TY - JOUR
T1 - A method to create a standardized generic and condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure for patient care and healthcare improvement
AU - Schifferdecker, Karen E.
AU - Yount, Susan E.
AU - Kaiser, Karen
AU - Adachi-Mejia, Anna
AU - Cella, David
AU - Carluzzo, Kathleen L.
AU - Eisenstein, Amy
AU - Kallen, Michael A.
AU - Greene, George J.
AU - Eton, David T.
AU - Fisher, Elliott S.
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgements This work was supported by the Patient-centered Outcomes Research Institute contract number ME-1303-5928. The authors wish to thank their valuable research partners in this work: Drs. Gene Nelson, Jill Gelow, Lynn Marshall, Taressa Fraze and Faraz Ahmad; and Brendin Beaulieu-Jones and Zabin Patel. We are especially grateful for the input of our patient and provider participants and for the guidance and advice from our Patient and Family Advisory Committee: Annette Jo Giarrante, Janet Trzaska, David Swanz, Jeff Gardner, Carol DuBois, Roger Arend and Linda Wilkinson.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, Springer International Publishing AG.
PY - 2018/2/1
Y1 - 2018/2/1
N2 - Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are generic or condition-specific, are used for a number of reasons, including clinical care, clinical trials, and in national-level efforts to monitor the quality of health care delivery. Creating PROMs that meet different purposes without overburdening patients, healthcare systems, providers, and data systems is paramount. The objective of this study was to test a generalizable method to incorporate condition-specific issues into generic PROM measures as a first step to producing PROMs that efficiently provide a standardized score. This paper outlines the method and preliminary findings focused on a PROM for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA-K). Methods: We used a mixed-methods approach and PROMIS® measures to test development of a combined generic and OA-K-specific PROM. Qualitative methods included patient focus groups and provider interviews to identify impacts of OA-K important to patients. We then conducted a thematic analysis and an item gap analysis: identified areas covered by existing generic PROMIS measures, identified “gap” areas not covered, compared gap areas to legacy instruments to verify relevance, and developed new items to address gaps. We then performed cognitive testing on new items and drafted an OA-K-specific instrument based on findings. Results: We identified 52 existing PROMIS items and developed 24 new items across 14 domains. Conclusions: We developed a process for creating condition-specific instruments that bridge gaps in existing generic measures. If successful, the methodology will create instruments that efficiently gather the patient’s perspective while allowing health systems, researchers, and other interested parties to monitor and compare outcomes over time, conditions, and populations.
AB - Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), which are generic or condition-specific, are used for a number of reasons, including clinical care, clinical trials, and in national-level efforts to monitor the quality of health care delivery. Creating PROMs that meet different purposes without overburdening patients, healthcare systems, providers, and data systems is paramount. The objective of this study was to test a generalizable method to incorporate condition-specific issues into generic PROM measures as a first step to producing PROMs that efficiently provide a standardized score. This paper outlines the method and preliminary findings focused on a PROM for osteoarthritis of the knee (OA-K). Methods: We used a mixed-methods approach and PROMIS® measures to test development of a combined generic and OA-K-specific PROM. Qualitative methods included patient focus groups and provider interviews to identify impacts of OA-K important to patients. We then conducted a thematic analysis and an item gap analysis: identified areas covered by existing generic PROMIS measures, identified “gap” areas not covered, compared gap areas to legacy instruments to verify relevance, and developed new items to address gaps. We then performed cognitive testing on new items and drafted an OA-K-specific instrument based on findings. Results: We identified 52 existing PROMIS items and developed 24 new items across 14 domains. Conclusions: We developed a process for creating condition-specific instruments that bridge gaps in existing generic measures. If successful, the methodology will create instruments that efficiently gather the patient’s perspective while allowing health systems, researchers, and other interested parties to monitor and compare outcomes over time, conditions, and populations.
KW - Healthcare quality
KW - Mixed methods
KW - Osteoarthritis of the knee
KW - Patient-reported outcome measure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027180270&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027180270&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11136-017-1675-5
DO - 10.1007/s11136-017-1675-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 28795261
AN - SCOPUS:85027180270
SN - 0962-9343
VL - 27
SP - 367
EP - 378
JO - Quality of Life Research
JF - Quality of Life Research
IS - 2
ER -