scholarly journals A feasibility esplorative study of a novel modality of using patient reported outcomes for patients with rare cancers and melanoma (prosexplor).

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonina De Angelis ◽  
Stefania Crivellari ◽  
Marinella Bertolotti ◽  
Antonella Cassinari ◽  
Michela Lia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
General Practitioner ◽  
Emergency Room ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Satisfaction Survey ◽  
Interval Time ◽  
Baseline Questionnaire ◽  
Rare Cancers ◽  
Patient Reported

Objectives: This study tested the feasibility of using a simplified Patient Reported Outcomes questionnaire (sPQs) in routine clinical practice. Methodology: A baseline questionnaire was completed by patients before starting treatment and in the interval time between courses (a total of 4 questionnaires). The results were communicated to a data manager who alerted the oncologist in case of replies differing from the basal/previous. The patient was referred to the nurse or general practitioner or specialist. A satisfaction survey was also done. Results: In a 3-months interval, 27 patients were enrolled. Fatigue and nausea were the most frequent symptoms reported as worsening. The oncologist managed toxicities in 4 cases, therapy variations were recommended by the nurse in 14 cases, visits was performed in 6 patients, 1 patient was hospitalized. None of patients had unplanned accesses to the emergency room or to the hospital. The questionnaire was judged simple and useful. Conclusions: The use of sPQs in the routine clinical practice was feasible and well accepted by patients. sPQs allowed to promptly recognize and manage toxicities reducing to zero unplanned accesses.

A feasibility exploratory study of a novel modality of using patient-reported outcomes (PROsEXPLOR) in the real world

2020 ◽  
Vol 106 (6) ◽  
pp. 464-470
Author(s):  
Federica Grosso ◽  
Stefania Crivellari ◽  
Marinella Bertolotti ◽  
Michela Lia ◽  
Antonina De Angelis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Satisfaction Survey ◽  
Home Therapy ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Hospital Visits

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.

scholarly journals A narrative review of current evidence supporting the implementation of electronic patient-reported outcome measures in the management of chronic diseases

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 204062232110159
Author(s):  
Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi ◽  
Devika Nair ◽  
John Devin Peipert ◽  
Kara Schick-Makaroff ◽  
Istvan Mucsi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Chronic Diseases ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Narrative Review ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Impact

An application of telemedicine of growing interest and relevance is the use of personal computers and mobile devices to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs are self-reports of patients’ health status without interpretation by anyone else. The tools developed to assess PROs are known as patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs). The technological innovations that have led to an increased ownership of electronic devices have also facilitated the development of electronic PROMs (ePROMs). ePROMs are a conduit for telemedicine in the care of patients with chronic diseases. Various studies have demonstrated that the use of ePROMs in routine clinical practice is both acceptable and feasible with patients increasingly expressing a preference for an electronic mode of administration. There is increasing evidence that the use of electronic patient-reported outcome (ePROMs) could have significant impacts on outcomes valued by patients, healthcare providers and researchers. Whilst the development and implementation of these systems may be initially costly and resource-intensive, patient preferences and existing evidence to support their implementation suggests the need for continued research prioritisation in this area. This narrative review summarises and discusses evidence of the impact of ePROMs on clinical parameters and outcomes relevant to chronic diseases. We also explore recently published literature regarding issues that may influence the robust implementation of ePROMs for routine clinical practice.

Between a logic of disruption and a logic of continuation: Negotiating the legitimacy of algorithms used in automated clinical decision-making

2021 ◽  
pp. 136345932199674
Author(s):  
Rikke Torenholt ◽  
Henriette Langstrup
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Diagnostic Procedures ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Pro Tools

In both popular and academic discussions of the use of algorithms in clinical practice, narratives often draw on the decisive potentialities of algorithms and come with the belief that algorithms will substantially transform healthcare. We suggest that this approach is associated with a logic of disruption. However, we argue that in clinical practice alongside this logic, another and less recognised logic exists, namely that of continuation: here the use of algorithms constitutes part of an established practice. Applying these logics as our analytical framing, we set out to explore how algorithms for clinical decision-making are enacted by political stakeholders, healthcare professionals, and patients, and in doing so, study how the legitimacy of delegating to an algorithm is negotiated and obtained. Empirically we draw on ethnographic fieldwork carried out in relation to attempts in Denmark to develop and implement Patient Reported Outcomes (PRO) tools – involving algorithmic sorting – in clinical practice. We follow the work within two disease areas: heart rehabilitation and breast cancer follow-up care. We show how at the political level, algorithms constitute tools for disrupting inefficient work and unsystematic patient involvement, whereas closer to the clinical practice, algorithms constitute a continuation of standardised and evidence-based diagnostic procedures and a continuation of the physicians’ expertise and authority. We argue that the co-existence of the two logics have implications as both provide a push towards the use of algorithms and how a logic of continuation may divert attention away from new issues introduced with automated digital decision-support systems.

Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1305-1314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire F. Snyder ◽  
Neil K. Aaronson ◽  
Ali K. Choucair ◽  
Thomas E. Elliott ◽  
Joanne Greenhalgh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Outcomes Assessment ◽  
Patient Reported
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document