Using PROMs During Routine Medical Consultations: The Perspectives of People with Parkinson's Disease and Their Health Professionals

Overview

Journal Health Expect

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Public Health

Date 2019 Jun 15

PMID 31199574

Citations 17

Authors

Olga C Damman

Marjolein E A Verbiest

Suzanne I Vonk

Henk W Berendse

Bastiaan R Bloem

Martine C de Bruijne

Marjan J Faber

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The use of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), such as quality of life or symptoms like pain or fatigue, is increasingly embraced within patient-centred care and shared decision making.

Objectives: To investigate: (a) how patients and health professionals think about using PROMs during routine medical consultations; (b) for which purpose(s), patients and health professionals want to use PROMs during those consultations; and (c) how patients interpret PROMs information presented in various formats. People with Parkinson's disease and their health professionals served as case example.

Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with patients (N = 13) and professionals (N = 7 neurologists; N = 7 physiotherapists). We also used a survey in which patients (N = 115) were shown six figures displaying different information types. Presentation formats of this information varied (line/bar graphs). Interpretation by patients, perceived usefulness of information, attitude towards using information during routine medical consultations and (hypothetical) decisions were assessed.

Findings: Patients and professionals were generally positive about using PROMs during medical consultations. Professionals stressed the opportunity to monitor changes in individual PROMs over time. Patients were primarily positive about aggregated PROMs to make treatment decisions. This information was also most often interpreted correctly, especially when presented through a line graph (90.1% correct). Professionals thought patients should take the initiative in discussing PROMs, whereas patients thought professionals should do so.

Conclusion/discussion: When used in routine medical consultations, PROMs seem to have potential to support shared decision making and facilitate patient-professional communication. However, training seems needed for both patients and professionals to facilitate actual discussion and proper interpretation.

Citing Articles

Gains and pains: a qualitative study on the implications of value-based health care for professionals.

van Engen V, Bonfrer I, Mieris F, Ensink M, Stiggelbout A, Ahaus K Hum Resour Health. 2025; 23(1):3.

PMID: 39810198 PMC: 11734497. DOI: 10.1186/s12960-025-00972-x.

Enhancing Clinicians' Use of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Outpatient Care: Mixed Methods Study.

van Engen V, Bonfrer I, Ahaus K, Den Hollander-Ardon M, Peters I, Buljac-Samardzic M J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e60306.

PMID: 39422999 PMC: 11530726. DOI: 10.2196/60306.

What are the perspectives of patients with hand and wrist conditions, chronic pain, and patients recovering from stroke on the use of patient and outcome information in everyday care? A Mixed-Methods study.

Arends G, Loos N, van Kooij Y, Tabeau K, de Ridder W, Selles R Qual Life Res. 2024; 33(9):2573-2587.

PMID: 38839681 PMC: 11390777. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03685-1.

The implementation, use and impact of patient reported outcome measures in value-based healthcare programmes: A scoping review.

Silveira Bianchim M, Crane E, Jones A, Neukirchinger B, Roberts G, Mclaughlin L PLoS One. 2023; 18(12):e0290976.

PMID: 38055759 PMC: 10699630. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290976.

The effects of an individualized smartphone-based exercise program on self-defined motor tasks in Parkinson's disease: a long-term feasibility study.

Lutzow L, Teckenburg I, Koch V, Marxreiter F, Jukic J, Stallforth S J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023; 7(1):106.

PMID: 37902922 PMC: 10616049. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-023-00631-6.

References

Gaston C, Mitchell G . Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61(10):2252-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.04.015. View

Feldman-Stewart D, Kocovski N, McConnell B, Brundage M, Mackillop W . Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions. Med Decis Making. 2000; 20(2):228-38. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0002000208. View

Brundage M, Smith K, Little E, Bantug E, Snyder C . Communicating patient-reported outcome scores using graphic formats: results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Qual Life Res. 2015; 24(10):2457-72. PMC: 4891942. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-015-0974-y. View

Bantug E, Coles T, Smith K, Snyder C, Rouette J, Brundage M . Graphical displays of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) for use in clinical practice: What makes a pro picture worth a thousand words?. Patient Educ Couns. 2015; 99(4):483-490. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.10.027. View

Soreide K, Soreide A . Using patient-reported outcome measures for improved decision-making in patients with gastrointestinal cancer - the last clinical frontier in surgical oncology?. Front Oncol. 2013; 3:157. PMC: 3682158. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00157. View

Henselmans I, Heijmans M, Rademakers J, van Dulmen S . Participation of chronic patients in medical consultations: patients' perceived efficacy, barriers and interest in support. Health Expect. 2014; 18(6):2375-88. PMC: 5810699. DOI: 10.1111/hex.12206. View

Oostendorp L, Ottevanger P, van de Wouw A, Honkoop A, Los M, van der Graaf W . Patients' Preferences for Information About the Benefits and Risks of Second-Line Palliative Chemotherapy and Their Oncologist's Awareness of These Preferences. J Cancer Educ. 2015; 31(3):443-8. PMC: 4988994. DOI: 10.1007/s13187-015-0845-9. View

Trevena L, Zikmund-Fisher B, Edwards A, Gaissmaier W, Galesic M, Han P . Presenting quantitative information about decision outcomes: a risk communication primer for patient decision aid developers. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2014; 13 Suppl 2:S7. PMC: 4045391. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S7. View

Neff C, Wang M, Martel H . Using the PDQ-39 in routine care for Parkinson's disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2018; 53:105-107. DOI: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2018.05.019. View

10.

Booij J, Zegers M, Evers P, Hendriks M, Delnoij D, Rademakers J . Improving cancer patient care: development of a generic cancer consumer quality index questionnaire for cancer patients. BMC Cancer. 2013; 13:203. PMC: 3648393. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-203. View

11.

Izard J, Hartzler A, Avery D, Shih C, Dalkin B, Gore J . User-centered design of quality of life reports for clinical care of patients with prostate cancer. Surgery. 2014; 155(5):789-96. PMC: 4237217. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.12.007. View

12.

Mathias S, Fifer S, Mazonson P, Lubeck D, Buesching D, Patrick D . Necessary but not sufficient: the effect of screening and feedback on outcomes of primary care patients with untreated anxiety. J Gen Intern Med. 1994; 9(11):606-15. DOI: 10.1007/BF02600303. View

13.

Stover A, Irwin D, Chen R, Chera B, Mayer D, Muss H . Integrating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures into Routine Cancer Care: Cancer Patients' and Clinicians' Perceptions of Acceptability and Value. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2015; 3(1):1169. PMC: 4636110. DOI: 10.13063/2327-9214.1169. View

14.

Gilbert A, Sebag-Montefiore D, Davidson S, Velikova G . Use of patient-reported outcomes to measure symptoms and health related quality of life in the clinic. Gynecol Oncol. 2014; 136(3):429-39. DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2014.11.071. View

15.

Snyder C, Smith K, Bantug E, Tolbert E, Blackford A, Brundage M . What do these scores mean? Presenting patient-reported outcomes data to patients and clinicians to improve interpretability. Cancer. 2017; 123(10):1848-1859. PMC: 5419857. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30530. View

16.

Lipkus I . Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making. 2007; 27(5):696-713. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X07307271. View

17.

van der Weijden T, Post H, Brand P, Veenendaal H, Drenthen T, van Mierlo L . Shared decision making, a buzz-word in the Netherlands, the pace quickens towards nationwide implementation…. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2017; 123-124:69-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.05.016. View

18.

Snyder C, Aaronson N, Choucair A, Elliott T, Greenhalgh J, Halyard M . Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res. 2011; 21(8):1305-14. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-011-0054-x. View

19.

Joseph-Williams N, Elwyn G, Edwards A . Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making. Patient Educ Couns. 2013; 94(3):291-309. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.10.031. View

20.

Tolbert E, Brundage M, Bantug E, Blackford A, Smith K, Snyder C . Picture This: Presenting Longitudinal Patient-Reported Outcome Research Study Results to Patients. Med Decis Making. 2018; 38(8):994-1005. PMC: 6221949. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18791177. View