Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 6/2022

02-11-2021

Clinicians’ perspectives on the integration of electronic patient-reported outcomes into dermatology clinics: a qualitative study

Auteurs: Vanina L. Taliercio, Ashley M. Snyder, Allison M. Biggs, Jacob Kean, Rachel Hess, Kristina Callis Duffin, Amy M. Cizik, Aaron M. Secrest

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 6/2022

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Background

Skin conditions can have profound negative symptomatic and psychological effects. Failure to address these effects can lead to poor treatment adherence and/or patient dissatisfaction. Despite patient-reported outcome (PRO) use being highly recommended, real-world adoption has been slow.

Objectives

To assess clinicians’ perceived facilitators and barriers to using PROs in daily practice.

Methods

We conducted in-person semi-structured interviews with 19 clinicians and thematic analysis of transcripts.

Results

Three main themes emerged: (1) clinicians’ attitudes about the value of Skindex-16 in daily practice, (2) patient attitudes influencing clinicians’ use of Skindex-16, and (3) clinicians’ perceptions of their ability to use PROs successfully for clinical care. Clinicians recognized benefits to using Skindex-16, such as revealing patients’ hidden concerns and highlighting discrepancies with the clinician’s severity assessments. Conversely, clinicians also identified limitations, such as time constraints and lack of relevance for some skin conditions. Patient complaints about PRO relevance have influenced clinicians’ use of Skindex-16 negatively. Finally, some clinicians recognized the need for more training in score interpretation and implementation strategies for optimal clinical flow.

Conclusions

While most clinicians believed PROs like Skindex-16 can be useful for patient care, barriers need to be addressed to make PROs more practical for routine clinical care.
Bijlagen
Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Smith, P. G., Morrow, R. H., & Ross, D. A. (2015). Field trials of health interventions: A toolbox. In P. G. Smith, R. H. Morrow, & D. A. Ross (Eds.), Chapter 12, Outcome measures and case definition. OUP Oxford. Smith, P. G., Morrow, R. H., & Ross, D. A. (2015). Field trials of health interventions: A toolbox. In P. G. Smith, R. H. Morrow, & D. A. Ross (Eds.), Chapter 12, Outcome measures and case definition. OUP Oxford.
2.
go back to reference Bhosle, M. J., Kulkarni, A., Feldman, S. R., & Balkrishnan, R. (2006). Quality of life in patients with psoriasis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 35.CrossRef Bhosle, M. J., Kulkarni, A., Feldman, S. R., & Balkrishnan, R. (2006). Quality of life in patients with psoriasis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 35.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Choi, J., & Koo, J. Y. (2003). Quality of life issues in psoriasis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 49(2 Suppl), S57–S61.CrossRef Choi, J., & Koo, J. Y. (2003). Quality of life issues in psoriasis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 49(2 Suppl), S57–S61.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Armstrong, A. W., Robertson, A. D., Wu, J., et al. (2013). Undertreatment, treatment trends, and treatment dissatisfaction among patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in the United States: Findings from the National Psoriasis Foundation surveys, 2003–2011. JAMA Dermatology, 149(10), 1180–1185.CrossRef Armstrong, A. W., Robertson, A. D., Wu, J., et al. (2013). Undertreatment, treatment trends, and treatment dissatisfaction among patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in the United States: Findings from the National Psoriasis Foundation surveys, 2003–2011. JAMA Dermatology, 149(10), 1180–1185.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Laine, C., & Davidoff, F. (1996). Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA, 275(2), 152–156.CrossRef Laine, C., & Davidoff, F. (1996). Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA, 275(2), 152–156.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Barry, M. J., & Edgman-Levitan, S. (2012). Shared decision making–pinnacle of patient-centered care. New England Journal of Medicine, 366(9), 780–781.CrossRef Barry, M. J., & Edgman-Levitan, S. (2012). Shared decision making–pinnacle of patient-centered care. New England Journal of Medicine, 366(9), 780–781.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Barry, M. J. (2011). Helping patients make better personal health decisions: The promise of patient-centered outcomes research. JAMA, 306(11), 1258–1259.CrossRef Barry, M. J. (2011). Helping patients make better personal health decisions: The promise of patient-centered outcomes research. JAMA, 306(11), 1258–1259.CrossRef
8.
9.
go back to reference Finlay, A. Y., Salek, M. S., Abeni, D., et al. (2017). Why quality of life measurement is important in dermatology clinical practice: An expert-based opinion statement by the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 31(3), 424–431.CrossRef Finlay, A. Y., Salek, M. S., Abeni, D., et al. (2017). Why quality of life measurement is important in dermatology clinical practice: An expert-based opinion statement by the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 31(3), 424–431.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. (2006). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: Draft guidance. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 79.CrossRef U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. (2006). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: Draft guidance. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 79.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Secrest, A. M., Chren, M. M., Hopkins, Z. H., et al. (2019). Benefits to patient care of electronically capturing patient-reported outcomes in dermatology. British Journal of Dermatology, 181(4), 826–827.CrossRef Secrest, A. M., Chren, M. M., Hopkins, Z. H., et al. (2019). Benefits to patient care of electronically capturing patient-reported outcomes in dermatology. British Journal of Dermatology, 181(4), 826–827.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Gaufin, M., Hess, R., Hopkins, Z. H., et al. (2020). Practical screening for depression in dermatology: Using technology to improve care. British Journal of Dermatology, 182(3), 786–787.CrossRef Gaufin, M., Hess, R., Hopkins, Z. H., et al. (2020). Practical screening for depression in dermatology: Using technology to improve care. British Journal of Dermatology, 182(3), 786–787.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Lohr, K. N., & Zebrack, B. J. (2009). Using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: Challenges and opportunities. Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 99–107.CrossRef Lohr, K. N., & Zebrack, B. J. (2009). Using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: Challenges and opportunities. Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 99–107.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Chren, M. M., Lasek, R. J., Sahay, A. P., & Sands, L. P. (2001). Measurement properties of Skindex-16: A brief quality-of-life measure for patients with skin diseases. Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, 5(2), 105–110.CrossRef Chren, M. M., Lasek, R. J., Sahay, A. P., & Sands, L. P. (2001). Measurement properties of Skindex-16: A brief quality-of-life measure for patients with skin diseases. Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery, 5(2), 105–110.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Nielsen, L. K., King, M., Möller, S., et al. (2020). Strategies to improve patient-reported outcome completion rates in longitudinal studies. Quality of Life Research, 29(2), 335–346.CrossRef Nielsen, L. K., King, M., Möller, S., et al. (2020). Strategies to improve patient-reported outcome completion rates in longitudinal studies. Quality of Life Research, 29(2), 335–346.CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Roydhouse, J. K., Gutman, R., Bhatnagar, V., et al. (2019). Analyzing patient-reported outcome data when completion differs between arms in open-label trials: An application of principal stratification. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 28(10), 1386–1394.CrossRef Roydhouse, J. K., Gutman, R., Bhatnagar, V., et al. (2019). Analyzing patient-reported outcome data when completion differs between arms in open-label trials: An application of principal stratification. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 28(10), 1386–1394.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Biber, J., Ose, D., Reese, J., et al. (2018). Patient reported outcomes—Experiences with implementation in a University Health Care setting. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes., 2(1), 34.CrossRef Biber, J., Ose, D., Reese, J., et al. (2018). Patient reported outcomes—Experiences with implementation in a University Health Care setting. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes., 2(1), 34.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Bauer, M. S., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., et al. (2015). An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychology, 3, 32.CrossRef Bauer, M. S., Damschroder, L., Hagedorn, H., et al. (2015). An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychology, 3, 32.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Palinkas, L. A. (2014). Qualitative and mixed methods in mental health services and implementation research. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 43(6), 851–861.CrossRef Palinkas, L. A. (2014). Qualitative and mixed methods in mental health services and implementation research. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 43(6), 851–861.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Luborsky, M. R., & Rubinstein, R. L. (1995). Sampling in qualitative research: Rationale, issues, and methods. Research on Aging, 17(1), 89–113.CrossRef Luborsky, M. R., & Rubinstein, R. L. (1995). Sampling in qualitative research: Rationale, issues, and methods. Research on Aging, 17(1), 89–113.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Conti, A. A., & Gensini, G. F. (2008). Doctor-patient communication: A historical overview. Minerva Medica, 99(4), 411–415.PubMed Conti, A. A., & Gensini, G. F. (2008). Doctor-patient communication: A historical overview. Minerva Medica, 99(4), 411–415.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Chren, M. M. (2012). The Skindex instruments to measure the effects of skin disease on quality of life. Dermatologic Clinics, 30(2), 231–236.CrossRef Chren, M. M. (2012). The Skindex instruments to measure the effects of skin disease on quality of life. Dermatologic Clinics, 30(2), 231–236.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Scholl, I., Zill, J. M., Härter, M., & Dirmaier, J. (2014). An integrative model of patient-centeredness—A systematic review and concept analysis. PLoS One, 9(9), e107828.CrossRef Scholl, I., Zill, J. M., Härter, M., & Dirmaier, J. (2014). An integrative model of patient-centeredness—A systematic review and concept analysis. PLoS One, 9(9), e107828.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory. Houghton Mifflin. Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and theory. Houghton Mifflin.
27.
go back to reference Talib, T. L., DeChant, P., Kean, J., et al. (2018). A qualitative study of patients’ perceptions of the utility of patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms in primary care clinics. Quality of Life Research, 27(12), 3157–3166.CrossRef Talib, T. L., DeChant, P., Kean, J., et al. (2018). A qualitative study of patients’ perceptions of the utility of patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms in primary care clinics. Quality of Life Research, 27(12), 3157–3166.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Chun Tie, Y., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE Open Medicine, 7, 2050312118822927.CrossRef Chun Tie, Y., Birks, M., & Francis, K. (2019). Grounded theory research: A design framework for novice researchers. SAGE Open Medicine, 7, 2050312118822927.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction (2nd ed.). Sage. Silverman, D. (2001). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction (2nd ed.). Sage.
30.
go back to reference Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
31.
go back to reference Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Meehan, B., et al. (2017). From screening to synthesis: Using NVIVO to enhance transparency in qualitative evidence synthesis. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(5–6), 873–881.CrossRef Houghton, C., Murphy, K., Meehan, B., et al. (2017). From screening to synthesis: Using NVIVO to enhance transparency in qualitative evidence synthesis. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 26(5–6), 873–881.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Galper, A., Shamai-Rosler, O., Stanger, V., & Zimlichman, E. (2019). PRO (Patient Reported Outcomes) implementation: From vision to reality. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 264, 1839–1840.PubMed Galper, A., Shamai-Rosler, O., Stanger, V., & Zimlichman, E. (2019). PRO (Patient Reported Outcomes) implementation: From vision to reality. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 264, 1839–1840.PubMed
33.
go back to reference Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11(2), 87–98.CrossRef Godin, G., & Kok, G. (1996). The theory of planned behavior: A review of its applications to health-related behaviors. American Journal of Health Promotion, 11(2), 87–98.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Hoerger, M. (2010). Participant dropout as a function of survey length in internet-mediated university studies: Implications for study design and voluntary participation in psychological research. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking., 13(6), 697–700.CrossRef Hoerger, M. (2010). Participant dropout as a function of survey length in internet-mediated university studies: Implications for study design and voluntary participation in psychological research. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking., 13(6), 697–700.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Rolstad, S., Adler, J., & Rydén, A. (2011). Response burden and questionnaire length: Is shorter better? A review and meta-analysis. Value Health, 14(8), 1101–1108.CrossRef Rolstad, S., Adler, J., & Rydén, A. (2011). Response burden and questionnaire length: Is shorter better? A review and meta-analysis. Value Health, 14(8), 1101–1108.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Santana, M. J., Haverman, L., Absolom, K., et al. (2015). Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice. Quality of Life Research, 24(7), 1707–1718.CrossRef Santana, M. J., Haverman, L., Absolom, K., et al. (2015). Training clinicians in how to use patient-reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice. Quality of Life Research, 24(7), 1707–1718.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Brundage, M. D., Smith, K. C., Little, E. A., et al. (2015). Communicating patient-reported outcome scores using graphic formats: Results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Quality of Life Research, 24(10), 2457–2472.CrossRef Brundage, M. D., Smith, K. C., Little, E. A., et al. (2015). Communicating patient-reported outcome scores using graphic formats: Results from a mixed-methods evaluation. Quality of Life Research, 24(10), 2457–2472.CrossRef
38.
go back to reference Snyder, C. F., Smith, K. C., Bantug, E. T., et al. (2017). What do these scores mean? Presenting patient-reported outcomes data to patients and clinicians to improve interpretability. Cancer, 123(10), 1848–1859.CrossRef Snyder, C. F., Smith, K. C., Bantug, E. T., et al. (2017). What do these scores mean? Presenting patient-reported outcomes data to patients and clinicians to improve interpretability. Cancer, 123(10), 1848–1859.CrossRef
39.
go back to reference Smith, K. C., Brundage, M. D., Tolbert, E., et al. (2016). Engaging stakeholders to improve presentation of patient-reported outcomes data in clinical practice. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24(10), 4149–4157.CrossRef Smith, K. C., Brundage, M. D., Tolbert, E., et al. (2016). Engaging stakeholders to improve presentation of patient-reported outcomes data in clinical practice. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24(10), 4149–4157.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Hewitt, R. M., Pattinson, R., Cordingley, L., et al. (2021). Implementation of the PsoWell™ model for the management of people with complex psoriasis. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 101(4), adv00445.CrossRef Hewitt, R. M., Pattinson, R., Cordingley, L., et al. (2021). Implementation of the PsoWell™ model for the management of people with complex psoriasis. Acta Dermato-Venereologica, 101(4), adv00445.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Clinicians’ perspectives on the integration of electronic patient-reported outcomes into dermatology clinics: a qualitative study
Auteurs
Vanina L. Taliercio
Ashley M. Snyder
Allison M. Biggs
Jacob Kean
Rachel Hess
Kristina Callis Duffin
Amy M. Cizik
Aaron M. Secrest
Publicatiedatum
02-11-2021
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 6/2022
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03030-w

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2022

Quality of Life Research 6/2022 Naar de uitgave