Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cardiovascular Research and Care: PRO(M)s and CONS
- PMID: 39847595
- DOI: 10.1097/FJC.0000000000001669
Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Cardiovascular Research and Care: PRO(M)s and CONS
Abstract
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are vital tools in cardiovascular disease research and care, providing insights that complement traditional clinical outcomes such as mortality and morbidity. PROMs capture patient experiences with cardiovascular disease, such as quality of life, functional capacity, and emotional well-being, allowing clinicians to assess how interventions affect daily life. PROMs are integral to cardiovascular investigations and management, especially in chronic conditions and rehabilitation, where they inform on the impact of personalized care plans by tracking symptom progression and patient adherence. Selecting and applying to cardiovascular research and practice effective PROMs involves evaluating their validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change, with instruments such as the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire widely used for heart failure and coronary artery disease, respectively. Implementing PROMs in real-world practice requires addressing challenges related to workflow integration and patient adherence, emphasizing their value in patient-centered care. As digital health advances, remote PROM data collection through mobile applications and wearable devices will enhance access to and extent of PROMs, and artificial intelligence-driven analytical tools will provide real-time, automated and plausible more poignant insights for personalized treatment. Future efforts should focus on culturally adapting PROMs for diverse populations to ensure global applicability. PROMs should also be established as essential components of innovative research and responsive, patient-centered cardiovascular care.
Keywords: PROMs; cardiology; cardiovascular; patients-reported outcomes measures.
Copyright © 2025 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
References
-
- Anker SD, Agewall S, Borggrefe M, et al. The importance of patient-reported outcomes: a call for their comprehensive integration in cardiovascular clinical trials. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2001–2009.
-
- Kluzek S, Dean B, Wartolowska KA. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as proof of treatment efficacy. BMJ Evid Based Med. 2022;27:153–155.
-
- Ajjan RA, Doble E, Holt RIG, et al. Patient related outcome measures (PROMs) in long term conditions-is it time to bring them into routine clinical practice? BMJ. 2024;386:q1921.
-
- Bajgain KT, Mendoza J, Naqvi F, et al. Prioritizing patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) to use in the clinical care of youth living with mental health concerns: a nominal group technique study. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2024;8:20.
-
- Churruca K, Pomare C, Ellis LA, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): a review of generic and condition-specific measures and a discussion of trends and issues. Health Expect. 2021;24:1015–1024.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
