在临床护理中扎根患者报告的结果:对患者和临床医生的益处、挑战和机遇的范围审查。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ipek Ozer Stillman, Brandon Boyle, Karen Lencoski, Meni Styliadou, Jeffrey M Muir, Grammati Sarri
{"title":"在临床护理中扎根患者报告的结果:对患者和临床医生的益处、挑战和机遇的范围审查。","authors":"Ipek Ozer Stillman, Brandon Boyle, Karen Lencoski, Meni Styliadou, Jeffrey M Muir, Grammati Sarri","doi":"10.1186/s12955-025-02430-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The patient voice in healthcare continues to grow, through the expanded use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and enhanced by the growing use of digital health technologies. Despite these positive signs, widespread adoption of PRO measures (PROM) in healthcare decision-making continues to lag. We conducted a scoping review to identify the current benefits of and roadblocks to the use of PRO data in the patient-clinician interaction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the Embase and MEDLINE databases from 2014 to 2024 for articles that discussed the role of PRO data in patient quality of life, clinical care and value assessment decision-making. We also manually searched the websites of nine national health technology assessment agencies and used a snowballing approach to identify additional publications. Eligible publications were mapped to three key topics of interest: benefits/barriers at the patient, clinician, and healthcare service levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our search yielded 1,846 citations; after deduplication and screening, 13 articles were included. At the patient level, benefits included increased care satisfaction and improved patient experience, mainly via enhanced communication. Uncertainty about PROMs and their mechanisms was a main barrier, as were concerns about the variability of clinical application, lack of follow-up, and unfulfilled patient expectations. For clinicians, improved patient symptom clarity, satisfaction with care, and informed decision-making were the main benefits of PROMs, along with improved efficiency during patient visits. The main barrier for physicians was the feasibility of integrating PROMs into daily practice, including establishing the routine use of PROMs, and consistency in the interpretation of PRO data. At the healthcare service level, improvements in efficiency and the identification of unmet needs were benefits, while questions about consistent between-group interpretation were raised, as were questions regarding the basic value of PROMs, as there is currently minimal evidence to indicate that PRO data directly improve care outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Much evidence exists indicating PROMs are associated with improvements in patient-clinician communication and improved satisfaction on both parts, although hesitation regarding their widespread adoption remains. More objective data are needed to further quantify the potential benefits of PROM integration in clinical care in order to assess any direct impact on clinical care outcomes and to facilitate their broader use.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"23 1","pages":"93"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482245/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rooting patient-reported outcomes in clinical care: a scoping review on benefits, challenges, and opportunities for patients and clinicians.\",\"authors\":\"Ipek Ozer Stillman, Brandon Boyle, Karen Lencoski, Meni Styliadou, Jeffrey M Muir, Grammati Sarri\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12955-025-02430-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The patient voice in healthcare continues to grow, through the expanded use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and enhanced by the growing use of digital health technologies. Despite these positive signs, widespread adoption of PRO measures (PROM) in healthcare decision-making continues to lag. We conducted a scoping review to identify the current benefits of and roadblocks to the use of PRO data in the patient-clinician interaction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched the Embase and MEDLINE databases from 2014 to 2024 for articles that discussed the role of PRO data in patient quality of life, clinical care and value assessment decision-making. We also manually searched the websites of nine national health technology assessment agencies and used a snowballing approach to identify additional publications. Eligible publications were mapped to three key topics of interest: benefits/barriers at the patient, clinician, and healthcare service levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our search yielded 1,846 citations; after deduplication and screening, 13 articles were included. At the patient level, benefits included increased care satisfaction and improved patient experience, mainly via enhanced communication. Uncertainty about PROMs and their mechanisms was a main barrier, as were concerns about the variability of clinical application, lack of follow-up, and unfulfilled patient expectations. For clinicians, improved patient symptom clarity, satisfaction with care, and informed decision-making were the main benefits of PROMs, along with improved efficiency during patient visits. The main barrier for physicians was the feasibility of integrating PROMs into daily practice, including establishing the routine use of PROMs, and consistency in the interpretation of PRO data. At the healthcare service level, improvements in efficiency and the identification of unmet needs were benefits, while questions about consistent between-group interpretation were raised, as were questions regarding the basic value of PROMs, as there is currently minimal evidence to indicate that PRO data directly improve care outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Much evidence exists indicating PROMs are associated with improvements in patient-clinician communication and improved satisfaction on both parts, although hesitation regarding their widespread adoption remains. More objective data are needed to further quantify the potential benefits of PROM integration in clinical care in order to assess any direct impact on clinical care outcomes and to facilitate their broader use.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12980,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"93\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482245/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-025-02430-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-025-02430-7","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

背景:通过扩大患者报告结果(PRO)的使用,以及越来越多地使用数字卫生技术,患者在医疗保健中的声音持续增长。尽管有这些积极的迹象,PRO措施(PROM)在医疗保健决策中的广泛采用仍然滞后。我们进行了一项范围审查,以确定在患者-临床互动中使用PRO数据的当前益处和障碍。方法:检索Embase和MEDLINE数据库2014 - 2024年有关PRO数据在患者生活质量、临床护理和价值评估决策中的作用的文章。我们还手动搜索了9个国家卫生技术评估机构的网站,并使用滚雪球的方法来确定其他出版物。符合条件的出版物被映射到三个感兴趣的关键主题:患者、临床医生和医疗保健服务水平的利益/障碍。结果:我们的搜索产生了1846个引用;经过重复数据删除和筛选,共纳入13篇文章。在患者层面,益处包括提高护理满意度和改善患者体验,主要是通过加强沟通。对PROMs及其机制的不确定性是主要障碍,对临床应用的可变性、缺乏随访和未满足患者期望的担忧也是主要障碍。对于临床医生来说,改善患者症状的清晰度、对护理的满意度和知情决策是PROMs的主要好处,同时也提高了患者就诊的效率。医师面临的主要障碍是将PROMs纳入日常实践的可行性,包括建立PROMs的常规使用,以及对PROMs数据解释的一致性。在医疗保健服务层面,效率的提高和未满足需求的确定是有益的,同时提出了关于组间解释一致性的问题,以及关于PROMs基本价值的问题,因为目前很少有证据表明PRO数据直接改善了护理结果。结论:许多证据表明,PROMs与医患沟通的改善和双方满意度的提高有关,尽管对其广泛采用仍然犹豫不决。需要更多的客观数据来进一步量化PROM在临床护理中的潜在益处,以评估其对临床护理结果的直接影响,并促进其更广泛的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rooting patient-reported outcomes in clinical care: a scoping review on benefits, challenges, and opportunities for patients and clinicians.

Background: The patient voice in healthcare continues to grow, through the expanded use of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and enhanced by the growing use of digital health technologies. Despite these positive signs, widespread adoption of PRO measures (PROM) in healthcare decision-making continues to lag. We conducted a scoping review to identify the current benefits of and roadblocks to the use of PRO data in the patient-clinician interaction.

Methods: We searched the Embase and MEDLINE databases from 2014 to 2024 for articles that discussed the role of PRO data in patient quality of life, clinical care and value assessment decision-making. We also manually searched the websites of nine national health technology assessment agencies and used a snowballing approach to identify additional publications. Eligible publications were mapped to three key topics of interest: benefits/barriers at the patient, clinician, and healthcare service levels.

Results: Our search yielded 1,846 citations; after deduplication and screening, 13 articles were included. At the patient level, benefits included increased care satisfaction and improved patient experience, mainly via enhanced communication. Uncertainty about PROMs and their mechanisms was a main barrier, as were concerns about the variability of clinical application, lack of follow-up, and unfulfilled patient expectations. For clinicians, improved patient symptom clarity, satisfaction with care, and informed decision-making were the main benefits of PROMs, along with improved efficiency during patient visits. The main barrier for physicians was the feasibility of integrating PROMs into daily practice, including establishing the routine use of PROMs, and consistency in the interpretation of PRO data. At the healthcare service level, improvements in efficiency and the identification of unmet needs were benefits, while questions about consistent between-group interpretation were raised, as were questions regarding the basic value of PROMs, as there is currently minimal evidence to indicate that PRO data directly improve care outcomes.

Conclusion: Much evidence exists indicating PROMs are associated with improvements in patient-clinician communication and improved satisfaction on both parts, although hesitation regarding their widespread adoption remains. More objective data are needed to further quantify the potential benefits of PROM integration in clinical care in order to assess any direct impact on clinical care outcomes and to facilitate their broader use.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信