Using PROMs during routine medical consultations

The perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease and their health professionals

O.C. Damman*, M.E.A. Verbiest, S.I. Vonk, H.W. Berendse, B.R. Bloem, M.C. de Bruijne, M.J. Faber

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)939-951
JournalHealth Expectations
Volume22
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

Parkinson Disease
Physical Therapists
Communication
Interviews

Keywords

  • ASSESSMENTS
  • CANCER-PATIENTS
  • CARE
  • CLINICAL-PRACTICE
  • IMPROVE
  • INFORMATION
  • PATIENT
  • QUALITY-OF-LIFE
  • REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES
  • SHARED DECISION-MAKING
  • patient perspective
  • patient-reported outcome measures
  • professional perspective
  • shared decision making

Cite this

Damman, O.C. ; Verbiest, M.E.A. ; Vonk, S.I. ; Berendse, H.W. ; Bloem, B.R. ; de Bruijne, M.C. ; Faber, M.J. / Using PROMs during routine medical consultations : The perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease and their health professionals. In: Health Expectations. 2019 ; Vol. 22, No. 5. pp. 939-951.
@article{6e649f9aabea42d6a6f0e940502f8b6d,
title = "Using PROMs during routine medical consultations: The perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease and their health professionals",
abstract = "BackgroundThe 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.ObjectivesTo 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.MethodsWe 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.FindingsPatients 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/DiscussionWhen 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.",
keywords = "ASSESSMENTS, CANCER-PATIENTS, CARE, CLINICAL-PRACTICE, IMPROVE, INFORMATION, PATIENT, QUALITY-OF-LIFE, REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES, SHARED DECISION-MAKING, patient perspective, patient-reported outcome measures, professional perspective, shared decision making",
author = "O.C. Damman and M.E.A. Verbiest and S.I. Vonk and H.W. Berendse and B.R. Bloem and {de Bruijne}, M.C. and M.J. Faber",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1111/hex.12899",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "939--951",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

Using PROMs during routine medical consultations : The perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease and their health professionals. / Damman, O.C.; Verbiest, M.E.A.; Vonk, S.I.; Berendse, H.W.; Bloem, B.R.; de Bruijne, M.C.; Faber, M.J.

In: Health Expectations, Vol. 22, No. 5, 2019, p. 939-951.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Using PROMs during routine medical consultations

T2 - The perspectives of people with Parkinson’s disease and their health professionals

AU - Damman, O.C.

AU - Verbiest, M.E.A.

AU - Vonk, S.I.

AU - Berendse, H.W.

AU - Bloem, B.R.

AU - de Bruijne, M.C.

AU - Faber, M.J.

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - BackgroundThe 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.ObjectivesTo 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.MethodsWe 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.FindingsPatients 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/DiscussionWhen 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.

AB - BackgroundThe 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.ObjectivesTo 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.MethodsWe 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.FindingsPatients 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/DiscussionWhen 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.

KW - ASSESSMENTS

KW - CANCER-PATIENTS

KW - CARE

KW - CLINICAL-PRACTICE

KW - IMPROVE

KW - INFORMATION

KW - PATIENT

KW - QUALITY-OF-LIFE

KW - REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES

KW - SHARED DECISION-MAKING

KW - patient perspective

KW - patient-reported outcome measures

KW - professional perspective

KW - shared decision making

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12899

DO - 10.1111/hex.12899

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 939

EP - 951

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

IS - 5

ER -