» Articles » PMID: 38135303

Why It is Hard to Use PROMs and PREMs in Routine Health and Care

Overview
Journal BMJ Open Qual
Specialty Health Services
Date 2023 Dec 22
PMID 38135303
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) show the results of healthcare activities as rated by patients and others. Patients or their proxies record feedback using questionnaires. These can enhance quality for all and tailored care for individuals. This paper describes obstacles that inhibit widespread use of PROMs and PREMs and some potential solutions.Implementation is a prerequisite for any innovation to succeed. Health and care services are complex and people need to be engaged at every level. Most people are cautious about proven innovations such as PROMs and PREMs but champions and leaders can help them engage. The NASSS framework (reasons for Non-adoption, Abandonment and failure to Scale up, Spread or Sustain digital health innovations) helps indicate that implementation is complex why it may be resisted.The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach aids implementation and helps ensure that everyone knows who should do what, when, where, how and why. Noise is an under-appreciated problem, especially when tracking patients over time such as before and after treatment. Interoperability of PROMs and PREMs with electronic health records should use Fast Health Interoperability Resources and internationally accepted coding schemes such as SNOMED CT and LOINC.Most projects need multiple measures to meet the needs of everyone involved. Measure selection should focus on their relevance, ease of use, and response rates.If these problems are avoided or mitigated, PROMs and PREMs can help deliver better patient outcomes, patient experience, staff satisfaction and health equity.

Citing Articles

Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures (PROM) Between Patients With Home Respiratory Therapies and Their Caregivers.

Diaz-Lobato S, Rodriguez J, Sampedro D, Camacho J, Caneiras C, Alises S Open Respir Arch. 2025; 7(1):100393.

PMID: 39950083 PMC: 11821387. DOI: 10.1016/j.opresp.2024.100393.


Instruments for assessing patient-reported experience measures among patients with diabetes mellitus: a scoping review.

Tint S, Oo M, Buawangpong N, Jiraporncharoen W, Wiwatkunupakarn N, Rerkasem K J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2025; 9(1):16.

PMID: 39921791 PMC: 11807032. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-025-00848-7.


Developing a Prototype Machine Learning Model to Predict Quality of Life Measures in People Living With HIV.

Mercadal-Orfila G, Serrano Lopez de Las Hazas J, Riera-Jaume M, Herrera-Perez S Integr Pharm Res Pract. 2025; 14:1-16.

PMID: 39872224 PMC: 11766232. DOI: 10.2147/IPRP.S492422.


A simple, subjective, knee self-evaluation using a single question can be used for a quick assessment of patients undergoing knee surgery.

Klasan A, Donati C, Compagnoni R, Grassi A, Musahl V, Menetrey J Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024; 145(1):93.

PMID: 39718585 PMC: 11668842. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-024-05720-9.


Predictive value of a self-administered frailty screening questionnaire for the effectiveness of functional rehabilitation evaluated with the locomotor functional independence measure in a geriatric rehabilitation unit: a multicentre cohort study.

Chrusciel J, Ndoye R, Ndiongue B, Fournier M, Kabirian F, Pondjikli M BMC Geriatr. 2024; 24(1):1013.

PMID: 39702184 PMC: 11656562. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-024-05605-x.


References
1.
Meyer V, Benjamens S, El Moumni M, Lange J, Pol R . Global Overview of Response Rates in Patient and Health Care Professional Surveys in Surgery: A Systematic Review. Ann Surg. 2020; 275(1):e75-e81. PMC: 8683255. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004078. View

2.
Giordano L, Elliott M, Goldstein E, Lehrman W, Spencer P . Development, implementation, and public reporting of the HCAHPS survey. Med Care Res Rev. 2009; 67(1):27-37. DOI: 10.1177/1077558709341065. View

3.
Benson T, Williams D, Potts H . Performance of EQ-5D, howRu and Oxford hip & knee scores in assessing the outcome of hip and knee replacements. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016; 16(1):512. PMC: 5034510. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-016-1759-x. View

4.
Mullins C, Coughlan J . Noise in medical decision making: a silent epidemic?. Postgrad Med J. 2023; 99(1169):96-100. DOI: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2022-141582. View

5.
Black N . Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ. 2013; 346:f167. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.f167. View