Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Feb;18(1):115-23.
doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9430-6. Epub 2008 Dec 23.

The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why?

Affiliations

The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why?

Joanne Greenhalgh. Qual Life Res. 2009 Feb.

Abstract

Background: Precisely defining the different applications of patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) in clinical practice can be difficult. This is because the intervention is complex and varies amongst different studies in terms of the type of PRO used, how the PRO is fed back, and to whom it is fed back.

Methods: A theory-driven approach is used to describe six different applications of PROs in clinical practice. The evidence for the impact of these applications on the process and outcomes of care are summarised. Possible explanations for the limited impact of PROs on patient management are then discussed and directions for future research are highlighted.

Results: The applications of PROs in clinical practice include screening tools, monitoring tools, as a method of promoting patient-centred care, as a decision aid, as a method of facilitating communication amongst multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), and as a means of monitoring the quality of patient care. Evidence from randomised controlled trials suggests that the use of PROs in clinical practice is valuable in improving the discussion and detection of HRQoL problems but has less of an impact on how clinicians manage patient problems or on subsequent patient outcomes. Many of the reasons for this may lie in the ways in which PROs fit (or do not fit) into the routine ways in which patients and clinicians communicate with each other, how clinicians make decisions, and how healthcare as a whole is organised.

Conclusions: Future research needs to identify ways in with PROs can be better incorporated into the routine care of patients by combining qualitative and quantitative methods and adopting appropriate trial designs.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. JAMA. 2003 Jun 18;289(23):3145-51 - PubMed
    1. Psychol Med. 2002 Nov;32(8):1339-43 - PubMed
    1. Med Care. 2000 Feb;38(2):175-86 - PubMed
    1. Med Decis Making. 2000 Jan-Mar;20(1):7-19 - PubMed
    1. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2001 Apr;69(2):159-72 - PubMed