Electronic health record-integrated approach for collection of patient-reported outcome measures: a retrospective evaluation.

Electronic health record-integrated approach for collection of patient-reported outcome measures: a retrospective evaluation.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1186/s12913-021-06626-7
复制
发表时间:
2021-06-30
影响因子:
2.8
通讯作者:
George SZ
George SZ
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Horn ME;Reinke EK;Mather RC;O'Donnell JD;George SZ

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

将患者报告结果测量 (PROM) 纳入临床护理给卫生系统带来了许多挑战。 PROM 提供有关患者报告的健康状况的定量数据。然而,收集 PROM 的最有效模型尚未建立。因此,本研究的目的是报告大型学术健康中心骨科外科 PROM 标准化收集的发展和初步评估。我们利用 Gensheimer 等人于 2018 年编写的《将患者报告结果整合到电子健康记录中的用户指南》作为框架来描述 PROM 收集计划的发展。我们通过实施 PROM 馆藏开发的三个方面来制定我们的计划:规划、选择和参与。接下来,我们通过评估整个科室(18 个诊所)、仅门诊诊所(14 个诊所)和仅医院诊所(4 个诊所)完成 PROM 的患者的反应率(完成 PROM 的数量/管理 PROM 的数量),对我们的举措进行了初步评估。最后,我们报告了前 5 名和后 5 名骨科提供者的平均响应率,以描述不同提供者之间的差异。我们描述了如何利用当地 EHR 的现有资源来制定完全集成的、基于人口健康的实施策略,以最大限度地提高 PROM 和常规收集的临床效用。我们在 13 个月期间(n=10,951)收集了 18 个临床中心、7 个临床专科和 100 多个提供者的大量 PROM。整个部门的响应率各不相同,从 29% 到 42% 不等,具体取决于电子健康记录门户 (MyChart) 的活动状态。最高的单一提供商平均响应率为 52%,最低提供商的平均响应率为 13%。医院诊所(26%)和门诊诊所(29%)之间的比率相似。我们发现,在 Gensheimer 等人的指导下,我们的标准化 PROM 收集计划已达到范围和规模,但在实现与现有文献相称的高回复率方面面临挑战。然而,大多数研究报告了在狭窄的临床人群中的有针对性的招募策略。需要进一步研究来阐明 PROM 收集计划中可扩展性和响应率之间的权衡。
The integration of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into clinical care presents many challenges for health systems. PROMs provide quantitative data regarding patient-reported health status. However, the most effective model for collecting PROMs has not been established. Therefore the purpose of this study is to report the development and preliminary evaluation of the standardized collection of PROMs within a department of orthopedic surgery at a large academic health center. We utilized the Users’ Guide to Integrating Patient-Reported Outcomes in Electronic Health Records by Gensheimer et al., 2018 as a framework to describe the development of PROMs collection initiative. We framed our initiative by operationalizing the three aspects of PROM collection development: Planning, Selection, and Engagement. Next, we performed a preliminary evaluation of our initiative by assessing the response rate of patients completing PROMs (no. of PROMs completed/no. of PROMs administered) across the entire department (18 clinics), ambulatory clinics only (14 clinics), and hospital-based clinics only (4 clinics). Lastly, we reported on the mean response rates for the top 5 and bottom 5 orthopaedic providers to describe the variability across providers. We described the development of a fully-integrated, population health based implementation strategy leveraging the existing resources of our local EHR to maximize clinical utility of PROMs and routine collection. We collected a large volume of PROMs over a 13 month period (n = 10,951) across 18 clinical sites, 7 clinical specialties and over 100 providers. The response rates varied across the department, ranging from 29 to 42%, depending on active status for the portal to the electronic health record (MyChart). The highest single provider mean response rate was 52%, and the lowest provider rate was 13%. Rates were similar between hospital-based (26%) and ambulatory clinics (29%). We found that our standardized PROMs collection initiative, informed by Gensheimer et al., achieved scope and scale, but faced challenges in achieving a high response rate commensurate with existing literature. However, most studies reported a targeted recruitment strategy within a narrow clinical population. Further research is needed to elucidate the trade-off between scalability and response rates in PROM collection initiatives.
DOI: 10.2196/jmir.3741
发表时间: 2015-05-07
影响因子: 7.4
作者:
Horevoorts NJ;Vissers PA;Mols F;Thong MS;van de Poll-Franse LV
通讯作者: van de Poll-Franse LV
DOI: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-20-00034
发表时间: 2020-05-01
影响因子: 1.5
作者:
Bhatt, Surabhi;Davis, Kristina;Rothrock, Nan E.
通讯作者: Rothrock, Nan E.
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2019.10.076
发表时间: 2020-05-01
影响因子: 2.5
作者:
O'Hara, Nathan N.;Richards, John T.;Klazinga, Niek S.
通讯作者: Klazinga, Niek S.
DOI: 10.1097/mlr.0b013e318268aaff
发表时间: 2012-12-01
期刊: MEDICAL CARE
影响因子: 3
作者:
Ahmed, Sara;Berzon, Richard A.;Wu, Albert W.
通讯作者: Wu, Albert W.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.04.014
发表时间: 2017-09-01
影响因子: 7.2
作者:
Bingham, Clifton O., III;Noonan, Vanessa K.;Bartlett, Susan J.
通讯作者: Bartlett, Susan J.