Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Framework to assess the effects of using patient-reported outcome measures in chronic care management

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The inclusion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the routine clinical care of chronically ill patients has the potential to add valuable information about the impact of the disease and its treatment and promotes effective patient self-management in which patients become more active participants in their own care. PROMs provide clinicians with timely information on patients’ symptoms as well as functional and emotional status. PROMs are a useful tool for enhancing patient–clinician communication.

Methods

We develop a conceptual framework describing the potential effects of the use of PROMs in chronic care management. The framework summarizes insights from the methods for evaluating the clinical effectiveness and methods for the health technology assessment of diagnostic technologies and results from the relevant studies.

Results

The framework describes potential effects, from proximal to distal, including communication (patient–clinician, patient–relative, clinician–clinician, and clinician–relative), engaging patients in shared clinical decision making, patient management (clinician management and patient self-management), and patient outcomes. Important potential effects also include enhancement in patient activation as well as improvements in clinician and patient satisfaction, and patient adherence to recommended treatment. Previous frameworks have described patient–physician communication, patient satisfaction, and health outcomes. Our framework adds unique domains, including patient engagement, patient activation, shared clinical decision making, and patient self-management.

Conclusions

The framework can be used as a tool to guide the development of interventions to improve chronic care management through the use of PROMs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases (2010). www.who.int/nmh/publications_ncd_report_full_en.pdf (last visited November 18, 2013).

  2. Schneider, K. M., O’Donnell, B. E., & Dean, D. (2009). Prevalence of chronic conditions in the United States Medicare population. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7, 82.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yach, D., Hawkes, C., & Hofman, K. J. (2004). The global burden of chronic diseases: Overcoming impediments to prevention and control. Journal American medical Association, 21(291), 2616–2622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Parekh, A. K., Goodman, R. A., Gordon, K., Koh, H. K., & the HHS interagency workgroup on multiple chronic conditions. (2011). Managing multiple chronic conditions: A strategic framework for improving health outcomes and quality of life. Public Health Reports, 126, 460–470.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wagner, E. H., Austin, B. T., & von Korff, M. (1996). Organizing care for patients with chronic illness. The Milbank Quarterly, 74(4), 511–544.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Barr, V. J., Robinson, S., Marin-link, B., Underhill, L., Dotts, A., Ravensdale, D., et al. (2003). The expanded chronic care model: An integration of concepts and strategies from population health promotion and the chronic care model. Hospital Quarterly, 7(1), 73–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tinetti, M. E., Fried, T. R., & Boyd, C. M. (2012). Designing health care for the most common chronic condition—Multimorbidity. Journal of the American Medical Association, 307(23), 2493–2494.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wolff, J. L., Starfield, B., & Anderson, G. (2002). Prevalence, expenditures, and complications of multiple chronic conditions in the elderly. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162(20), 2269–2276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Deyo, R. A., & Patrick, D. L. (1989). Barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research. Medical Care, 27(3), S254–S268.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fayers, P. M., & Machain, D. (2000). Quality of life: Assessment, analysis and Interpretation. Chapter 10. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu, A. (1996) The role of quality assessments in medical practice. Bert Spilker, (Ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven.

  12. Morris, J., Perez, D., & McNoe, B. (1998). The use of quality of life data in clinical practice. Quality of Life Research, 7(1), 85–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Osoba, D. (1999). What has been learned from measuring health-related quality of life in clinical oncology. European Journal of Cancer, 35(11), 1565–1570.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Taenzer, P., Buktz, B. D., Carkson, L. E., Speca, M., DeGagne, T., et al. (2000). Impact of computerized quality of life screening on physician behavior and patient satisfaction in lung cancer outpatients. Psycho-Oncology, 9(3), 203–213.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Velikova, G., Booth, L., Smith, A., Brown, P., Lynch, P., Brown, J. M., et al. (2004). Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. Journal Clinical Oncology, 22(4), 714–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Santana, M. J., Feeny, D., Johnson, J. A., McAlister, F. A., Kim, D., Weinkauf, J., et al. (2010). An assessment of the effects of the use of measures of health-related quality of life in routine clinical care: An application to lung transplantation. Quality of Life Research, 19(3), 371–379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lyndon, G. M., Dowrick, C. F., McBride, A., Burgess, H. J., Howe, A. C., Clarke, P. D., et al. (2011). Questionnaire severity measure of depression: A threat to the doctor-patient relationship? British Journal of General Practice, 61(583), 117–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dowrick, C., Leydon, G. M., McBride, A., Howe, A., Burgess, H., Clarke, P., et al. (2009). Patients’ and doctors’ views on depression severity questionnaires incentivised in UK quality and outcomes framework: Qualitative study. British Medical Journal, 338, b663.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Greenhalgh, J., & Meadows, K. (1999). The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: A literature review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 5, 401–416.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Espallargues, M., Valderas, J. M., & Alonso, J. (2000). Provision of feedback on perceived health status to health care professionals: A systematic review of its impact. Medical Care, 38, 175–186.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Detmar, S. B., Muller, M. J., Schornagel, J. H., Wever, L. D., & Aaronson, N. K. (2002). Health-related quality-of-life assessments and patient–physician communication: A randomized controlled trial. Journal American Medical Association, 288(23), 3027–3034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Greenhalgh, J., Long, A. F., & Flynn, R. (2005). The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical care: Lack of impact or lack of theory? Social Science and Medicine, 60, 833–843.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Haywood, K., Marshall, S., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006). Patient participation in the consultation process: A structured review of intervention strategies. Patient Education Counselling, 63(1–2), 12–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Marshall, S., Haywood, K., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006). Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: A structured review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12, 559–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Valderas, J. M., Kotzeva, A., Espallargues, M., et al. (2008). The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: A systematic review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 17, 179–193.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Greenhalgh, J. (2009). The applications of PROs in clinical practice: What are they, do they work and why? Quality of Life Research, 18, 115–123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosenbloom, S. K., Victorson, D. E., Hanh, E. A., Peterman, A. H., & Cella, D. (2007). Assessment is not enough: A randomized controlled trial of the effects of health-related quality of life assessment on quality of life and satisfaction in oncology clinical practice. Psychooncology, 16, 1069–1079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gutteling, J. J., Darlington, A. S., Janssen, H. L., Duivenvoorden, H. J., Busschbach, J. J., & de Man, R. A. (2008). Effectiveness of health-related quality of life measurement in clinical practice: A prospective, randomized controlled trial in patients with chronic liver disease and their physicians. Quality of Life Research, 17, 195–205.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. de Wit, M., Delemarre-van de Waal, H. A., Bokma, J. A., Haasnoot, K., Houdijk, M., Gemke, R. J., et al. (2008). Monitoring and discussing health related quality of life in adolescent with type 1 diabetes improve psychosocial well-being. Diabetes Care, 31(8), 1521–1526.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hilarius, D. L., Kloeg, P. H., Gundy, C. M., & Aaroson, N. K. (2008). Use of health-related quality of life assessments in daily clinical oncology nursing practice: A community hospital-based intervention study. Cancer, 113(3), 628–637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Boyce, M.B., Browne, J.P. (2013). Does providing feedback on patient-reported outcomes to healthcare professionals result in better outcomes for patients? A systematic review. Quality of Life Research. [ePub ahead of print].

  32. Snyder, C. F., Aaronson, N. K., Choucair, A. K., Elliott, T. E., Greenhalgh, J., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2011). Implementing patient-reported outcome assessment in clinical practice: A review of the options and considerations. Quality of Life Research,. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0054.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Aaronson, N.K., Choucair, A.K., Elliott, T.E., Greenhalgh, J., Halyard, M.Y., Hess, R., Miller, D.M., Reeve, B.B., Santana, M.J., Snyder, C.F. (2011). User’s guide to implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice. http://www.isoqol.org (last access March 2, 2013).

  34. Roter, D. L., & Hall, J. A. (2006). Doctors talking with patients/patients talking to doctors. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Roter, D. L. The enduring and evolving nature of the patient-physician relationship. Patient Education Counselling, 39, 5–15.

  36. Street, R. L, Jr, Makoul, G., Arora, N. K., & Epstein, R. M. (2009). How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician–patient communication to health outcomes. Patient Education and Counselling, 74, 295–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Levinson, W., Lesser, C. S., & Epstein, R. M. (2010). Developing physician communication skills for patient-centered care. Health Affairs, 29(7), 1310–1318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Feldman-Stewart, D., Brundage, M. D., & Tishelman, C. (2005). A conceptual framework for patient-professional communication: An application to the cancer context. Psycho-oncology, 14, 801–809.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Feldman-Stewart, D., & Brundage, M. D. (2009). A conceptual framework for patient-provider communication: A tool in the PRO research tool box. Quality of Life Research, 18, 109–114.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Gerrity, P. (2010). And to think that it happened on 11th street: A nursing approach to community-based holistic care and health care reform. Alternative Therapies, 6(5), 62–67.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Takeuchi, E. E., Keding, A., Awad, N., Hofmann, U., Campbell, L. J., Selby, P. J., et al. (2011). Impact of patient-reported outcomes in oncology: A longitudinal analysis of patient–physician communication. Journal Clinical Oncology, 29(21), 2910–2917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Epstein, R. M., & Street, R. L, Jr. (2007). Patient-centered communication in cancer care: Promoting healing and reducing suffering. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. (NIH Publication No 07-6225).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Greenhalgh, J., Abhyankar, P., McCluskey, S., Takeuchi, E., & Velikova, G. (2013). How do doctors refer to patient-reported outcome measures in oncology consultations? Quality of Life Research, 22, 939–950.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bodenheimer, T., Loring, K., Holman, H., & Grumbach, K. (2002). Patient self-management of chronic disease in primary care. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 288(19), 2469–2475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. McGreevey, M. (2006). Patient as partners: How to involve patient and families in Their Own Care. Oakbrook Terrace, IL: Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Hibbard, H. J., Stockard, J., Mahoney, E. R., & Tusler, M. (2004). Development of the patient activation measure (PAM): Conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Services Research, 39, 4, Part I.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Chow, A., Mayer, E. K., Darzi, A. W., & Athanasiou, T. (2009). Patient-reported outcome measures: The importance of patient satisfaction in surgery. Journal of Surgery, 146(3), 435–443.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Hibbard, J. H., Mahoney, E. R., Stock, R., & Tusler, M. (2007). Self-management and health care utilization. Do increases in patient-activation result in improved self-management behaviours. Health Research Services, 42(4), 1443–1462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wu, A. W., & Ka, Cagney. (1997). Health status assessment, completing the clinical database. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 12, 254–256.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Remmers, C., Hibbard, J., Mosen, D. M., Wagenfield, M., Hoye, R. E., & Jones, C. (2009). Is patient activation associated with future health outcomes and healthcare utilization among patients with diabetes? Journal Ambulatory care management, 32(4), 320–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Korda, H. Patient Satisfaction: The new rules of engagement. The Health Care Blog. http://thehealthcareblog.com/blog/2012/10/26/patient-satisfaction-the-new-rules-of-engagement/ (last access August 26, 2013).

  52. Loring, K. R., Sobel, D. S., Ritter, P. L., Laurent, D., & Hobbs, M. (2001). Effects of the self-management program on patient with chronic disease. Effective Clinical Practice, 4(6), 256–262.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Clark, N. M., Becker, M. H., Janz, N. K., Loring, K., Rakowski, W., & Anderson, L. (1991). Self-management of chronic disease by older adults: A review and questions for research. Journal of Aging Health, 3, 3–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Marshall, S. S., Haywood, K. L., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2005). Patient involvement and collaboration in shared decision-making: A structure review to inform chronic disease management. Report from the patient-reported health instruments group to the Department of Health.

  55. Barry, M. J., & Edgman-Levitan, S. (2012). Shared decision making—The pinnacle of patient-centered care. New England Journal of Medicine, 366(9), 780–781.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Frosch, D. L., & Kaplan, R. M. (1999). Shared decision making in clinical medicine: Past research and future directions. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 17(4), 285–294.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Santana, M. J., Feeny, D., Weinkauf, J., Nador, R., Jackson, K., et al. (2010). The use of patient-reported outcomes becomes standard practice in the routine clinical care of lung–heart transplant patients. Patient Related Outcome Measures, 1, 93–105.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Santana, M. J., Feeny, D., Ghosh, S., & Lien, D. C. (2012). Patient-reported outcome 2 years after lung transplantation: Does the underlying diagnosis matter? Patient Related Outcome Measures, 3, 79–84.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hudak, P. L., & Wright, J. G. (2000). The characteristics of patient satisfaction measures. Spine, 25(24), 3167–3177.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Roter, D., & Frankel, R. (1992). Quantitative and qualitative approaches to the evaluation of the medical dialogue. Social Sciences and Medicine, 34(10), 1097–1103.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Rivkin, M. O., & Bush, P. J. (1974). The satisfaction continuum in health care: Consumer and provider preferences. In S. J. Mushkin (Ed.), Consumer incentives for health care. New York: Prodist.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Guyatt, G. H., Tugwell, P. X., Feeny, D. H., Haynes, R. B., & Drummond, M. (1986). A framework for clinical evaluation of diagnostic technologies. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 134, 587–594.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Banta, H. D., & Behney, C. J. (1981). Policy formulation and technology assessment. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 59, 445–479.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Olsen, L. A., Aisner, D., & McGinnis, J. The learning healthcare system: Workshop summary (IOM Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine). Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53494/pdf/TOC.pdf (last access December 3, 2013).

  65. Abernethy, A. P., Ahmad, A., Zafar, S. Y., Wheeler, J. L., Reese, J. B., & Lyerly, H. K. (2010). Electronic patient-reported data capture as a foundation of rapid learning cancer care. Medical Care, 48(6), S32–S38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Feeny, D. (2013). Health-related quality of life data should be regarded as a vital sign. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.12.013.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the valuable contributions from three anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria-Jose Santana.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Santana, MJ., Feeny, D. Framework to assess the effects of using patient-reported outcome measures in chronic care management. Qual Life Res 23, 1505–1513 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0596-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0596-1

Keywords

Navigation