Time in Diabetes Distress and Glycaemia-Specific Distress: New Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Psychosocial Burden of Diabetes Using Ecological Momentary Assessment in an Observational Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic Ehrmann ◽  
Andreas Schmitt ◽  
Lilli Priesterroth ◽  
Bernhard Kulzer ◽  
Norbert Hermanns
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Ecological Momentary Assessment ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Psychosocial Burden ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Momentary Assessment

scholarly journals Effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e044888
Author(s):  
Rita McMorrow ◽  
Barbara Hunter ◽  
Christel Hendrieckx ◽  
Dominika Kwasnicka ◽  
Leanne Cussen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Patient Reported

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is a global health priority. People with diabetes are more likely to experience mental health problems relative to people without diabetes. Diabetes guidelines recommend assessment of depression and diabetes distress during diabetes care. This systematic review will examine the effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a prespecified strategy using a prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Setting and study design strategy. The date range of the search of all databases will be from inception to 3 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case–control studies and analytical cross-sectional studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language will be included. Two review authors will independently screen abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer, if required, using Covidence software. Two reviewers will undertake risk of bias assessment using checklists appropriate to study design. Data will be extracted using prespecified template. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, with a meta-analysis, if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review of published studies. Presentation of results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.

Patient-reported outcome measures after 8 weeks of mepolizumab treatment and long-term outcomes in patients with severe asthma: an observational study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Anthon Kroes ◽  
Sander Wilhelm Zielhuis ◽  
Akke-Nynke van der Meer ◽  
Kim de Jong ◽  
Anneke ten Brinke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
Severe Asthma ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical diabetes consultations: the DiaPROM randomised controlled pilot trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e042353
Author(s):  
Ingvild Hernar ◽  
Marit Graue ◽  
David A Richards ◽  
Ragnhild B Strandberg ◽  
Roy Miodini Nilsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Pilot Trial ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Full Scale ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Distress Scale

ObjectiveTo pilot test the proposed DiaPROM trial components and address uncertainties associated with conducting a full-scale randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate whether such a trial is feasible.DesignTwo-arm pilot RCT.ParticipantsAdults aged ≥18–39 years, with minimum 1 year type 1 diabetes duration, attending outpatient follow-up. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy, severe cognitive, somatic or psychiatric conditions and impaired vision.Randomisation and interventionAll participants completed electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) prior to the annual diabetes consultation. Using computer-generated block-randomisation without blinding, we assigned participants in a 1:1 ratio stratified by sex to receive standard care or an intervention. Physicians reviewed diabetes distress scores (Problem Areas In Diabetes scale) and referred individuals with scores ≥30 or single item(s) ≥3 to minimum two diabetes nurse consultations where reported problems were reviewed and discussed.OutcomesRecruitment and retention rates; participants perceptions about intervention components. Variance and estimated between-group differences in follow-up scores (Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), WHO 5-Well-being Index, Perceived Competence for Diabetes Scale and glycaemic control) and DDS correlation with baseline scores, to assist sample size calculations.ResultsWe randomised 80 participants to the control or intervention arm (one participant was later excluded). 23/39 intervention arm participants qualified for additional consultations and 17 attended. 67/79 attended the 12-month follow-up (15.2% attrition); 5/17 referred to additional consultations were lost to follow-up (29.4% attrition). Participants reported PROMs as relevant (84.6%) and acceptable (97.4%) but rated the usefulness of consultations as moderate to low. Baseline mean±SD DDS score was 2.1±0.69; DDS SD was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.60 to 0.86) at follow-up; correlation between baseline and follow-up DDS scores was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7 to 0.9).ConclusionsThe pilot trial revealed need for intervention modifications ahead of a full-scale trial to evaluate use of PROMs in diabetes consultations. Specifically, participant acceptability and intervention implementation need further investigation.

scholarly journals Patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) – 30-day mortality and adverse events post colonoscopy: A prospective observational study from a metropolitan Australian hospital

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. s52-s53
Author(s):  
Myat Myat Khaing ◽  
Petrina Kellar ◽  
Felicity Hartnell ◽  
John Croese ◽  
Ruth Hodgson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Prospective Observational Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Australian Hospital

scholarly journals Use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical diabetes consultations: study protocol for the DiaPROM randomised controlled trial pilot study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e024008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Haugstvedt ◽  
Ingvild Hernar ◽  
Ragnhild Bjarkøy Strandberg ◽  
David A Richards ◽  
Roy Miodini Nilsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Clinical Diabetes ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionAlthough diabetes distress is found to be associated with decreased glycaemic control among adults with type 1 diabetes, the psychological and emotional impact of living with the condition is often not recognised and often under-reported in diabetes care. Therefore, regular assessment of diabetes distress is recommended. Assessment of diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical practice has the potential to enhance care for people with diabetes by identifying problems and improving patient–clinician communication. In this study protocol, we describe a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) aiming to test the feasibility of all components of an empowerment-based intervention using PROMs as dialogue support in clinical diabetes consultations, and to address the uncertainties associated with running a fully powered evaluation study.Methods and analysisWe will undertake a two-arm pilot RCT of an intervention using the Problem Areas In Diabetes (PAID) scale in clinical diabetes consultations in order to conclude whether a fully powered trial is appropriate and/or feasible. The study will also include qualitative indepth interviews with participants and healthcare providers. Our objectives are to (1) evaluate the recruitment procedures and attrition rates; (2) evaluate the performance of the randomisation procedure; (3) evaluate the participants’ mean scores on the outcome measures before and after the intervention; (4) evaluate if the intervention consultations are acceptable and feasible; and (5) explore patients’ and healthcare providers’ experiences with the use of PAID as dialogue support and empowerment-based communication skills in clinical diabetes consultations. The quantitative data analysis includes descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, means, SD and CI). For the qualitative data, we will perform thematic analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been obtained from the Western Norway Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics (2017/1506/REC west). We will present the findings from the study phases at national and international conferences and submit manuscripts to peer-reviewed journals and popular science journals.Trial registration numberNCT03471104; Pre-results.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adults with Hand Trauma: A Systematic Review

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 145-157
Author(s):  
Daniel Alexander Waltho ◽  
Manraj Nirmal Kaur ◽  
Mary Ellen Gedye ◽  
Achilleas Thoma
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Hand Trauma ◽  
Patient Reported

Impact of Depression on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Lumbar Spine Decompression

Spine ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 434-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert K. Merrill ◽  
Lukas P. Zebala ◽  
Colleen Peters ◽  
Sheeraz A. Qureshi ◽  
Steven J. McAnany
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Patient Reported
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document