Large-scale Clinical Implementation of PROMIS Computer Adaptive Testing with Direct Incorporation into the Electronic Medical Record

Overview

Journal Health Syst (Basingstoke)

Date 2019 Jun 20

PMID 31214335

Citations 36

Authors

M O Papuga

C Dasilva

A McIntyre

D Mitten

S Kates

J F Baumhauer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The objective of this research was to assess the implementation of collecting patient-reported outcomes data in the outpatient clinics of a large academic hospital and identify potential barriers and solutions to such an implementation. Three PROMIS computer adaptive test instruments, (1) physical function, (2) pain interference, and (3) depression, were administered at 23,813 patient encounters using a novel software platform on tablet computers. The average time to complete was 3.50 ± 3.12 min, with a median time of 2.60 min. Registration times for new patients did not change significantly, 6.87 ± 3.34 to 7.19 ± 2.69 min. Registration times increased for follow-up ( = .007) from 2.94 ± 1.57 ( < .01) min to 3.32 ± 1.78 min. This is an effective implementation strategy to collect patient-reported outcomes and directly import the results into the electronic medical record in real time for use during the clinical visit.

Citing Articles

Are all cancer survivors included when using electronically administered patient reported outcomes in primary healthcare cancer rehabilitation? A cross-sectional study.

Rossen S, Sandager M, Hofland D, Nielsen C, Maribo T J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024; 8(1):67.

PMID: 38976222 PMC: 11231107. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-024-00753-5.

Enhancing the Evaluation of Physical Function Following Orthopaedic Trauma Care: Comparison of PROMIS Computerized Adaptive Testing and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment.

Luijten M, Haverman L, Terwee C, Poeze M, Verbeek D J Orthop Trauma. 2024; 38(7):390-396.

PMID: 38837210 PMC: 11146170. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002814.

Efficiency, Precision, Validity, and Reliability of GlauCAT-Asian Computerized Adaptive Tests in Measuring Glaucoma-Related Quality of Life.

Fenwick E, Man R, Lim B, Baskaran M, Nongpiur M, Sng C Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2024; 13(2):6.

PMID: 38329749 PMC: 10860685. DOI: 10.1167/tvst.13.2.6.

Self-reported MeasUrement of Physical and PsychosOcial Symptoms Response Tool (SUPPORT-dialysis): systematic symptom assessment and management in patients on in-centre haemodialysis - a parallel arm, non-randomised feasibility pilot study protocol.

Gill J, Pucci M, Samudio A, Ahmed T, Siddiqui R, Edwards N BMJ Open. 2024; 14(1):e080712.

PMID: 38296283 PMC: 10828879. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080712.

Seamless Integration of Computer-Adaptive Patient Reported Outcomes into an Electronic Health Record.

Nolla K, Rasmussen L, Rothrock N, Butt Z, Bass M, Davis K Appl Clin Inform. 2023; 15(1):145-154.

PMID: 38154472 PMC: 10881259. DOI: 10.1055/a-2235-9557.

References

Wagner L, Schink J, Bass M, Patel S, Varela Diaz M, Rothrock N . Bringing PROMIS to practice: brief and precise symptom screening in ambulatory cancer care. Cancer. 2014; 121(6):927-34. PMC: 4352124. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29104. View

Overbeek C, Nota S, Jayakumar P, Hageman M, Ring D . The PROMIS physical function correlates with the QuickDASH in patients with upper extremity illness. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 473(1):311-7. PMC: 4390943. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3840-2. View

Touvier M, Mejean C, Kesse-Guyot E, Pollet C, Malon A, Castetbon K . Comparison between web-based and paper versions of a self-administered anthropometric questionnaire. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010; 25(5):287-96. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9433-9. View

Speerin R, Slater H, Li L, Moore K, Chan M, Dreinhofer K . Moving from evidence to practice: Models of care for the prevention and management of musculoskeletal conditions. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2014; 28(3):479-515. DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2014.07.001. View

Schick-Makaroff K, Molzahn A . Strategies to use tablet computers for collection of electronic patient-reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015; 13:2. PMC: 4311482. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-014-0205-1. View

Hung M, Hon S, Franklin J, Kendall R, Lawrence B, Neese A . Psychometric properties of the PROMIS physical function item bank in patients with spinal disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 39(2):158-63. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000097. View

Hung M, Baumhauer J, Brodsky J, Cheng C, Ellis S, Franklin J . Psychometric Comparison of the PROMIS Physical Function CAT With the FAAM and FFI for Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes. Foot Ankle Int. 2014; 35(6):592-599. DOI: 10.1177/1071100714528492. View

Zbrozek A, Hebert J, Gogates G, Thorell R, Dell C, Molsen E . Validation of electronic systems to collect patient-reported outcome (PRO) data-recommendations for clinical trial teams: report of the ISPOR ePRO systems validation good research practices task force. Value Health. 2013; 16(4):480-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.002. View

Norman G, Sloan J, Wyrwich K . Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Med Care. 2003; 41(5):582-92. DOI: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000062554.74615.4C. View

10.

Tyser A, Beckmann J, Franklin J, Cheng C, Hon S, Wang A . Evaluation of the PROMIS physical function computer adaptive test in the upper extremity. J Hand Surg Am. 2014; 39(10):2047-2051.e4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.06.130. View

11.

Selby J, Beal A, Frank L . The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) national priorities for research and initial research agenda. JAMA. 2012; 307(15):1583-4. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2012.500. View

12.

Wu A, Snyder C . Getting ready for patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in clinical practice. Healthc Pap. 2012; 11(4):48-53. DOI: 10.12927/hcpap.2012.22705. View

13.

Broderick J, Schneider S, Junghaenel D, Schwartz J, Stone A . Validity and reliability of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system instruments in osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013; 65(10):1625-33. PMC: 3779528. DOI: 10.1002/acr.22025. View

14.

Reeve B, Burke L, Chiang Y, Clauser S, Colpe L, Elias J . Enhancing measurement in health outcomes research supported by Agencies within the US Department of Health and Human Services. Qual Life Res. 2007; 16 Suppl 1:175-86. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-007-9190-8. View

15.

Cutler D, Ghosh K . The potential for cost savings through bundled episode payments. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366(12):1075-7. PMC: 3325104. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1113361. View

16.

Hung M, Franklin J, Hon S, Cheng C, Conrad J, Saltzman C . Time for a paradigm shift with computerized adaptive testing of general physical function outcomes measurements. Foot Ankle Int. 2013; 35(1):1-7. DOI: 10.1177/1071100713507905. View

17.

Greenwood M, Hakim A, Carson E, Doyle D . Touch-screen computer systems in the rheumatology clinic offer a reliable and user-friendly means of collecting quality-of-life and outcome data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005; 45(1):66-71. DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/kei100. View

18.

Velikova G, Wright E, Smith A, Cull A, Gould A, Forman D . Automated collection of quality-of-life data: a comparison of paper and computer touch-screen questionnaires. J Clin Oncol. 1999; 17(3):998-1007. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.3.998. View

19.

Black N . Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ. 2013; 346:f167. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f167. View

20.

Yoon S, Wilcox A, Bakken S . Comparisons among Health Behavior Surveys: Implications for the Design of Informatics Infrastructures That Support Comparative Effectiveness Research. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2015; 1(1):1021. PMC: 4371426. DOI: 10.13063/2327-9214.1021. View