在炎性肠病患者的护理中,患者报告结果的真实世界全球使用

IF 1.8 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Jamie M Horrigan, Edouard Louis, Antonino Spinelli, Simon Travis, Bjorn Moum, Jessica Salwen-Deremer, Jonas Halfvarson, Remo Panaccione, Marla C Dubinsky, Pia Munkholm, Corey A Siegel
{"title":"在炎性肠病患者的护理中,患者报告结果的真实世界全球使用","authors":"Jamie M Horrigan,&nbsp;Edouard Louis,&nbsp;Antonino Spinelli,&nbsp;Simon Travis,&nbsp;Bjorn Moum,&nbsp;Jessica Salwen-Deremer,&nbsp;Jonas Halfvarson,&nbsp;Remo Panaccione,&nbsp;Marla C Dubinsky,&nbsp;Pia Munkholm,&nbsp;Corey A Siegel","doi":"10.1093/crocol/otad006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been developed for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) without recommendations for clinical use. PROs differ from physician-reported disease activity indices; they assess patients' perceptions of their symptoms, functional status, mental health, and quality of life, among other areas. We sought to investigate the current global use and barriers to using PROs in clinical practice for IBD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was performed. An electronic questionnaire was sent to an international group of providers who care for patients with IBD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 194 respondents, including adult/pediatric gastroenterologists, advanced practice providers, and colorectal surgeons from 5 continents. The majority (80%) use PROs in clinical practice, 65% frequently found value in routine use, and 50% frequently found PROs influenced management. Thirty-one different PROs for IBD were reportedly used. Barriers included not being familiar with PROs, not knowing how to incorporate PRO results into clinical practice, lack of electronic medical record integration, and time constraints. Most (91%) agreed it would be beneficial to have an accepted set of consistently used PROs. The majority (60%) thought that there should be some cultural differences in PROs used globally but that PROs for IBD should be consistent around the world.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PROs are used frequently in clinical practice with wide variation in which are used and how they influence management. Education about PROs and how to use and interpret an accepted set of PROs would decrease barriers for use and allow for global harmonization.</p>","PeriodicalId":10847,"journal":{"name":"Crohn's & Colitis 360","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7d/c8/otad006.PMC10022710.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Real-World Global Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes for the Care of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Jamie M Horrigan,&nbsp;Edouard Louis,&nbsp;Antonino Spinelli,&nbsp;Simon Travis,&nbsp;Bjorn Moum,&nbsp;Jessica Salwen-Deremer,&nbsp;Jonas Halfvarson,&nbsp;Remo Panaccione,&nbsp;Marla C Dubinsky,&nbsp;Pia Munkholm,&nbsp;Corey A Siegel\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/crocol/otad006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been developed for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) without recommendations for clinical use. PROs differ from physician-reported disease activity indices; they assess patients' perceptions of their symptoms, functional status, mental health, and quality of life, among other areas. We sought to investigate the current global use and barriers to using PROs in clinical practice for IBD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was performed. An electronic questionnaire was sent to an international group of providers who care for patients with IBD.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 194 respondents, including adult/pediatric gastroenterologists, advanced practice providers, and colorectal surgeons from 5 continents. The majority (80%) use PROs in clinical practice, 65% frequently found value in routine use, and 50% frequently found PROs influenced management. Thirty-one different PROs for IBD were reportedly used. Barriers included not being familiar with PROs, not knowing how to incorporate PRO results into clinical practice, lack of electronic medical record integration, and time constraints. Most (91%) agreed it would be beneficial to have an accepted set of consistently used PROs. The majority (60%) thought that there should be some cultural differences in PROs used globally but that PROs for IBD should be consistent around the world.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PROs are used frequently in clinical practice with wide variation in which are used and how they influence management. Education about PROs and how to use and interpret an accepted set of PROs would decrease barriers for use and allow for global harmonization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Crohn's & Colitis 360\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7d/c8/otad006.PMC10022710.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Crohn's & Colitis 360\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otad006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crohn's & Colitis 360","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/crocol/otad006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多炎症性肠病(IBD)的患者报告结局(PROs)已被开发出来,但没有临床应用的建议。PROs与医生报告的疾病活动指数不同;他们评估患者对其症状、功能状态、心理健康和生活质量等方面的看法。我们试图调查目前在IBD临床实践中使用pro的全球使用情况和障碍。方法:采用横断面调查方法。一份电子问卷被发送给照顾IBD患者的一组国际提供者。结果:共有194名受访者,包括来自5大洲的成人/儿童胃肠病学家、高级执业医师和结直肠外科医生。大多数(80%)在临床实践中使用pro, 65%的人经常发现pro在日常使用中有价值,50%的人经常发现pro影响管理。据报道,使用了31种不同的IBD pro。障碍包括不熟悉PRO,不知道如何将PRO结果纳入临床实践,缺乏电子病历集成以及时间限制。大多数(91%)同意拥有一套一致使用的公认的优点是有益的。大多数人(60%)认为全球使用的pro应该存在一些文化差异,但IBD的pro应该在世界范围内保持一致。结论:PROs在临床实践中被频繁使用,但使用方式和影响管理的方式差异很大。关于pro以及如何使用和解释一套公认的pro的教育将减少使用障碍,并允许全球协调。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The Real-World Global Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes for the Care of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

The Real-World Global Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes for the Care of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

The Real-World Global Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes for the Care of Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Background: Many patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have been developed for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) without recommendations for clinical use. PROs differ from physician-reported disease activity indices; they assess patients' perceptions of their symptoms, functional status, mental health, and quality of life, among other areas. We sought to investigate the current global use and barriers to using PROs in clinical practice for IBD.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was performed. An electronic questionnaire was sent to an international group of providers who care for patients with IBD.

Results: There were 194 respondents, including adult/pediatric gastroenterologists, advanced practice providers, and colorectal surgeons from 5 continents. The majority (80%) use PROs in clinical practice, 65% frequently found value in routine use, and 50% frequently found PROs influenced management. Thirty-one different PROs for IBD were reportedly used. Barriers included not being familiar with PROs, not knowing how to incorporate PRO results into clinical practice, lack of electronic medical record integration, and time constraints. Most (91%) agreed it would be beneficial to have an accepted set of consistently used PROs. The majority (60%) thought that there should be some cultural differences in PROs used globally but that PROs for IBD should be consistent around the world.

Conclusions: PROs are used frequently in clinical practice with wide variation in which are used and how they influence management. Education about PROs and how to use and interpret an accepted set of PROs would decrease barriers for use and allow for global harmonization.

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
Crohn's & Colitis 360
Crohn's & Colitis 360 Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
41
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信