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
. 2024 Aug 19:13:e57344.
doi: 10.2196/57344.

Acceptability, Perceptions, and Experiences Regarding Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

Affiliations

Acceptability, Perceptions, and Experiences Regarding Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Feasibility Study

Kareem Choucair et al. JMIR Res Protoc. .

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can be defined as any report of a patient's health taken directly from the patient. Routine collection of PRO data has been shown to offer potential benefits to patient-doctor communication. Electronic forms of PRO measures (PROMs) could be more beneficial in comparison to traditional PROMs in obtaining PROs from patients. However, it is currently unclear whether the routine collection of electronic PRO data could result in better outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Objective: This study aims to explore the perspectives of patients and surgeons on the use of electronic PROMs. Based on prior research, technical skill and experience level of the surgeon, long-term quality of life, patient involvement in decision-making, communication skills of the surgeon, cleanliness of the ward environment, and standards of nursing care are identified to be the most important factors for the patients.

Methods: This is a mixed methods prospective study that will collect both quantitative (survey) and qualitative (interview) data. The study has two components. The first involves the distribution of an electronic presurvey to patients who received elective LC within 48 hours of their surgery (n=80). This survey will explore the perspective of patients regarding the procedure, hospital experience, long-term outcomes, and the perceived value of using PROMs. These patients will then be followed up after 1 year and given another survey. The second component involves the distribution of the same survey and the completion of structured interviews with general surgeons (n=10). The survey will ascertain what PROs from the participants are most useful for the surgeons and the interviews will focus on how the surgeons view routine PRO collection. A convenience sampling approach will be used. Surveys will be distributed through Qualtrics and interviews will be completed on Microsoft Teams.

Results: Data collection began on February 14, 2023. As of February 12, 2024, 71 of 80 recruited patients have been given the presurvey. The follow-up with the patients and the general surgeon components of the study have not begun. The expected completion date of this study is in April 2025.

Conclusions: Overall, this study will investigate the potential of electronic PRO collection to offer value for patients and general surgeons. This approach will ensure that patient care is investigated in a multifaceted way, offering patient-centric guidance to surgeons in their approach to care.

International registered report identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/57344.

Keywords: Microsoft Teams; Qualtrics; data collection; digital technology; eHealth; electronic patient; general surgeon; hepatobiliary surgery; interview; laparoscopic cholecystectomy; mixed methods; patient care; patient-centric; patient-doctor communication; patient-reported outcomes; prospective study; qualitative; quantitative; surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

References

    1. Alexander HC, Nguyen CH, Moore MR, Bartlett AS, Hannam JA, Poole GH, Merry AF. Measurement of patient-reported outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2019 Jul 1;33(7):2061–2071. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-06745-7.10.1007/s00464-019-06745-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weldring T, Smith SMS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) Health Serv Insights. 2013;6:61–68. doi: 10.4137/HSI.S11093.hsi-6-2013-061 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marshall S, Haywood K, Fitzpatrick R. Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006 Oct;12(5):559–568. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00650.x.JEP650 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Deshpande P, Rajan S, Sudeepthi BL, Abdul Nazir C. Patient-reported outcomes: a new era in clinical research. Perspect Clin Res. 2011 Oct;2(4):137–1 44. doi: 10.4103/2229-3485.86879.PCR-2-137 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stewart M, Brown J, Donner A, McWhinney I, Oates J, Weston W, Jordan J. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. J Fam Pract. 2000 Sep;49(9):796–804. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources