assessing health-related quality of life among patients with peripheral artery disease: A review of the literature and focus on patient-reported outcome measures.

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a progressive atherosclerotic disease associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Symptomatic PAD typically presents with claudication, and symptom severity strongly associates with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Existing treatment strategies for PAD are aimed at reducing symptom severity and improving functional outcomes. However, there is a need to incorporate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into PAD treatment and research in order to provide more patient-centered care. This review will discuss the impact of PAD on HRQoL, existing PROMs available to assess PAD-related HRQoL, utilization of PROMs in research studies and registries, and challenges and solutions related to the integration of PROMs into research and clinical settings.

The utility of the implementation science framework \u201cIntegrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services\u201d (i-PARIHS) and the facilitator role for introducing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a medical oncology outpatient department

PurposeWe evaluated the utility of the implementation science framework “Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services” (i-PARIHS) for introducing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) into a medical oncology outpatient department. The i-PARIHS framework identifies four core constructs for implementation, including Facilitation, Innovation, Context and Recipients.MethodsA pilot study used the i-PARIHS framework to identify PROM implementation barriers and enablers to inform facilitation support strategies, such as training clinicians and staff, workflow support, technical support and audit and feedback. Pre- and post-implementation surveys were completed by 83 and 72 staff, respectively, (nurses, doctors and allied health), to assess perceived knowledge, enablers, barriers and utility of PROMs; and acceptability of the PROM intervention was also assessed post-implementation.ResultsImportant barriers included time constraints and previous experiences with technology. Enablers included good leadership support and a culture of learning. Facilitation strategies were used to overcome barriers identified in the i-PARIHS core domains. Compared to before the intervention, staff surveys showed improvement in perceived usefulness, perceived understanding and interpretation skills for PROMs. Staff perceptions about lack of time to use PROMs during visits remained a major perceived barrier post-implementation.ConclusionThe i-PARIHS framework was useful for guiding the implementation of PROMs in routine oncology care. The four core i-PARIHS constructs (Facilitation, Innovation, Context and Recipients) identified factors that directly impacted implementation, with Facilitation having a particularly important role to overcome these barriers. Oncology clinics and health systems considering implementing PROMs should consider having a dedicated Facilitator available during PROM implementation.

Feasibility of Utilizing EPIC-CP to Guide Symptom Management for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

Utilization of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to guide symptom management during radiation therapy has shown to be more sensitive to changes in health status and might detect the exact onset of the toxic effects of radiotherapy more accurately than clinician-reported outcomes. The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) is a validated 16-item, diseasespecific PROM that targets the unique needs of men with prostate cancer (PCa) and evaluates the five HRQOL domains of urinary incontinence, urinary irritation/obstruction, bowel related symptoms, sexual dysfunction and hormonal symptoms.

Development of a Questionnaire to Assess Patient Priorities in Hip Fracture Care.

Background:Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are becoming well recognized as an important component of health care outcomes and determinants of value in patient-centered care. Yet, there is emerging recognition that guidance is lacking in the utilization of PROMs in hip fracture patients. The aim of this study was to collect input from hip fracture patients and their health care advocates as proxies to identify outcomes that are important and to gain insight into which ones are of greatest importance.Methods:A cross-section of patients aged 65 and older treated for hip fractures at a single level 1 trauma center within the previous 3 to 9 months was identified. Semistructured telephone interviews of patients and/or health care proxies were performed in 2 phases: (1) concept identification and conceptual framework development and (2) item generation and assessment of relative importance of health care outcomes. Each phase was completed by separate patient cohorts.Results:Sixty-four interviews were completed. Eighteen interviews with 13 patients and 5 proxies were completed for framework development. Forty-six interviews with 33 patients and 13 proxies were completed for the assessment of relative importance. Care team and communication were reported as important in hip fracture patients. Physical outcomes were ranked as most important by only 9% of respondents. “Having confidence that I/my loved one received the best care possible” was perceived as very important by 98% of respondents and “Having access to the surgeon” was perceived as very important by 76% of the respondents.Conclusions:In our study, communication between patients and care providers as well as collaboration among patients’ care providers ranked as the most important postoperative preferences in our cohort. Notably, physical outcomes were ranked as most important by only 9% of respondents.

Functional and aesthetic results after septorhinoplasty and concomitant radiofrequency of the inferior turbinate: is there a role for patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)?

Functional and aesthetic results after septorhinoplasty (SRP) are often not clearly demonstrated. There is still an open topic in the literature about analysis of aesthetic, functional results and patients' satisfaction after SRP. The aim of our study is to determine patients' satisfaction after SRP and concomitant radiofrequency of the inferior turbinate (RF) regarding nose appearance and improvement of symptoms, using patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). ROE questionnaire and the NOSE scale were used for a retrospective evaluation to assess patient's satisfaction in 369 patients undergoing SRP surgery from 2003 to 2016. Two additional questions were asked to confirm satisfaction following surgery. 258 patients completed the questionnaires (71.7%). The global average ROE score was 18.14 (75.6%). The percentage of satisfaction of aesthetic result was 87.3%, in particular 10.5% were very happy, 57% very much satisfied and 19.8% moderately satisfied. The global post-operative average NOSE score was 13.1 with the resolution of nasal obstruction in 72.1% cases and a marked improvement in 9.3%. The results of the two additional questions showed that 81% of patients would undergo the procedure again if required and 72.1% of patients were globally satisfied. Our study demonstrates the utility of PROMs in evaluating aesthetic and functional results after SRP and simultaneous RF. In our series, the patients undergoing SRP and RF are generally satisfied by the functional and aesthetic results. This kind of assessments should be the most common post-operative evaluation methods in this surgery.

A qualitative study of patients' perceptions of the utility of patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms in primary care clinics.

Sleep, pain, anxiety, depression, and low energy/fatigue (SPADE pentad) symptoms are common, but often unrecognized and undertreated in primary care. In an effort to improve symptom outcomes, primary care clinics are integrating patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), such as the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS), into practice. Whether patients with SPADE symptoms perceive these measures as useful is unknown. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore patients' perceptions of the utility of symptom-based PROs in primary care. As part of a mixed-methods study, 23 patients (age 24-77years) with one or more SPADE symptoms participated in one-on-one interviews about the use, implementation and visual display of PROMIS. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Five themes emerged: (1) PROs may foster communication about symptoms; (2) data from PROs may prompt clinical actions; (3) the visual display of symptom scores could be useful for patients and providers, though modifications may enhance interpretation; (4) implementation may vary according to patients' perception of PRO features (e.g., length); and (5) PROs may be useful, but only to the extent that they are valued, prioritized, and used. According to patients, the use of PROs to measure symptoms in primary care clinics has the potential to be useful. However, patients are reluctant to complete PROs if they perceive that clinicians do not use the measures to improve care. Barriers to implementation in primary care (e.g., duration of visit) should be addressed to enhance the utility of PROs. Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02383862.

Psychometric properties of health related quality of life measures in acute coronary syndrome patients: a systematic review protocol.

The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the psychometric properties and clinical utility of patient-reported outcome measures that assess health-related quality of life in patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome.

Montreal Accord on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) use series – Paper 5: patient-reported outcomes can be linked to epidemiologic measures to monitor populations and inform public health decisions

BackgroundA comprehensive picture of population health status can be captured by the incorporation of patient-reported outcome measures into population health monitoring. ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to identify the current state, opportunities, and future research related to the utilization of patient-reported outcome measures for population health monitoring in Canada. DiscussionsPatient-reported outcome measures can help to identify community health needs in public health topics including injury, chronic disease, and communicable disease. They are currently collected in major national surveys in Canada, while electronic medical records, personal health records, and online patient communities could facilitate rapid and cost-effective collection of population-based data. Their effective use requires well-validated measurements and consideration to the factors affecting validity and reproducibility and the modes of administering questionnaires. Methodologically, relevant public health application of patient-reported outcome measures includes analysis assessing measurement comparability across sociodemographically and clinically diverse population and the influence of physical and social environment. Research is needed to develop and apply analytical methods, harmonize patient-reported outcome measures across data sources and health jurisdictions, and link these measures to traditional epidemiologic indicators. Achieving these goals will benefit from collaboration among governmental agencies and expert groups.