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
. 2021 Apr 28;10(1):128.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01682-w.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) use in post-stroke patient care and clinical practice: a realist synthesis protocol

Affiliations

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) use in post-stroke patient care and clinical practice: a realist synthesis protocol

A Smith et al. Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: There is growing interest in the use of routine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to influence the care of individual patients with stroke. However, there are significant gaps in our understanding as to how PROMs influence post-stroke patient care and clinical practice. This is due to factors including the number of purported uses for PROMs and that PROMs are complex interventions, which attempt to stimulate varied actions or behaviours. Therefore, the objective of this realist synthesis is to offer theory-based explanations as to how PROMs influence post-stroke clinical practice and patient care.

Methods: This is a protocol for a realist synthesis, which involves three distinct phases: theory building (phase 1), theory testing and refinement (phase 2) and synthesis (phase 3). Phase 1 will develop initial rough programme theories (IRPTs), through literature searches (from January 2000 onwards) of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and the grey literature. Only secondary sources will be included that contribute to the development of IRPTs. Only two IRPTs, prioritised by the stakeholder group, will be taken forward to be tested and refined during phase 2. Further novel searches will be employed in phase 2, utilising the same criteria as phase 1; however, phase 2 searches will not utilise grey literature searches, and only primary research studies that contribute to the refinement of programme theories under investigation will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen and select all returned results. The reviewers will code and annotate relevant sources, resulting in 'fragments' to be extracted and graded based on the richness of their contribution to explanation and causal insight. Further, these fragments will be organised into 'Context-Mechanism-Outcome' configurations. Phase 3 of the review will involve the synthesis of context-mechanism-outcome configurations to form middle-range theory-based explanations and developed logic models for stakeholders to understand how PROMs in post-stroke clinical practice and patient care work for whom, how and under what circumstances.

Discussion: The resulting realist synthesis will provide guidance on the implementation of PROMs within routine post-stroke clinical practice and patient care and act as a touchstone for further testing and refinement of PROMs programmes.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42020138649 .

Keywords: Feedback; PROM; Patient care; Patient-reported outcome measure; Realist synthesis; Stroke; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party . National clinical guideline for stroke. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2016.
    1. Bray BD, Ayis S, Campbell J, Hoffman A, Roughton M, Tyrrell PJ, Wolfe CDA, Rudd AG. Associations between the organisation of stroke services, process of care, and mortality in England: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2013;346:f2827. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2827. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barclay-Moss KM, Lannin NA, Grabsch B, Kilkenny M, Cadilhac DA. Stroke survivor follow-up in a national registry: lessons learnt from respondents who completed telephone interviews. Int J Stroke. 2019;14(2):112–114. doi: 10.1177/1747493018806190. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dawson J, Doll H, Fitzpatrick R, Jenkinson C, Carr AJ. The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings. BMJ. 2010;340:c186. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c186. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Basch E, Spertus J, Dudley RA, Wu A, Chuahan C, Cohen P, et al. Methods for developing patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PRO-PMs) Value Health. 2015;18(4):493–504. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.018. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types