Evaluation of point-of-care PRO assessment in clinic settings: integration, parallel-forms reliability, and patient acceptability of electronic QOL measures during clinic visits.

Purpose: Assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, has become an important component of healthcare that measures the impact of disease and medical treatment on patient health. Collecting PROs during point-of-care assessments and integrating them into the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Quality of Life Research Vol. 25; no. 3; pp. 575 - 584
Main Authors: Sharma, Pranav, Dunn, Rodney, Wei, John, Montie, James, Gilbert, Scott, Dunn, Rodney L, Wei, John T, Montie, James E, Gilbert, Scott M
Format: clinical trial research Journal Article
Published: Springer Nature Mar2016
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=113139878&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 113139878
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09629343
        GPQ
      jtl: Quality of Life Research
      issn: 09629343
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Mar2016
      vid: 25
      iid: 3
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        113139878
        113139878
        NLM26373852
        113139878
        10.1007/s11136-015-1113-5
        NLM26373852
        113139878
      ppf: 575
      ppct: 9
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
      tig:
        atl: Evaluation of point-of-care PRO assessment in clinic settings: integration, parallel-forms reliability, and patient acceptability of electronic QOL measures during clinic visits.
      aug:
        au:
          Sharma, Pranav
          Dunn, Rodney
          Wei, John
          Montie, James
          Gilbert, Scott
          Dunn, Rodney L
          Wei, John T
          Montie, James E
          Gilbert, Scott M
        affil: Genitourinary Oncology Program, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa USA
      sug:
        subj:
          Outcome Assessment
          Patient Attitudes
          Clinical Information Systems
          Quality of Life
          Health Status Indicators
          Medical Informatics
          Pilot Studies
          Human
          Prospective Studies
          Adult
          Aged
          Prostatic Neoplasms
          Young Adult
          Middle Age
          Ambulatory Care
          Reproducibility of Results
          Aged, 80 and Over
          Adolescence
          Male
          Clinical Trials
          Validation Studies
          Comparative Studies
          Evaluation Research
          Multicenter Studies
          Scales
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Aged: 65+ years
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Aged, 80 & over
          Adolescent: 13-18 years
          Male
      ab: Purpose: Assessment of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as health-related quality of life, has become an important component of healthcare that measures the impact of disease and medical treatment on patient health. Collecting PROs during point-of-care assessments and integrating them into the clinical setting, however, remains challenging. The objective of this pilot study was to evaluate the reliability, usability, and acceptability of point-of-care electronic PRO assessments implemented in a prostate cancer clinic.Methods: Fifty subjects completed paper-pencil and computerized formats of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC), a validated, condition-specific QOL instrument, at separate times before treatment. Parallel-forms reliability was evaluated by comparing mean scores, variations in response distribution, and correlations between administration formats. Correlation coefficients of at least 0.70 were used for reliability testing. Differences between administration forms, indicating potential bias, were compared using the signed-rank test. A 6-item acceptability scale was also used to evaluate patient acceptability and satisfaction with the electronic format.Results: Mean scores and standard deviations were similar between the paper-pencil and electronic forms across all EPIC instrument domains, and no assessment bias was found. Each EPIC domain demonstrated a high reliability between administration formats (correlation coefficients: 0.70-0.98). The majority (>90 %) of respondents found that the computerized QOL format was user friendly and simple to use.Conclusions: Point-of-care computerized QOL assessments were reliable and acceptable to patients in this study, supporting the feasibility of PRO integration at the point-of-care in clinical settings.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        clinical trial
        research
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N