Publicatie
Publicatie datum
To PROM or not to PROM: Using patient reported outcome measures during consultations with patients in orthopaedic care.
Wiering, B., Boer, D. de, Delnoij, D. To PROM or not to PROM: Using patient reported outcome measures during consultations with patients in orthopaedic care. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Orthopaedie: 2019, 26(2), p. 27-32.
Download de PDF
Objective
Besides the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as measures for quality of care, the Dutch government hopes that PROMs could also be used in consultations to guide individual care. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate whether PROMs are used during consultations in routine orthopaedic practice, how this is used and how orthopaedists experience the use of PROMs.
Method and results
From the total of 712 orthopaedists invited to participate in an online survey and an interview, 142 (20%) orthopaedists completed the survey and 4 (1%) orthopaedists were interviewed. Due to the low response, the results are not representative. However, they give an insight into why implementing PROMs to guide individual care may be difficult. The main difficulty may be due to the use of PROMs for several purposes, as the PROMs used to measure quality of care may not be suitable for specific complaints, are not always relevant to patients and are often not suitable to measure individual progress. Additionally, PROMs overlap with the anamnesis and diagnostic procedures.
Conclusion
A PROM with a smaller measurement error developed with patient involvement or separating quality measures may help to increase the relevance of PROMs to patients and orthopaedists.
Besides the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as measures for quality of care, the Dutch government hopes that PROMs could also be used in consultations to guide individual care. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate whether PROMs are used during consultations in routine orthopaedic practice, how this is used and how orthopaedists experience the use of PROMs.
Method and results
From the total of 712 orthopaedists invited to participate in an online survey and an interview, 142 (20%) orthopaedists completed the survey and 4 (1%) orthopaedists were interviewed. Due to the low response, the results are not representative. However, they give an insight into why implementing PROMs to guide individual care may be difficult. The main difficulty may be due to the use of PROMs for several purposes, as the PROMs used to measure quality of care may not be suitable for specific complaints, are not always relevant to patients and are often not suitable to measure individual progress. Additionally, PROMs overlap with the anamnesis and diagnostic procedures.
Conclusion
A PROM with a smaller measurement error developed with patient involvement or separating quality measures may help to increase the relevance of PROMs to patients and orthopaedists.
Objective
Besides the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as measures for quality of care, the Dutch government hopes that PROMs could also be used in consultations to guide individual care. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate whether PROMs are used during consultations in routine orthopaedic practice, how this is used and how orthopaedists experience the use of PROMs.
Method and results
From the total of 712 orthopaedists invited to participate in an online survey and an interview, 142 (20%) orthopaedists completed the survey and 4 (1%) orthopaedists were interviewed. Due to the low response, the results are not representative. However, they give an insight into why implementing PROMs to guide individual care may be difficult. The main difficulty may be due to the use of PROMs for several purposes, as the PROMs used to measure quality of care may not be suitable for specific complaints, are not always relevant to patients and are often not suitable to measure individual progress. Additionally, PROMs overlap with the anamnesis and diagnostic procedures.
Conclusion
A PROM with a smaller measurement error developed with patient involvement or separating quality measures may help to increase the relevance of PROMs to patients and orthopaedists.
Besides the use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) as measures for quality of care, the Dutch government hopes that PROMs could also be used in consultations to guide individual care. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate whether PROMs are used during consultations in routine orthopaedic practice, how this is used and how orthopaedists experience the use of PROMs.
Method and results
From the total of 712 orthopaedists invited to participate in an online survey and an interview, 142 (20%) orthopaedists completed the survey and 4 (1%) orthopaedists were interviewed. Due to the low response, the results are not representative. However, they give an insight into why implementing PROMs to guide individual care may be difficult. The main difficulty may be due to the use of PROMs for several purposes, as the PROMs used to measure quality of care may not be suitable for specific complaints, are not always relevant to patients and are often not suitable to measure individual progress. Additionally, PROMs overlap with the anamnesis and diagnostic procedures.
Conclusion
A PROM with a smaller measurement error developed with patient involvement or separating quality measures may help to increase the relevance of PROMs to patients and orthopaedists.