Does providing feedback on patient-reported outcomes to healthcare professionals result in better outcomes for patients? A systematic review
To assess the impact of providing healthcare professionals with feedback on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).
This is a systematic review including controlled studies investigating the effectiveness of PROMs feedback, specifically examining the impact at a group-level and a patient-level.
Only one study provided feedback at a group-level as a measure of professional performance, which found no intervention effect. At a patient-level, sixteen studies were identified and only one study found an overall significant difference in the PROM score. However, an additional six studies found a significant result favouring the intervention group for a particular subgroup or domain. The studies which demonstrated the greatest impact primarily used PROMs as a management tool in an outpatient setting on a specialised patient population. In contrast, there was weak evidence supporting with the use of PROMs as a screening tool. The studies which found a positive effect had a lower quality score on average.
The effectiveness of PROMs feedback seems to be related to the function of the PROM. However, the evidence regarding the impact of PROMs feedback on patient outcomes is weak, and methodological issues with studies are frequent. The use of PROMs as a performance measure is not well investigated. Future research should focus on the appropriate application of PROMs by testing specific hypothesis related to cause and effect. Qualitative research is required to provide a deeper understanding of the practical issues surrounding the implementation of PROMs and the methodological issues associated with the effective use of the information.
KeywordsPatient-reported outcomes Quality of life Outcome assessment Quality improvement Behavioural change
Patient-reported outcome measures
National Health Service
Randomised controlled trial
Patient, intervention, comparison, outcome
Standardised mean difference
- 1.Rosenbloom, S. K., Victorson, D. E., Hahn, E. A., Peterman, A. H., & Cella, D. (2007). Assessment is not enough: a randomized controlled trial of the effects of HRQL assessment on quality of life and satisfaction in oncology clinical practice. Psychooncology, 16(12), 1069–1079. doi:10.1002/pon.1184.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Deyo, R. A., & Carter, W. B. (1992). Strategies for improving and expanding the application of health status measures in clinical settings. A researcher-developer viewpoint. Medical Care, 30(5 Suppl), MS176–MS186 (discussion MS196-209).Google Scholar
- 8.Devlin, N., & Appleby, J. (2010). Getting the most out of PROMs: Putting health outcomes at the heart of NHS decision-making. London: King’s Fund.Google Scholar
- 9.Canadian Institute of Public Health. (2012). Health outcomes of care: An idea whose time has come. Ontario: Ottawa.Google Scholar
- 10.Health Services Advisory Group. (2011). Medicare Health Outcomes Survey. http://www.hosonline.org/. Accessed 17/11/11.
- 11.Appleby, J., & Devlin, N. (2004). Measuring success in the NHS. Using patient-assessed health outcomes to manage the performance of healthcare providers. London: King’s Fund.Google Scholar
- 12.Leonard, K. L., & Masatu, M. C. Using the Hawthorne effect to examine the gap between a doctor’s best possible practice and actual performance. Journal of Development Economics. (in press, corrected proof). doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2009.11.001.
- 14.Bridgewater, B., Grayson, A. D., Brooks, N., Grotte, G., Fabri, B. M., Au, J., et al. (2007). Has the publication of cardiac surgery outcome data been associated with changes in practice in northwest England: An analysis of 25,730 patients undergoing CABG surgery under 30 surgeons over eight years. Heart, 93(6), 744–748. doi:10.1136/hrt.2006.106393.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Jamtvedt, G., Young, J. M., Kristoffersen, D. T., O’Brien, M. A., & Oxman, A. D. (2006). Audit and feedback: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2), CD000259. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000259.pub2.
- 19.Coulter, A., & Ellins, J. (2006). Patient-focused interventions. A review of the evidence. London: The Health Foundation.Google Scholar
- 24.Valderas, J. M., Kotzeva, A., Espallargues, M., Guyatt, G., Ferrans, C. E., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2008). The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: A systematic review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 17(2), 179–193. doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9295-0.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Department of Health & Children. (2001). Primary care: A new direction. Dublin: Government of Ireland.Google Scholar
- 26.Calman, K., & Hine, D. (1995). Policy framework for commissioning cancer services: A report by the expert advisory group on cancer to the chief medical officers of England and Wales. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
- 27.Mental Health Commission. (2006). Multidisciplinary team working: From theory to practice- discussion paper, Dublin.Google Scholar
- 28.Smith, S., Cano, S., Lamping, D., Staniszewska, S., Browne, J., Lewsey, J., et al. (2005). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for routine use in treatment centres: Recommendations based on a review of the scientific evidence. London: Department of Health.Google Scholar
- 32.Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New Jersey: Lawrence Arlnaum Associates Inc.Google Scholar
- 33.Calkins, D. R., Rubenstein, L. V., Cleary, P. D., Davies, A. R., Jette, A. M., Fink, A., et al. (1994). Functional disability screening of ambulatory patients: A randomized controlled trial in a hospital-based group practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9(10), 590–592.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Mathias, S. D., Fifer, S. K., Mazonson, P. D., Lubeck, D. P., Buesching, D. P., & Patrick, D. L. (1994). Necessary but not sufficient: The effect of screening and feedback on outcomes of primary care patients with untreated anxiety. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 9(11), 606–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.McCoy, J. M., Rubenstein, L., Hirsch, S. H., & Barrett, P. A. (1988). A feedforward system for functional status information. Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer Applications in Medical Care, 9, 683–686.Google Scholar
- 48.Gutteling, J. J., Darlington, A. S., Janssen, H. L., Duivenvoorden, H. J., Busschbach, J. J., & de Man, R. A. (2008). Effectiveness of health-related quality-of-life measurement in clinical practice: A prospective, randomized controlled trial in patients with chronic liver disease and their physicians. Quality of Life Research, 17(2), 195–205. doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9308-7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar