Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

26-07-2020 | Special Section: Feedback Tools

Using implementation science to inform the integration of electronic patient-reported experience measures (ePREMs) into healthcare quality improvement: description of a theory-based application in primary care

Auteurs: Kimberly Manalili, Maria J. Santana, ISOQOL PROMs/PREMs in clinical practice implementation science work group

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 11/2021

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
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Background

Collecting and monitoring the information from patients through patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) about the quality of care they receive is important for tracking changes in healthcare quality, stimulate innovation, and enhance person-centred care. The objective of this theoretical paper is to discuss the use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks to inform and evaluate the integration of the electronic collection of PREMs (ePREMs) in healthcare quality improvement for primary care in Canada.

Methods

To assess potential knowledge-to-practice gaps in implementing ePREMs in primary care in Alberta, the overarching implementation model that will be used is the Knowledge to Action Cycle. An integrated knowledge translation approach will ensure ongoing engagement of key stakeholders (e.g. primary care providers, patients) throughout the study. ePREM implementation will be informed by the identification of barriers and facilitators to implementation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The CFIR brings an organizational perspective providing an opportunity to explore the intervention characteristics, the context of implementation, individual factors, and the processes that influence implementation of ePREMs in healthcare. Identified barriers and facilitators to ePREM implementation will be mapped to evidence-based implementation strategies and prioritized by stakeholders. The RE-AIM framework will be used to guide the evaluation of ePREM implementation outcomes after six months of implementation by assessing Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (sustainability).

Discussion

Consultations with stakeholders affirm the importance of using integrated knowledge translation approaches and the need to better understand how to integrate ePREMs in primary care. Using an implementations science approach, this study can provide guidance for mitigating important ePREM implementation challenges and promote the successful uptake and use of ePREMs for quality improvement in healthcare.
vorige artikel The utility of the implementation science framework “Integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services” (i-PARIHS) and the facilitator role for introducing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a medical oncology outpatient department
volgende artikel Continuous quality improvement in measure development: Lessons from building a novel clinical feedback system
Literatuur
1.
2.
Ahmed, S., Kemp, K., Johnson, D., Quan, H., & Santana, M. J. (2019). Identifying areas for improvement in paediatric inpatient care using the Child HCAHPS survey. Paediatrics & Child Health.
3.
Kemp, K., McCormack, B., Chan, N., Santana, M. J., & Quan, H. (2015). Correlation of inpatient experience survey items and domains with overall hospital rating. Journal of patient experience, 2(2), 29–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
4.
Stewart, M., Brown, J. B., Donner, A., McWhinney, I. R., Oates, J., Weston, W. W., et al. (2000). The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. Journal of Family Practice, 49(9), 796–796.PubMed
5.
Anhang Price, R., Elliott, M. N., Zaslavsky, A. M., Hays, R. D., Lehrman, W. G., Rybowski, L., et al. (2014). Examining the role of patient experience surveys in measuring health care quality. Medical Care Research and Review, 71(5), 522–554.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Kemp, K. A., Ahmed, S., Quan, H., Johnson, D., & Santana, M. J. (2018). Family Experiences of Pediatric Inpatient Care in Alberta, Canada: Results From the Child HCAHPS Survey. Hospital pediatrics, 8(6), 338–344.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Davies, E., Shaller, D., Edgman-Levitan, S., Safran, D. G., Oftedahl, G., Sakowski, J., et al. (2008). Evaluating the use of a modified CAHPS® survey to support improvements in patient-centred care: lessons from a quality improvement collaborative. Health Expectations, 11(2), 160–176.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
Santana, M. J., Manalili, K., Jolley, R. J., Zelinsky, S., Quan, H., & Lu, M. (2018). How to practice person-centred care: A conceptual framework. Health Expectations, 21(2), 429–440.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Benson, T. (2020). Measure what we want: a taxonomy of short generic person-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs). BMJ open quality, 9(1), e000789.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
11.
12.
Jensen, R. E., Snyder, C. F., Abernethy, A. P., Basch, E., Potosky, A. L., Roberts, A. C., et al. (2013). Review of electronic patient-reported outcomes systems used in cancer clinical care. Journal of Oncology Practice, 10(4), e215–e222.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
Snyder, C. F., Aaronson, N. K., Choucair, A. K., Elliott, T. E., Greenhalgh, J., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2012). Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Quality of Life Research, 21(8), 1305–1314.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Santana, M. J., Feeny, D., Weinkauf, J., Nador, R., Kapasi, A., Jackson, K., et al. (2010). The use of patient-reported outcomes becomes standard practice in the routine clinical care of lung–heart transplant patients. Patient related outcome measures, 1, 93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
Haverman, L., van Oers, H. A., Limperg, P. F., Hijmans, C. T., Schepers, S. A., Nicolaas, S., et al. (2014). Implementation of electronic patient reported outcomes in pediatric daily clinical practice: The KLIK experience. Clinical Practice in Pediatric Psychology, 2(1), 50.CrossRef
16.
Basch, E., & Abernethy, A. P. (2011). Supporting clinical practice decisions with real-time patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 29(8), 954–956.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., & Graham, I. D. (2013). Introduction. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 3–13): John Wiley & Sons.
18.
Graham, I. D., Logan, J., Harrison, M. B., Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Caswell, W., et al. (2006). Lost in knowledge translation: time for a map? Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26(1), 13–24.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Handley, M. A., Gorukanti, A., & Cattamanchi, A. (2016). Strategies for implementing implementation science: a methodological overview. Emerg Med J, 33(9), 660–664.PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Doktorchik, C., Manalili, K., Jolley, R., Gibbons, E., Lu, M., Quan, H., et al. (2018). Identifying Canadian patient-centred care measurement practices and quality indicators: a survey. CMAJ open, 6(4), E643.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
22.
Ahmed, S., Siad, F. M., Manalili, K., Lorenzetti, D. L., Barbosa, T., Lantion, V., et al. (2018). How to measure cultural competence when evaluating patient-centred care: a scoping review. British Medical Journal Open, 8(7), e021525.
23.
Santana, M.-J., Ahmed, S., Lorenzetti, D., Jolley, R. J., Manalili, K., Zelinsky, S., et al. (2019). Measuring patient-centred system performance: a scoping review of patient-centred care quality indicators. British Medical Journal Open, 9(1), e023596.
24.
Ahmed, S., Djurkovic, A., Manalili, K., Sahota, B., & Santana, M. J. (2019). A qualitative study on measuring patient-centered care: Perspectives from clinician-scientists and quality improvement experts. Health Science Reports, 2(12), e140.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
25.
Gagliardi, A. R., Berta, W., Kothari, A., Boyko, J., & Urquhart, R. (2015). Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review. Implementation Science, 11(1), 38.CrossRef
26.
Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., et al. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 171–181.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Alexander, J. A., & Hearld, L. R. (2011). The science of quality improvement implementation: developing capacity to make a difference. Medical Care, S6-S20.
28.
Scott, C., Seidel, J., Bowen, S., & Gall, N. (2009). Integrated health systems and integrated knowledge: creating space for putting knowledge into action. Healthcare Quarterly, 13(15), 30–36.PubMedCrossRef
29.
30.
May, C. R., Mair, F., Finch, T., MacFarlane, A., Dowrick, C., Treweek, S., et al. (2009). Development of a theory of implementation and integration: Normalization Process Theory. Implementation Science, 4(1), 1–9.CrossRef
31.
Stover, A. M., Haverman, L., van Oers, H. A., Greenhalgh, J., & Potter, C. M. (2020). Using an implementation science approach to implement and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) initiatives in routine care settings. Quality of Life Research, 1–19.
32.
Harrison, M. B., Graham, I. D., Fervers, B., & van den Hoek, J. (2013). Adapting knowledge to local context. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 110–120): John Wiley & Sons.
33.
Legare, F., & Zhang, P. (2013). Barriers and facilitators. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (pp. 121–136): John Wiley & Sons.
34.
Wensing, M., Bosch, M., & Grol, R. (2013). Methods to identify determinants of change in healthcare. In R. Grol, M. Wensing, M. Eccles, & D. Davis (Eds.), Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care (2nd ed., pp. 151–162): John Wiley & Sons.
35.
Palinkas, L. A., Aarons, G. A., Horwitz, S., Chamberlain, P., Hurlburt, M., & Landsverk, J. (2011). Mixed method designs in implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 38(1), 44–53.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Morgan, D. L. (2013). Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods: A pragmatic approach: Sage Publications.
37.
Lehman, W. E., Greener, J. M., & Simpson, D. D. (2002). Assessing organizational readiness for change. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 22(4), 197–209.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Damschroder, L. J., Aron, D. C., Keith, R. E., Kirsh, S. R., Alexander, J. A., & Lowery, J. C. (2009). Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implementation Science, 4(1), 50.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Colquhoun, H., Grimshaw, J., & Wensing, M. (2013). Mapping KT interventions to barriers and facilitators. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 137–149).
40.
Grol, R., Bosch, M., & Wensing, M. (2013). Development and selection of strategies to improve patient care. In R. Grol, M. Wensing, M. Eccles, & D. Davis (Eds.), Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care (2nd ed., pp. 167–183): John Wiley & Sons.
41.
Powell, B. J., Waltz, T. J., Chinman, M. J., Damschroder, L. J., Smith, J. L., Matthieu, M. M., et al. (2015). A refined compilation of implementation strategies: results from the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project. Implementation Science, 10(1), 21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
43.
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., & Friedman, R. M. (2005). Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature (T. N. I. R. Network, Trans.). Tampa, FL: University of South Florida: Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute.
44.
Grol, R., Ouwens, M., & Wollershein, H. (2013). Planning and organizing the change process. In R. Grol, M. Wensing, M. Eccles, & D. Davis (Eds.), Improving patient care: the implementation of change in health care (2nd ed., pp. 64–74): John Wiley & Sons.
45.
Straus, S. E., Tetroe, J., Bhattacharyya, O., Zwarenstein, M., & Graham, I. D. (2013). Monitoring knowledge and evaluating outcomes. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 227–236): John Wiley & Sons.
46.
Sales, A. (2013). Quality improvement theories. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 320–328): John Wiley & Sons.
47.
Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999). Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1322–1327.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
48.
Bhattacharyya, O., Hayden, L., & Zwarenstein, M. (2013). Methodologies to evalute effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham Eds, Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 331–348): John Wiley & Sons.
49.
Kaplan, H. C., Brady, P. W., Dritz, M. C., Hooper, D. K., Linam, W. M., Froehle, C. M., et al. (2010). The influence of context on quality improvement success in health care: a systematic review of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly, 88(4), 500–559.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Davies, B., & Edwards, N. (2013). Sustaining knowledge use. In S. E. Straus, J. Tetroe, & I. D. Graham (Eds.), Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice (2nd ed., pp. 237–248).
51.
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Davis, K., Schoenbaum, S. C., & Audet, A.-M. (2005). A 2020 vision of patient-centered primary care. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20(10), 953–957.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Haggerty, J., Burge, F., Lévesque, J.-F., Gass, D., Pineault, R., Beaulieu, M.-D., et al. (2007). Operational definitions of attributes of primary health care: consensus among Canadian experts. The Annals of Family Medicine, 5(4), 336–344.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Berwick, D. M., Nolan, T. W., & Whittington, J. (2008). The triple aim: care, health, and cost. Health Affairs, 27(3), 759–769.CrossRefPubMed
55.
56.
Rathert, C., Wyrwich, M. D., & Boren, S. A. (2013). Patient-centered care and outcomes: a systematic review of the literature. Medical Care Research and Review, 70(4), 351–379.PubMedCrossRef
57.
Hoff, T., Weller, W., & DePuccio, M. (2012). The patient-centered medical home: a review of recent research. Medical Care Research and Review, 69(6), 619–644.PubMedCrossRef
58.
Jackson, G. L., Powers, B. J., Chatterjee, R., Bettger, J. P., Kemper, A. R., Hasselblad, V., et al. (2013). The patient-centered medical home: a systematic review. Annals of Internal Medicine, 158(3), 169–178.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Cohen, D., McDaniel, R. R., Jr., Crabtree, B. F., & Ruhe, M. C. (2004). A practice change model for quality improvement in primary care practice. Journal of Healthcare Management, 49(3), 155.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Greenhalgh, T. (2013). Primary health care: theory and practice: John Wiley & Sons.
61.
Primary Care Network Management Office. (2019). Alberta PCNs.
62.
The College of Family Physicians of Canadain. (2019). A New Vision for Canada: Family Practice - The Patient’s Medical Home 2019.
63.
Chang, A., & Ritchie, C. (2015). Patient-centered models of care: closing the gaps in physician readiness. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 30(7), 870–872.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Using implementation science to inform the integration of electronic patient-reported experience measures (ePREMs) into healthcare quality improvement: description of a theory-based application in primary care
Auteurs
Kimberly Manalili
Maria J. Santana
ISOQOL PROMs/PREMs in clinical practice implementation science work group
Publicatiedatum
26-07-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 11/2021
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02588-1

Andere artikelen Uitgave 11/2021

Smartphone App for monitoring Asthma in children and adolescents

  • Special Section: Feedback Tools

Standardized assessment, information, and networking technologies (SAINTs): lessons from three decades of development and testing

  • Open Access
  • Special Section: Feedback Tools

Racial differences in user experiences and perceived value of electronic symptom monitoring in a cohort of black and white bladder and prostate cancer patients

  • Special Section: Feedback Tools

Complexity and potentials of clinical feedback in mental health: an in-depth study of patient processes

  • Open Access
  • Special Section: Feedback Tools

Using an implementation science approach to implement and evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) initiatives in routine care settings

  • Open Access
  • Special Section: Feedback Tools

Initial quantitative development of the Norse Feedback system: a novel clinical feedback system for routine mental healthcare

  • Open Access
  • Special Section: Feedback Tools