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
. 2019 Feb 24;9(2):e027046.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-027046.

The iPROMOS protocol: a stepped-wedge study to implement routine patient-reported outcomes in a medical oncology outpatient setting

Affiliations

The iPROMOS protocol: a stepped-wedge study to implement routine patient-reported outcomes in a medical oncology outpatient setting

Natasha Anne Roberts et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are data capture tools that collect information directly from patients. Several large research studies provide evidence that the use of PROMs in routine care provides benefits to mortality and morbidity outcomes in medical oncology patients. Despite this, implementation of PROMs in daily clinical routine is slow and challenging.

Methods and analysis: This study will use a stepped-wedge design to assess the implementation of a PROM intervention in highly frequented medical oncology outpatient clinics. During a lead-in period of 4 weeks, control data will be collected. The intervention will then be implemented for 4 weeks in Clinic 1 initially, then in Clinic 2 for another 4 weeks. 500 patient encounters will be measured over the 12 weeks in total. The process of implementation will be informed and evaluated using the Medical Research Council Guidelines for Implementing Complex Interventions. The study will be guided by the Promoting Action Research in Health Services framework approach for implementation. The intervention and implementation outcomes will be measured using qualitative and quantitative data.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been obtained, approval number HREC/16/QRBW/100 by the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee. Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings.

Trial registration: ACTRN12618000398202. Trial Status: Opened on 25 March 2018 and will continue until 12 months after the last PROMs reporting encounter.

Keywords: PRO-CTCAE; PROMs; complex intervention; iPARIHS; implementation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None to declared.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Coons SJ, Gwaltney CJ, Hays RD, et al. . Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2009;12:419–29. 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00470.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Revicki DA, Osoba D, Fairclough D, et al. . Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States. Qual Life Res 2000;9:887–900. 10.1023/A:1008996223999 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Antunes B, Harding R, Higginson IJ. EUROIMPACT. Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice: a systematic review of facilitators and barriers. Palliat Med 2014;28:158–75. 10.1177/0269216313491619 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sharma P, Dunn RL, Wei JT, et al. . Evaluation of point-of-care PRO assessment in clinic settings: integration, parallel-forms reliability, and patient acceptability of electronic QOL measures during clinic visits. Qual Life Res 2016;25:575–83. 10.1007/s11136-015-1113-5 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Basch E, Deal AM, Kris MG, et al. . Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Oncol 2016;34:557–65. 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources