-
The Lancet. Healthy Longevity Jul 2023Comprehensive geriatric assessment is the core toolkit of geriatric medicine. Awareness of and engagement in comprehensive geriatric assessment are crucial competences... (Review)
Review
Comprehensive geriatric assessment is the core toolkit of geriatric medicine. Awareness of and engagement in comprehensive geriatric assessment are crucial competences for all professionals caring for older people living with frailty. The fundamental tenet of comprehensive geriatric assessment is person centredness, which means orienting problem evaluation and intervention plans around an individual's specific biopsychosocial situation to maximise their function and participation. Person-centred outcomes are frequently neglected from measurements of health-care delivery, service improvement, and research. Instead, systems tend to measure outcomes of the health-care service (ie, resource use) or a person's destination following a health-care process. The absence of person-centred outcome measures risks the delivery of health care that seeks to achieve, and is benchmarked against, outcomes that are not best for the patient. We must, therefore, ensure that the outcomes that matter to older people are being measured.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Delivery of Health Care; Geriatrics; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 37336229
DOI: 10.1016/S2666-7568(23)00084-3 -
JAMA Network Open Aug 2023The ideal hospitalist workload and optimal way to measure it are not well understood.
IMPORTANCE
The ideal hospitalist workload and optimal way to measure it are not well understood.
OBJECTIVE
To obtain expert consensus on the salient measures of hospitalist workload.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
This qualitative study used a 3-round Delphi technique between April 5 and July 13, 2022, involving national experts within and external to the field. Experts included hospitalist clinicians, leaders, and administrators, as well as researchers with expertise in human factors engineering and cognitive load theory.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Three rounds of surveys were conducted, during which participants provided input on the salient measures of hospitalist workload across various domains. In the first round, free-text data collected from the surveys were analyzed using a directed qualitative content approach. In the second and third rounds, participants rated each measure's relevance on a Likert scale, and consensus was evaluated using the IQR. Percentage agreement was also calculated.
RESULTS
Seventeen individuals from 14 organizations, encompassing clinicians, leaders, administrators, and researchers, participated in 3 rounds of surveys. In round 1, participants provided 135 unique qualitative comments across 10 domains, with 192 unique measures identified. Of the 192 measures presented in the second round, 6 (3%) were considered highly relevant, and 25 (13%) were considered moderately relevant. In round 3, 161 measures not meeting consensus were evaluated, with 25 (16%) considered highly relevant and 95 (59%) considered moderately relevant. Examples of measures considered highly relevant included a patient complexity score and outcome measures such as savings from hospital days avoided and clinician turnover.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this qualitative study measuring hospitalist workload, multiple measures, including those quantifying work demands and the association of those demands with outcomes, were considered relevant for measuring and understanding workloads. The findings suggest that relying on traditional measures, such as productivity-related measures and financial measures, may offer an incomplete understanding of workloads and their association with key outcomes. By embracing a broader range of measures, organizations may be able to better capture the complexity and nuances of hospitalist work demands and their outcomes on clinicians, patients, and organizations.
Topics: Humans; Workload; Hospitalists; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Consensus; Delphi Technique
PubMed: 37561462
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28165 -
Brain : a Journal of Neurology Dec 2023The capacity and power of data from cohorts, registries and randomized trials to provide answers to contemporary clinical questions in neurology has increased... (Review)
Review
The capacity and power of data from cohorts, registries and randomized trials to provide answers to contemporary clinical questions in neurology has increased considerably over the past two decades. Novel sophisticated statistical methods are enabling us to harness these data to guide treatment decisions, but their complexity is making appraisal of clinical evidence increasingly demanding. In this review, we discuss several methodological aspects of contemporary research of treatment effectiveness in observational data in neurology, aimed at academic neurologists and analysts specializing in outcomes research. The review discusses specifics of the sources of observational data and their key features. It focuses on the limitations of observational data and study design, as well as statistical approaches aimed to overcome these limitations. Among the examples of leading clinical themes typically studied with analyses of observational data, the review discusses methodological approaches to comparative treatment effectiveness, development of diagnostic criteria and definitions of clinical outcomes. Finally, this review provides a brief summary of key points that will help clinical audience critically evaluate design and analytical aspects of studies of disease outcomes using observational data.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Registries; Research Design; Neurology
PubMed: 37587541
DOI: 10.1093/brain/awad278 -
Current Oncology Reports Sep 2023Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a debilitating progressive disease resulting in various impairments and dysfunctions. Complete decongestive therapy embodies... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a debilitating progressive disease resulting in various impairments and dysfunctions. Complete decongestive therapy embodies conservative rehabilitation treatments for BCRL. Surgical procedures performed by plastic and reconstructive microsurgeons are available when conservative treatment fails. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate which rehabilitation interventions contribute to the highest level of pre- and post-microsurgical outcomes.
RECENT FINDINGS
Studies published between 2002 and 2022 were grouped for analysis. This review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341650) and followed the PRISMA guidelines. Levels of evidence were based upon study design and quality. The initial literature search yielded 296 results, of which, 13 studies met all inclusion criteria. Lymphovenous bypass anastomoses (LVB/A) and vascularized lymph node transplant (VLNT) emerged as dominant surgical procedures. Peri-operative outcome measures varied greatly and were used inconsistently. There is a dearth of high quality literature leading to a gap in knowledge as to how BCRL microsurgical and conservative interventions complement each other. Peri-operative guidelines are needed to bridge the knowledge and care gap between lymphedema surgeons and therapists. A core set of outcome measures for BCRL is vital to unify terminological differences in the multidisciplinary care of BCRL. Complete decongestive therapy embodies conservative rehabilitation treatments for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Surgical procedures performed by microsurgeons are available when conservative treatment fails. This systematic review investigated which rehabilitation interventions contribute to the highest level of pre- and post-microsurgical outcomes. Thirteen studies met all inclusion criteria and revealed that there is a dearth of high quality literature leading to a gap in knowledge as to how BCRL microsurgical and conservative interventions complement each other. Furthermore, peri-operative outcome measures were inconsistent. Peri-operative guidelines are needed to bridge the knowledge and care gap between lymphedema surgeons and therapists.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Lymphedema; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 37402044
DOI: 10.1007/s11912-023-01439-9 -
Diabetologia Aug 2023Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs,... (Review)
Review
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Surveys and Questionnaires; Health Surveys; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37222772
DOI: 10.1007/s00125-023-05926-3 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2024Healthcare systems are transforming from the traditional volume-based model of healthcare to a value-based model of healthcare. Value generation in healthcare is about... (Review)
Review
Healthcare systems are transforming from the traditional volume-based model of healthcare to a value-based model of healthcare. Value generation in healthcare is about emphasising the health outcomes achieved by patients and organisations while maintaining an optimal relationship with costs. This scoping review aimed to identify the key elements and outcomes of implementing value-based healthcare (VBHC). The review process included studies published from 2013 to 2023 in four different databases (SpringerLink, PubMed, ProQuest and Scopus). Of the 2801 articles retrieved from the searches, 12 met the study's inclusion criteria. A total of 11 studies referred to value as the relationship between the outcomes achieved by patients and the costs of achieving those outcomes. Most of the studies highlighted the presence of leadership, the organisation of care into integrated care units, the identification and standardisation of outcome measures that generate value for the patient, and the inclusion of the patient perspective as the most prominent key elements for optimal VBHC implementation. Furthermore, some benefits were identified from VBHC implementation, which could shed light for future implementation actions. Therefore, the VBHC model is a promising approach that may contribute to an improvement in the efficiency and sustainability of healthcare.
Topics: Humans; Value-Based Health Care; Delivery of Health Care; Costs and Cost Analysis; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 38397625
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph21020134 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Jun 2023Patients with multiple myeloma experience severe symptom burden. Patient participation in self-reporting is essential as medical staff's assessment of patient symptom... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with multiple myeloma experience severe symptom burden. Patient participation in self-reporting is essential as medical staff's assessment of patient symptom severity is often lower than patient self-reporting. This article reviews patient-reported outcome (PRO) assessment tools and their application in the field of multiple myeloma.
RESULTS
The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) is the universal patient-reported outcome assessment tool most frequently used to evaluate the life quality in people with multiple myeloma. Among the specific patient-reported outcome assessment tools, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Multiple Myeloma Module (EORTC QLQ-MY20), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Multiple Myeloma (FACT-MM), and the M.D. Anderson Symptom Inventory-Multiple Myeloma Module (MDASI-MM) are the most widely used, with some scholars using the EORTC QLQ-MY20 as a calibration correlate for scale development. Most current assessment instruments were developed using classical measurement theory methods; future researchers could combine classic theory tests and item response theory to create scientific assessment instruments. In addition, researchers select the appropriate assessment tool based on the purpose of the study. They can translate high-quality assessment tools into different languages and consider applying them more often to assessing multiple myeloma patients. Finally, most existing PROs focus on measuring life quality and symptoms in people with multiple myeloma, with less research on outcomes such as adherence and satisfaction, thus failing to comprehensively evaluate the patient treatment and disease management.
CONCLUSIONS
Research has shown that the field of PROs in multiple myeloma is in an exploratory phase. There is still a need to enrich the content of PROs and develop more high-quality PRO scales for multiple myeloma based on the strengths and weaknesses of existing tools. With the successful advancement of information technology, PROs for people with multiple myeloma could be integrated with electronic information systems, allowing patients to report their health status in real time and doctors to track their condition and adjust their treatment, thereby improving patient outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Multiple Myeloma; Quality of Life; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Patient Outcome Assessment; Disease Management
PubMed: 37389673
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-07902-4 -
Implementation Science : IS Jul 2023Proctor and colleagues' 2011 paper proposed a taxonomy of eight implementation outcomes and challenged the field to address a research agenda focused on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Proctor and colleagues' 2011 paper proposed a taxonomy of eight implementation outcomes and challenged the field to address a research agenda focused on conceptualization, measurement, and theory building. Ten years later, this paper maps the field's progress in implementation outcomes research. This scoping review describes how each implementation outcome has been studied, research designs and methods used, and the contexts and settings represented in the current literature. We also describe the role of implementation outcomes in relation to implementation strategies and other outcomes.
METHODS
Arksey and O'Malley's framework for conducting scoping reviews guided our methods. Using forward citation tracing, we identified all literature citing the 2011 paper. We conducted our search in the Web of Science (WOS) database and added citation alerts sent to the first author from the publisher for a 6-month period coinciding with the WOS citation search. This produced 1346 titles and abstracts. Initial abstract screening yielded 480 manuscripts, and full-text review yielded 400 manuscripts that met inclusion criteria (empirical assessment of at least one implementation outcome).
RESULTS
Slightly more than half (52.1%) of included manuscripts examined acceptability. Fidelity (39.3%), feasibility (38.6%), adoption (26.5%), and appropriateness (21.8%) were also commonly examined. Penetration (16.0%), sustainability (15.8%), and cost (7.8%) were less frequently examined. Thirty-two manuscripts examined implementation outcomes not included in the original taxonomy. Most studies took place in healthcare (45.8%) or behavioral health (22.5%) organizations. Two-thirds used observational designs. We found little evidence of progress in testing the relationships between implementation strategies and implementation outcomes, leaving us ill-prepared to know how to achieve implementation success. Moreover, few studies tested the impact of implementation outcomes on other important outcome types, such as service systems and improved individual or population health.
CONCLUSIONS
Our review presents a comprehensive snapshot of the research questions being addressed by existing implementation outcomes literature and reveals the need for rigorous, analytic research and tests of strategies for attaining implementation outcomes in the next 10 years of outcomes research.
Topics: Humans; Delivery of Health Care; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 37491242
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-023-01286-z -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Oct 2023The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is expected to rise due to increased survivorship and life expectancy of patients with acute heart conditions. Patients with HF and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The prevalence of heart failure (HF) is expected to rise due to increased survivorship and life expectancy of patients with acute heart conditions. Patients with HF and other multiple comorbid conditions are likely to have poor health outcomes. This study aimed to assimilate the current body of knowledge and to provide the pooled effect of HF patients' comorbid conditions on health outcomes.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases. Observational studies evaluating the relationship between comorbid conditions and the health outcomes of HF were included. The pooled effect sizes of comorbidity on the identified health outcomes were calculated using a random effects model, and the heterogeneity was evaluated using I statistics.
RESULTS
A total of 42 studies were included in this review, and a meta-analysis was performed using the results of 39 studies. In the pooled analysis, the presence of a comorbid condition showed a significant pooled effect size in relation to the prognostic health outcomes: all-cause mortality (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.18, 1.45), all-cause readmission (HR 1.16; 95% CI 1.09, 1.23), HF-related readmission (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.05, 1.23), and non-HF-related readmission (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.07, 1.27). Also, comorbidity was significantly associated with health-related quality of life and self-care confidence. Furthermore, we identified a total of 32 comorbid conditions from included studies. From these, 16 individual conditions were included in the meta-analyses, and we identified 10 comorbid conditions to have negative effects on overall prognostic outcomes: DM (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.11, 1.22), COPD (HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.23, 1.39), CKD (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.14, 1.23, stroke (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.17, 1.31), IHD (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11, 1.23), anemia (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.14, 1.78), cancer (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04, 1.32), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01, 1.54), dementia (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.03, 1.36) and depression (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04, 1.31).
CONCLUSIONS
Comorbid conditions have significantly negative pooled effects on HF patient health outcomes, especially in regard to the prognostic health outcomes. Clinicians should carefully identify and manage these conditions when implementing HF interventions to improve prognostic outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Comorbidity; Heart Failure; Atrial Fibrillation; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 37817062
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-023-03527-x -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Jan 2024Cancer surgery is an essential treatment strategy but can disrupt patients' physical and psychological health. With worldwide demand for surgery expected to increase,... (Review)
Review
Cancer surgery is an essential treatment strategy but can disrupt patients' physical and psychological health. With worldwide demand for surgery expected to increase, this review aims to raise awareness of this global public health concern, present a stepwise framework for preoperative risk evaluation, and propose the adoption of personalised prehabilitation to mitigate risk. Perioperative medicine is a growing speciality that aims to improve clinical outcome by preparing patients for the stress associated with surgery. Preparation should begin at contemplation of surgery, with universal screening for established risk factors, physical fitness, nutritional status, psychological health, and, where applicable, frailty and cognitive function. Patients at risk should undergo a formal assessment with a qualified healthcare professional which informs meaningful shared decision-making discussion and personalised prehabilitation prescription incorporating, where indicated, exercise, nutrition, psychological support, 'surgery schools', and referral to existing local services. The foundational principles of prehabilitation can be adapted to local context, culture, and population. Clinical services should be co-designed with all stakeholders, including patient representatives, and require careful mapping of patient pathways and use of multi-disciplinary professional input. Future research should optimise prehabilitation interventions, adopting standardised outcome measures and robust health economic evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Exercise; Preoperative Care; Nutritional Status; Outcome Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 38392040
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31020046