Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process
Objectives Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to measure the patient’s perspective of their outcomes following healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to determine the preferred formats for reporting service-level PROs data to clinicians, researchers and managers to s...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022-07-01
|
| Series: | BMJ Open |
| Online Access: | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/7/e055999.full |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832575973746278400 |
|---|---|
| author | Monique F Kilkenny Dominique A Cadilhac Shaun L Hancock Violet Marion Paulette Kelly Sibilah Breen Benjamin Clissold Lauren Sanders Olivia Francis Ryan Penina Gunzburg Shae Cooke Lauren Guy |
| author_facet | Monique F Kilkenny Dominique A Cadilhac Shaun L Hancock Violet Marion Paulette Kelly Sibilah Breen Benjamin Clissold Lauren Sanders Olivia Francis Ryan Penina Gunzburg Shae Cooke Lauren Guy |
| author_sort | Monique F Kilkenny |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objectives Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to measure the patient’s perspective of their outcomes following healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to determine the preferred formats for reporting service-level PROs data to clinicians, researchers and managers to support greater utility of these data to improve healthcare and patient outcomes.Setting Healthcare professionals receiving PRO data feedback at the health service level.Participants An interdisciplinary Project Working Group comprised of clinicians participated in three workshops to codesign reporting templates of summarised PRO data (modified Rankin Scale, EuroQol Five Dimension Descriptive System, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) using a modified Delphi process. An electronic survey was then distributed to short list the preferred templates among a broad sample of clinical end users. A final workshop was undertaken with the Project Working Group to review results and reach consensus on the final templates.Primary and secondary outcome measures The recommendation of preferred PRO summary data feedback templates and guiding principles for reporting aggregate PRO data to clinicians was the primary outcome. A secondary outcome was the identification of perceived barriers and enablers to the use of PRO data in hospitals. For each outcome measure, quantitative and qualitative data were summarised.Results 31 Working Group members (19 stroke, 2 psychology, 1 pharmacy, 9 researchers) participated in the workshops, where 25/55 templates were shortlisted for wider assessment. The survey was completed by 114 end users. Strongest preferences were identified for bar charts (37/82 votes, 45%) and stacked bar charts (37/91 votes, 41%). At the final workshop, recommendations to enhance communication of PROs data for comparing health service performance were made including tailoring feedback to professional roles and use of case-mix adjustment to ensure fair comparisons.Conclusions Our research provides guidance on PROs reporting for optimising data interpretation and comparing hospital performance. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-0496854a0edd476b9ffb0ba9f05031c7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2044-6055 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2022-07-01 |
| publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMJ Open |
| spelling | doaj-art-0496854a0edd476b9ffb0ba9f05031c72025-01-31T13:40:08ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552022-07-0112710.1136/bmjopen-2021-055999Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop processMonique F Kilkenny0Dominique A Cadilhac1Shaun L Hancock2Violet Marion3Paulette Kelly4Sibilah Breen5Benjamin Clissold6Lauren Sanders7Olivia Francis Ryan8Penina Gunzburg9Shae Cooke10Lauren Guy11Stroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaStroke and Ageing Research, Department of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, AustraliaPublic Health: Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health—Austin Campus, Heidelberg, Victoria, AustraliaPublic Health: Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health—Austin Campus, Heidelberg, Victoria, AustraliaVictorian Agency for Health Information, Victoria Department of Health and Human Services, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaPublic Health: Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health—Austin Campus, Heidelberg, Victoria, AustraliaNeurosciences Department, Monash Health, Clayton, Victoria, Australia4 Neurology and Neurosciences, St Vincent`s Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaPublic Health: Stroke Division, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health—Austin Campus, Heidelberg, Victoria, AustraliaPhysiotherapy Department, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaDepartment of Physiotherapy, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Victoria, AustraliaCommunity Based Rehabilitation, Sunshine Hospital, Saint Albans, Victoria, AustraliaObjectives Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to measure the patient’s perspective of their outcomes following healthcare interventions. The aim of this study was to determine the preferred formats for reporting service-level PROs data to clinicians, researchers and managers to support greater utility of these data to improve healthcare and patient outcomes.Setting Healthcare professionals receiving PRO data feedback at the health service level.Participants An interdisciplinary Project Working Group comprised of clinicians participated in three workshops to codesign reporting templates of summarised PRO data (modified Rankin Scale, EuroQol Five Dimension Descriptive System, EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) using a modified Delphi process. An electronic survey was then distributed to short list the preferred templates among a broad sample of clinical end users. A final workshop was undertaken with the Project Working Group to review results and reach consensus on the final templates.Primary and secondary outcome measures The recommendation of preferred PRO summary data feedback templates and guiding principles for reporting aggregate PRO data to clinicians was the primary outcome. A secondary outcome was the identification of perceived barriers and enablers to the use of PRO data in hospitals. For each outcome measure, quantitative and qualitative data were summarised.Results 31 Working Group members (19 stroke, 2 psychology, 1 pharmacy, 9 researchers) participated in the workshops, where 25/55 templates were shortlisted for wider assessment. The survey was completed by 114 end users. Strongest preferences were identified for bar charts (37/82 votes, 45%) and stacked bar charts (37/91 votes, 41%). At the final workshop, recommendations to enhance communication of PROs data for comparing health service performance were made including tailoring feedback to professional roles and use of case-mix adjustment to ensure fair comparisons.Conclusions Our research provides guidance on PROs reporting for optimising data interpretation and comparing hospital performance.https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/7/e055999.full |
| spellingShingle | Monique F Kilkenny Dominique A Cadilhac Shaun L Hancock Violet Marion Paulette Kelly Sibilah Breen Benjamin Clissold Lauren Sanders Olivia Francis Ryan Penina Gunzburg Shae Cooke Lauren Guy Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process BMJ Open |
| title | Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process |
| title_full | Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process |
| title_fullStr | Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process |
| title_full_unstemmed | Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process |
| title_short | Feedback of aggregate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) data to clinicians and hospital end users: findings from an Australian codesign workshop process |
| title_sort | feedback of aggregate patient reported outcomes pros data to clinicians and hospital end users findings from an australian codesign workshop process |
| url | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/12/7/e055999.full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT moniquefkilkenny feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT dominiqueacadilhac feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT shaunlhancock feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT violetmarion feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT paulettekelly feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT sibilahbreen feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT benjaminclissold feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT laurensanders feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT oliviafrancisryan feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT peninagunzburg feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT shaecooke feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess AT laurenguy feedbackofaggregatepatientreportedoutcomesprosdatatocliniciansandhospitalendusersfindingsfromanaustraliancodesignworkshopprocess |