Customizing workflows for electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring using the action, actor, context, target, time (AACTT) framework.
Julia Lai-Kwon, Claudia Rutherford, Michael Jefford, Iris Zhang, Catherine Devereux, Dishan Herath, Kate Burbury, Stephanie Best
{"title":"Customizing workflows for electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring using the action, actor, context, target, time (AACTT) framework.","authors":"Julia Lai-Kwon, Claudia Rutherford, Michael Jefford, Iris Zhang, Catherine Devereux, Dishan Herath, Kate Burbury, Stephanie Best","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03995-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Real-time electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring is a complex intervention with few examples of successful implementation at scale. A key challenge is designing a clear ePRO symptom monitoring workflow to support implementation into practice. We aimed to create an empirical and theory-informed site-specific workflow guided by the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time (AACTT) implementation science framework.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A five-step process was undertaken to customize a generic ePRO symptom monitoring workflow to create a site-specific version: (1) design a generic ePRO symptom monitoring workflow through a qualitative study with key stakeholders; (2) conduct co-design workshops to understand stakeholder preferences regarding a site-specific version; (3) code co-design workshop data using the AACTT framework to produce a provisional site-specific version; (4) conduct a final co-design workshop using the AACTT framework to finalize stakeholder preferences for a site-specific version; and (5) code co-design workshop data using the AACTT framework to produce a final site-specific version.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants (n = 27) included nine patients, four caregivers, four oncologists, four nurses, two pharmacists, two clinic administrators, and two Electronic Medical Record (EMR) analysts. Provisional and final site-specific workflows were generated outlining the key AACTT components for each step of ePRO symptom monitoring.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We demonstrated the value in using the AACTT to guide the co-design of a site-specific workflow for ePRO symptom monitoring. By describing this process in detail, we will enable others to replicate this process for creating site-specific workflows not only for ePRO symptom monitoring, but for any complex clinical process.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03995-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Real-time electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) symptom monitoring is a complex intervention with few examples of successful implementation at scale. A key challenge is designing a clear ePRO symptom monitoring workflow to support implementation into practice. We aimed to create an empirical and theory-informed site-specific workflow guided by the Action, Actor, Context, Target, Time (AACTT) implementation science framework.
Methods: A five-step process was undertaken to customize a generic ePRO symptom monitoring workflow to create a site-specific version: (1) design a generic ePRO symptom monitoring workflow through a qualitative study with key stakeholders; (2) conduct co-design workshops to understand stakeholder preferences regarding a site-specific version; (3) code co-design workshop data using the AACTT framework to produce a provisional site-specific version; (4) conduct a final co-design workshop using the AACTT framework to finalize stakeholder preferences for a site-specific version; and (5) code co-design workshop data using the AACTT framework to produce a final site-specific version.
Results: Participants (n = 27) included nine patients, four caregivers, four oncologists, four nurses, two pharmacists, two clinic administrators, and two Electronic Medical Record (EMR) analysts. Provisional and final site-specific workflows were generated outlining the key AACTT components for each step of ePRO symptom monitoring.
Conclusion: We demonstrated the value in using the AACTT to guide the co-design of a site-specific workflow for ePRO symptom monitoring. By describing this process in detail, we will enable others to replicate this process for creating site-specific workflows not only for ePRO symptom monitoring, but for any complex clinical process.
期刊介绍:
Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences.
Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership.
This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.