Patient-Reported outcomes of pain care research in the adult emergency department: A scoping review

Author(s):  
Alixandra Wong ◽  
Joseph Potter ◽  
Nathan J Brown ◽  
Kevin Chu ◽  
James A Hughes
2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 101897
Author(s):  
Ana Almeida ◽  
Teresa Martins ◽  
Lígia Lima

Author(s):  
Shannon B. Juengst ◽  
Lauren Terhorst ◽  
Andrew Nabasny ◽  
Tracey Wallace ◽  
Jennifer A. Weaver ◽  
...  

The purpose of our scoping review was to describe the current use of mHealth technology for long-term assessment of patient-reported outcomes in community-dwelling individuals with acquired brain injury (ABI). Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a scoping review of literature meeting these criteria: (1) civilians or military veterans, all ages; (2) self-reported or caregiver-reported outcomes assessed via mobile device in the community (not exclusively clinic/hospital); (3) published in English; (4) published in 2015–2019. We searched Ovid MEDLINE(R) < 1946 to 16 August 2019, MEDLINE InProcess, EPub, Embase, and PsycINFO databases for articles. Thirteen manuscripts representing 12 distinct studies were organized by type of ABI [traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke] to extract outcomes, mHealth technology used, design, and inclusion of ecological momentary assessment (EMA). Outcomes included post-concussive, depressive, and affective symptoms, fatigue, daily activities, stroke risk factors, and cognitive exertion. Overall, collecting patient-reported outcomes via mHealth was feasible and acceptable in the chronic ABI population. Studies consistently showed advantage for using EMA despite variability in EMA timing/schedules. To ensure best clinical measurement, research on post-ABI outcomes should consider EMA designs (versus single time-point assessments) that provide the best timing schedules for their respective aims and outcomes and that leverage mHealth for data collection.


10.2196/19685 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. e19685
Author(s):  
Afaf Girgis ◽  
Ivana Durcinoska ◽  
Anthony Arnold ◽  
Joseph Descallar ◽  
Nasreen Kaadan ◽  
...  

Background Despite the acceptability and efficacy of e–patient-reported outcome (ePRO) systems, implementation in routine clinical care remains challenging. Objective This pragmatic trial implemented the PROMPT-Care (Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Personalized Treatment and Care) web-based system into existing clinical workflows and evaluated its effectiveness among a diverse population of patients with cancer. Methods Adult patients with solid tumors receiving active treatment or follow-up care in four cancer centers were enrolled. The PROMPT-Care intervention supported patient management through (1) monthly off-site electronic PRO physical symptom and psychosocial well-being assessments, (2) automated electronic clinical alerts notifying the care team of unresolved clinical issues following two consecutive assessments, and (3) tailored online patient self-management resources. Propensity score matching was used to match controls with intervention patients in a 4:1 ratio for patient age, sex, and treatment status. The primary outcome was a reduction in emergency department presentations. Secondary outcomes were time spent on chemotherapy and the number of allied health service referrals. Results From April 2016 to October 2018, 328 patients from four public hospitals received the intervention. Matched controls (n=1312) comprised the general population of patients with cancer, seen at the participating hospitals during the study period. Emergency department visits were significantly reduced by 33% (P=.02) among patients receiving the intervention compared with patients in the matched controls. No significant associations were found in allied health referrals or time to end of chemotherapy. At baseline, the most common patient reported outcomes (above-threshold) were fatigue (39%), tiredness (38.4%), worry (32.9%), general wellbeing (32.9%), and sleep (24.1%), aligning with the most frequently accessed self-management domain pages of physical well-being (36%) and emotional well-being (23%). The majority of clinical feedback reports were reviewed by nursing staff (729/893, 82%), largely in response to the automated clinical alerts (n=877). Conclusions Algorithm-supported web-based systems utilizing patient reported outcomes in clinical practice reduced emergency department presentations among a diverse population of patients with cancer. This study also highlighted the importance of (1) automated triggers for reviewing above-threshold results in patient reports, rather than passive manual review of patient records; (2) the instrumental role nurses play in managing alerts; and (3) providing patients with resources to support guided self-management, where appropriate. Together, these factors will inform the integration of web-based PRO systems into future models of routine cancer care. Trial Registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616000615482; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=370633 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.1186/s12885-018-4729-3


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 336-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Bohm ◽  
Kara Schick‐Makaroff ◽  
Jennifer M. MacRae ◽  
Maria Tan ◽  
Stephanie Thompson

2020 ◽  
Vol 106 (6) ◽  
pp. 464-470
Author(s):  
Federica Grosso ◽  
Stefania Crivellari ◽  
Marinella Bertolotti ◽  
Michela Lia ◽  
Antonina De Angelis ◽  
...  

Introduction: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can help clinicians better evaluate chemotherapy and immunotherapy toxicity based on patient perspectives. In this exploratory study, we tested a simplified PRO questionnaire (sPQ) in routine clinical practice and patient satisfaction with this tool. Methods: We included 16 items related to the main toxicities of chemotherapy and immunotherapy to be filled in by patients. A baseline sPQ was completed by patients before starting treatment and then in the interval between courses for a total of 4 sPQs. Patients communicated the results to a data manager, who alerted the referral oncologist in case of replies differing from the basal or previous sPQ. According to the severity of symptoms, the patient was then referred to the team nurse, the general practitioner, or another specialist. A satisfaction survey was also completed. Results: In a 3-month interval, 27 patients were enrolled. Fatigue and nausea were the most frequent symptoms reported as worsening during treatment. The oncologist was involved in the management of adverse events in 4 cases, home therapy variations were recommended by the dedicated nurse in 14 cases, additional visits were performed in 6 patients, and 1 patient was admitted to the oncology ward. None of the patients had unplanned visits to the emergency department or to the hospital. The sPQ was judged to be simple, useful, and satisfactory. Conclusions: Using sPQs in routine clinical practice was feasible and well-accepted by patients. PROs allowed us to recognize and promptly manage adverse events, reducing unplanned emergency department or hospital visits to zero.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document