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
Multicenter Study
. 2018 Jun;53(3):1834-1850.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12729. Epub 2017 Jun 15.

Feasibility of Collecting Patient-Reported Outcomes for Inpatient Rehabilitation Quality Reporting

Allen Walter Heinemann  1   2 , Anne Deutsch  1   2 , David Cella  3 , Karon Frances Cook  3 , Linda Foster  4 , Ana Miskovic  1 , Katharine Davis  1 , Arielle Goldsmith  1
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Feasibility of Collecting Patient-Reported Outcomes for Inpatient Rehabilitation Quality Reporting

Allen Walter Heinemann et al. Health Serv Res. 2018 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate rehabilitation inpatients' willingness and ability to complete patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the burden of completion on patients and staff.

Data sources/study setting: Two inpatient rehabilitation facilities.

Study design: Patients with neurological disorders were assigned randomly to receive a nominal monetary incentive during or 1 month after the stay.

Data collection: Patients responded using a tablet computer or paper.

Principal findings: Of the 1,055 admissions, 74 percent were eligible, and 51 percent of eligible patients completed the survey. Most answered without assistance. A majority completed the survey 1 month after discharge; incentive timing was unrelated to postdischarge completion. Half of the 285 follow-up respondents required at least two reminder calls.

Conclusions: Collection of PROs from rehabilitation patients is feasible. Results inform policy makers regarding feasibility of PRO data in evaluating rehabilitation quality.

Keywords: Quality of care/patient safety (measurement); disability; patient assessment/satisfaction; quality improvement/report cards (interventions); rehabilitation services.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Patient Accrual and Retention for Patient‐Reported Outcome (PRO) Collection [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 2
Figure 2
Assistance Required for Patients to Complete Patient‐Reported Outcomes during Inpatient Rehabilitation [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com] Note. RA, research assistant.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. 2010. “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” Public Law No. 111‐148, Sec. 3011.
    1. 2012. “Review of Patient Reported Outcomes in Performance Measurement.” N. M. A. Public, p. 36. Washington, DC: National Quality Forum.
    1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) . 2010. “National Healthcare Disparities and Quality Reports” [accessed on October 1, 2010]. Available at https://archive.ahrq.gov/research/findings/nhqrdr/nhqrdr10/qrdr10.html
    1. Amtmann, D. , Cook K. F., Jensen M. P., Chen W.‐H., Choi S., Revicki D., Cella D., Rothrock N., Keefe F., and Callahan L.. 2010. “Development of a PROMIS Item Bank to Measure Pain Interference.” Pain 150 (1): 173–82. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cella, D. 2015a. “Development and Initial Validation of Patient‐Reported Item Banks for Use in Neurological Research and Practice” [accessed on July 11, 2016]. Available at http://www.healthmeasures.net/images/neuro_qol/Neuro-QoL_Manual_Technica...

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources