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
. 2011 Apr 20:9:27.
doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-27.

Implementing patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in palliative care--users' cry for help

Claudia Bausewein  1 , Steffen T Simon, Hamid Benalia, Julia Downing, Faith N Mwangi-Powell, Barbara A Daveson, Richard Harding, Irene J Higginson; PRISMA
Affiliations

Implementing patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in palliative care--users' cry for help

Claudia Bausewein et al. Health Qual Life Outcomes. .

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) plays an increasingly important role in palliative care. A variety of measures exists and is used in clinical care, audit and research. However, little is known about professionals' views using these measures. The aim of this study is to describe the use and experiences of palliative care professionals with outcome measures.

Methods: A web-based online survey was conducted in Europe and Africa. Professionals working in clinical care, audit and research in palliative care were invited to the survey via national palliative care associations and various databases. Invitation e-mails were sent with a link to the questionnaire.

Results: Overall participation rate 42% (663/1592), overall completion rate 59% (392/663). The majority of respondents were female (63.4%), mean age 46 years (SD 9). 68.1% respondents from Europe and 73.3% from Africa had experiences with outcome measures in palliative care. Non-users reported time constraints, burden, lack of training and guidance as main reasons. In clinical care/audit, assessment of patients' situation, monitoring changes and evaluation of services were main reasons for use. Choice of OMs for research was influenced by validity of the instrument in palliative care and comparability with international literature. Main problems were related to patient characteristics, staff, and outcome measures. Participants expressed the need for more guidance and training in the use of PROMs.

Conclusions: Professionals need more support for the use and implementation of PROMs in clinical practice and research through training and guidance in order to improve patient care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Use of outcome measures in palliative care.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Department of Health. Guidance on the routine collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) London: Department of Health; 2008.
    1. Ferrell B, Connor SR, Cordes A, Dahlin CM, Fine PG, Hutton N, Leenay M, Lentz J, Person JL, Meier DE, Zuroski K. National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care Task Force, Members. The national agenda for quality palliative care: the National Consensus Project and the National Quality Forum. [Review] [5 refs] Journal of Pain & Symptom Management. 2007;33(6):737–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2007.02.024. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Secretary of State for Health. Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS. London: Department of Health; 2010.
    1. Teno JM, Byock I, Field MJ. Research agenda for developing measures to examine quality of care and quality of life of patients diagnosed with life-limiting illness. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management. 1999;17:81. - PubMed
    1. Tilden VP, Tolle S, Drach L, Hickman S. Measurement of quality of care and quality of life at the end of life. [References] The Gerontologist. 2002;42:80. - PubMed