scholarly journals mHealth Platform for Self-Management of Pediatric Cystic Fibrosis: Impact on Patient-Reported Outcomes and Patient-Centered Care

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.R. Oates ◽  
S.B. Rutland ◽  
R. Geurs ◽  
C. Mims ◽  
R. Bergquist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cystic Fibrosis ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Centered Care

scholarly journals Using Patient-Reported Outcomes to Assess Healthcare Quality: Toward Better Measurement of Patient-Centered Care in Cardiovascular Disease

2021 ◽  
pp. e1-e9
Author(s):  
Raul Angel Garcia ◽  
John A Spertus
Keyword(s):  
Health Status ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Health Management ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Healthcare Quality ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Centered Care

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are elicited directly from patients so they can describe their overall health status, including their symptoms, function, and quality of life. While commonly used as end points in clinical trials, PROs can play an important role in routine clinical care, population health management, and as a means for quantifying the quality of patient care. In this review, we propose that PROs be used to improve patient-centered care in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases given their importance to patients and society and their ability to improve doctor- provider communication. Furthermore, given the current variability in patients’ health status across different clinics and the fact that PROs can be improved by titrating therapy, we contend that PROs have a key opportunity to serve as measures of healthcare quality.

scholarly journals Bringing Patient-Centered Care to the Fore in Diseases of the Pancreas

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sayali A. Pendharkar ◽  
Maxim S. Petrov
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Evidence ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Pancreatic Diseases ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Optimal Patient Care ◽  
Centered Care

Diseases of the pancreas are often very challenging for both patients and doctors as well as pose a considerable burden on healthcare system. Emerging evidence on the importance of shared-decision making in medicine stresses the need to integrate best clinical evidence and patient-reported outcomes to deliver optimal patient care. This paper argues that patient-centered care should no longer be a hermit in management of pancreatic diseases in the 21st century.

Patient-reported outcomes and surgical triage: A gap in patient-centered care?

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 2845-2851 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Trafford Crump ◽  
Guiping Liu ◽  
Mark Chase ◽  
Jason M. Sutherland
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Centered Care

GPS' PERCEPTION OF THE PATIENT ORIENTED INTERVENTIONS AS KEY ELEMENTS OF PATIENT CENTRED CARE FOR PEOPLE WITH MULTIMORBIDITY.pdf

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 561-565
Author(s):  
Radost Assenova ◽  
Levena Kireva ◽  
Gergana Foreva
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Conditions ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Self Management ◽  
Multiple Chronic Conditions ◽  
Positive Health ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Patient Centred Care ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Health Related

Background: Patients with multimorbidity represent a significant portion of the primary healthcare population. For healthcare providers, managing patients with multiple chronic conditions represents a challenge given the complexity and the intensity of interventions. Integrated and patient-centered care is considered an effective response to the needs of people who suffer from multiple chronic conditions. According to the literature providing patient-centered care is one of the most important interventions in terms of positive health-related outcomes for patients with multimorbidity.Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate the GPs’ perception of patient oriented interventions as key elements of patient centred care for patients with multimorbidity.Material and methods: A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted among randomly selected 73 GPs. A direct individual anonymous survey was performed to explore the opinion of respondents about the importance of two patient-oriented interventions, each one including specific elements of patient-centered care for patients with multimorbidity. The tool was developed as a result of the scoping review performed by Smith et al. (2012;2016). A 5-point Likert scale (0-not at all, 1-little, 2-rather, 3-much, 4-very strong) was used. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics. In processing the data, the software product for statistical analyses - SPSS version 17 was performed for Windows XP.Results: Our results show that both categories - providing patient-oriented approach and self-management support interventions were highly accessed by the respondents. The most frequent categories of interventions identified in our study were Creating individualized and adapted interventions, Performing regular contacts and Reinforcing adherence. Less frequently reported elements such as Considering relatives’ needs and Developing self-management plan are still underestimated by the Bulgarian GPs.Conclusions: The acceptance and understanding of innovative patient-centered interventions adapted to patients with multimorbidity could be accepted as a good indicator for improving health-related outcomes and care for patients with multiple chronic conditions.

Using patient-reported outcomes for technology assessment (TA) and quality improvement (QI) in prostate cancer brachytherapy

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5139-5139
Author(s):  
R. C. Chen ◽  
A. L. Zietman ◽  
A. V. D’Amico ◽  
I. Kaplan ◽  
J. A. Clark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Standard Technique ◽  
Bowel Function ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Score Change ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Centered Care

5139 Background: Despite their sensitivity, validity and increasing prominence in clinical reports, patient-reported outcomes have played little role in TA and QI. We used our validated disease-specific instrument to compare outcomes after alternative brachytherapy techniques for early prostate cancer, both experimental vs. standard technique and between implementations of the standard technique. Methods: One radiation oncologist performed experimental MRI-guided brachytherapy (MRB) on protocol and 2 performed standard ultrasound-guided brachytherapy (USB1 and USB2). We prospectively measured urinary and bowel function of 237 men before brachytherapy and at 1, 3 and 12 months after treatment. Each symptom index is scored from 0 (no dysfunction) to 100 (maximum dysfunction). We report outcomes both as mean change in scale score from baseline and as the distribution of functional categories, grouped by pretreatment functional level: normal, intermediate, and poor (severe dysfunction). Results: Among all patients, MRB caused less urinary obstruction/irritation at 3 months after treatment than ultrasound-guided brachytherapy (mean score change 9.2 vs. 23.6, p<.001). Significant differences in outcome also existed between USB1 and USB2 (19.5 vs. 29.0, p=.01). When baseline function was normal, 15% of MRB patients reported severe 3-month dysfunction, compared to 50% of USB1 and 71% of USB2 patients ( Table ). Outcomes of patients with pretreatment urinary dysfunction differed less. Preliminary results documenting inferior outcomes prompted modification of the USB2 brachytherapy technique, producing a trend toward improved outcomes in small patient numbers (mean score change: 30.4 vs. 22.8, p=.25). Bowel symptom outcomes varied less. Conclusions: Patient-reported outcomes can provide sensitive and valid indicators of TA and QI that may contribute to optimal patient-centered care. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Patient-reported outcomes for performance measurement: Multi-institution challenges.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (8_suppl) ◽  
pp. 211-211
Author(s):  
Constance Barysauskas ◽  
Kristen K. McNiff ◽  
Stephen Flaherty ◽  
Mary Ellen Morba ◽  
Tracy E. Spinks ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Quality Of Healthcare ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Aggregated Data ◽  
Cancer Centers ◽  
Care Experience ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Centered Care

211 Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are self-reported measures of a patient’s health or healthcare experience. PRO utilization is driven by the movement toward patient-centered care and emerging evidence which suggests patients (pts) more involved in their care experience better outcomes. The infrastructure to capture PROs is evolving and PROs are now used for performance measurement (PM). PRO-PMs assess the quality of healthcare for improvement and/or accountability; but implementation is challenging. Success of PRO-PM requires identification of pts, ongoing data collection and data aggregation across institutions. The Alliance of Dedicated Cancer Centers (ADCC) identified challenges of PRO use for PM. Methods: The validated tool, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, evaluating pt function and bother from treatment (trt), administered to new localized prostate pts at three independent cancer centers was retrospectively collected. Surveys administered before and after trt measured change from trt. Results: Institutions implementing PROs following local standards resulted in a high degree of variation. The aggregated data presented challenges in identifying eligible pt populations who received surveys before and after trt within a timeframe. We identified a pragmatic and meaningful pt population and survey implementation window. Pts were stratified by center and trt modality for analysis. Conclusions: The aggregation of dissimilar data sources led to the identification of institution implementation and data capture differences, however, the ADCC identified variation for PRO measure development. Clear guidance, policies and procedures are essential to ensure adequate homogeneity and reduced variability, to assure meaningful PM and reduce confounding by institution. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document