TY - JOUR
T1 - Information is a key prerequisite for perceived relevance of patient reported outcome data (PRO data)
T2 - A multicenter questionnaire study
AU - Kildemand, Malene
AU - Lindegaard, Hanne Merete
AU - Rothmann, Mette Juel
AU - Nørgaard, Birgitte
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the relevance of patient reported outcome data (PRO data) as assessed by arthritis patients in a Danish hospital setting. Methods: The study was conducted as a multicenter questionnaire survey comprising patients with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis at three rheumatology outpatient clinics. Respondents with experience of reporting PRO data were recruited. The recruitment took place in March 2017. Results: A total of 98 respondents were included. We found significant correlation between respondents’ level of information about PRO data and the perceived relevance of PRO data questions. Remarkably, a third of the respondents stated that PRO data prepared neither themselves nor the healthcare professionals for the consultation, while 40% found that their PRO data responses were not used during consultations with healthcare professionals. Conclusions: The respondents’ assessment of the relevance of PRO data depended on the information offered to them. In recognition of its potential as a tool for patient involvement, the use of PRO data should be formally integrated in routine clinical care.
AB - Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the relevance of patient reported outcome data (PRO data) as assessed by arthritis patients in a Danish hospital setting. Methods: The study was conducted as a multicenter questionnaire survey comprising patients with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and psoriatic arthritis at three rheumatology outpatient clinics. Respondents with experience of reporting PRO data were recruited. The recruitment took place in March 2017. Results: A total of 98 respondents were included. We found significant correlation between respondents’ level of information about PRO data and the perceived relevance of PRO data questions. Remarkably, a third of the respondents stated that PRO data prepared neither themselves nor the healthcare professionals for the consultation, while 40% found that their PRO data responses were not used during consultations with healthcare professionals. Conclusions: The respondents’ assessment of the relevance of PRO data depended on the information offered to them. In recognition of its potential as a tool for patient involvement, the use of PRO data should be formally integrated in routine clinical care.
U2 - 10.5430/jnep.v9n6p107
DO - 10.5430/jnep.v9n6p107
M3 - Journal article
SN - 1925-4040
VL - 9
SP - 107
EP - 112
JO - Journal of Nursing Education and Practice
JF - Journal of Nursing Education and Practice
IS - 6
ER -