Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies

  • Review
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used in clinical settings to inform individual patient care. In-depth understanding of end-users’ experiences may help identify factors that promote or hinder their use in clinical decision-making. We aimed to examine stakeholder perceptions of the utility of using PROMs in clinical practice based on real-life experience.

Methods

Systematic review searching Medline, Embase and PsychINFO from inception to May 2021. Qualitative studies examining patients’ and/or clinicians’ experiences of using PROMs in clinical settings were included. Study screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative data from included studies was analysed thematically.

Results

Of 2388 abstracts retrieved, 52 articles reporting 50 studies met eligibility. Five key benefits were identified: (1) promotes active patient involvement (enables goal setting and discussion of sensitive topics); (2) enhances the focus of consultations (prioritizes patient needs); (3) improves quality of care (enables tailored, holistic care and prompts action); (4) enables standardized monitoring of patient outcomes; and (5) enhances the patient–clinician relationship (provides reassurance). Perceived limitations included the capacity of PROMs to shift the focus of consultations; inaccurately estimate problems; raise unrealistic expectations for care; inhibit patient–clinician interaction; lack clinically meaningful information; and not be suitable for all patients.

Conclusion

Both patients and clinicians reported benefits of using PROMs across diverse health conditions and clinical settings, but also highlighted several limitations. These limitations shed some light on why PROM use may not always improve patient outcomes and provide considerations for the design and implementation of future PROM initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Requests for access to qualitative data will be considered, and made available if deemed reasonable.

Code availability

Requests for qualitative software coding will be considered, and made available if deemed reasonable.

Notes

  1. XX, YY, ZZ used throughout to replace author initials for blind manuscript.

References

  1. Agency for Clinical Innovation. (2019). Patient reported measures: Outcomes that matter to patients. Retrieved from https://www.aci.health.nsw.gov.au/make-it-happen/prms. Accessed Jan 11 2021

  2. NHS England. (2019). The National Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Programme. Retrieved from https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/proms-guide-aug-18-v3.pdf. Accessed Jan 11 2021

  3. Mercieca-Bebber, R., King, M. T., Calvert, M. J., Stockler, M. R., & Friedlander, M. (2018). The importance of patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and strategies for future optimization. Patient Related Outcome Measures, 9, 353–367.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Øvretveit, J., Zubkoff, L., Nelson, E. C., Frampton, S., Knudsen, J. L., & Zimlichman, E. (2017). Using patient-reported outcome measurement to improve patient care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 29(6), 874–879.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gonçalves Bradley, D. C., Gibbons, C., Ricci-Cabello, I., Bobrovitz, N. J. H., Gibbons, E. J., Kotzeva, A., et al. (2015). Routine provision of information on patient-reported outcome measures to healthcare providers and patients in clinical practice. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Greenhalgh, J. (2009). The applications of PROs in clinical practice: What are they, do they work, and why? Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 115–123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, J., Ou, L., & Hollis, S. J. (2013). A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting. BMC Health Services Research, 13, 211.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Greenhalgh, J., & Meadows, K. (1999). The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: A literature review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 5(4), 401–416.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Boyce, M. B., & Browne, J. P. (2013). Does providing feedback on patient-reported outcomes to healthcare professionals result in better outcomes for patients? A systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 22(9), 2265–2278.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ishaque, S., Karnon, J., Chen, G., Nair, R., & Salter, A. B. (2019). A systematic review of randomised controlled trials evaluating the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Quality of Life Research, 28(3), 567–592.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Boyce, M. B., Browne, J. P., & Greenhalgh, J. (2014). The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Quality & Safety., 23(6), 508–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Antunes, B., Harding, R., & Higginson, I. J. (2014). Implementing patient-reported outcome measures in palliative care clinical practice: A systematic review of facilitators and barriers. Palliative Medicine, 28(2), 158–175.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lewis, C. C., Boyd, M., Puspitasari, A., Navarro, E., Howard, J., Kassab, H., et al. (2019). Implementing measurement-based care in behavioral health: A review. JAMA Psychiatry, 76(3), 324–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Greenhalgh, J., Gooding, K., Gibbons, E., Dalkin, S., Wright, J., Valderas, J., et al. (2018). How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2(1), 42.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Solstad, S. M., Castonguay, L. G., & Moltu, C. (2019). Patients’ experiences with routine outcome monitoring and clinical feedback systems: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative empirical literature. Psychotherapy Research, 29(2), 157–170.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). (2008). Systematic reviews. CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. CRD UoY.

    Google Scholar 

  18. McDonagh, M., Peterson, K., Raina, P., Chang, S., & Shekelle, P. (2008). AHRQ Methods for effective health care avoiding bias in selecting studies. Methods guide for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness reviews. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Deutscher, D., Hart, D. L., Dickstein, R., Horn, S. D., & Gutvirtz, M. (2008). Implementing an integrated electronic outcomes and electronic health record process to create a foundation for clinical practice improvement. Physical Therapy, 88(2), 270–285.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schick-Makaroff, K., & Molzahn, A. E. (2017). Evaluation of real-time use of electronic patient-reported outcome data by nurses with patients in home dialysis clinics. BMC Health Services Research, 17(1), 439.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Greenhalgh, J. (2005). An assessment of the feasibility and utility of the MS symptom and impact diary (MSSID). Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1363–1374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Callaly, T., Hyland, M., Coombs, T., & Trauer, T. (2006). Routine outcome measurement in public mental health: Results of a clinician survey. Australian Health Review, 30(2), 164–173.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Primdahl, J., Jensen, D. V., Meincke, R. H., Jensen, K. V., Ziegler, C., Nielsen, S. W., et al. (2020). Patients’ views on routine collection of patient-reported outcomes in rheumatology outpatient care: A multicenter focus group study. Arthritis Care and Research (Hoboken), 72(9), 1331–1338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. McHorney, C. A., & Earl Bricker, D. (2002). A qualitative study of patients’ and physicians’ views about practice-based functional health assessment. Medical Care, 40(11), 1113–1125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Talib, T. L., DeChant, P., Kean, J., Monahan, P. O., Haggstrom, D. A., Stout, M. E., et al. (2018). A qualitative study of patients’ perceptions of the utility of patient-reported outcome measures of symptoms in primary care clinics. Quality of Life Research, 27(12), 3157–3166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Neff, C., Wang, M. C., & Martel, H. (2018). Using the PDQ-39 in routine care for Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism & Related Disorders, 53, 105–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dowrick, C., Leydon, G. M., McBride, A., Howe, A., Burgess, H., Clarke, P., et al. (2009). Patients’ and doctors’ views on depression severity questionnaires incentivised in UK quality and outcomes framework: qualitative study. BMJ, 338, b663.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Eilander, M., de Wit, M., Rotteveel, J., Maas-van Schaaijk, N., Roeleveld-Versteegh, A., & Snoek, F. (2016). Implementation of quality of life monitoring in Dutch routine care of adolescents with type 1 diabetes: Appreciated but difficult. Pediatric Diabetes, 17(2), 112–119.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Kettis-Lindblad, A., Ring, L., Widmark, E., Bendtsen, P., & Glimelius, B. (2007). Patients’and doctors’ views of using the schedule for individual quality of life in clinical practice. The Journal of Supportive Oncology, 5(6), 281–287.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dronkers, E. A. C., de Jong, R. J. B., van der Poel, E. F., Sewnaik, A., & Offerman, M. P. J. (2020). Keys to successful implementation of routine symptom monitoring in head and neck oncology with “Healthcare Monitor” and patients’ perspectives of quality of care. Head & Neck, 42(12), 3590–3600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Porter, I., Davey, A., Gangannagaripalli, J., Evans, J., Bramwell, C., Evans, P., et al. (2021). Integrating patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) into routine nurse-led primary care for patients with multimorbidity: A feasibility and acceptability study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes., 19(1), 133.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Tai, D., Li, E., Liu-Ambrose, T., Bansback, N., Sadatsafavi, M., & Davis, J. C. (2020). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to support adherence to falls prevention clinic recommendations: A qualitative study. Patient Preference and Adherence, 14, 2105–2121.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Delgadillo, J., Overend, K., Lucock, M., Groom, M., Kirby, N., McMillan, D., et al. (2017). Improving the efficiency of psychological treatment using outcome feedback technology. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 99, 89–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Krawczyk, M., & Sawatzky, R. (2018). Relational use of an electronic quality of life and practice support system in hospital palliative consult care: A pilot study. Palliative Support Care, 2018, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Mejdahl, C. T., Schougaard, L. M. V., Hjollund, N. H., Riiskjær, E., & Lomborg, K. (2018). Exploring organisational mechanisms in PRO-based follow-up in routine outpatient care—An interpretive description of the clinician perspective. BMC Health Services Research., 18(1), 546.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Evans, J. M., Glazer, A., Lum, R., Heale, E., MacKinnon, M., Blake, P. G., et al. (2020). Implementing a patient-reported outcome measure for hemodialysis patients in routine clinical care: Perspectives of Patients and providers on ESAS-r:Renal. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 15(9), 1299–1309.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Thestrup Hansen, S., Kjerholt, M., Friis Christensen, S., Brodersen, J., & Hølge-Hazelton, B. (2020). “I am sure that they use my PROM data for something important”. A qualitative study about patients’ experiences from a hematologic outpatient clinic. Cancer Nursing, 43(5), E273–E282.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Monroe, A. K., Jabour, S. M., Peña, S., Keruly, J. C., Moore, R. D., Chander, G., et al. (2018). A qualitative study examining the benefits and challenges of incorporating patient-reported outcome substance use and mental health questionnaires into clinical practice to improve outcomes on the HIV care continuum. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 419.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Thestrup Hansen, S., Kjerholt, M., Friis Christensen, S., Brodersen, J., & Hølge-Hazelton, B. (2021). Nurses’ experiences when introducing patient-reported outcome measures in an outpatient clinic: An interpretive description study. Cancer Nursing, 44(2), E108–E120.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Wheat, H., Horrell, J., Valderas, J. M., Close, J., Fosh, B., & Lloyd, H. (2018). Can practitioners use patient reported measures to enhance person centred coordinated care in practice? A qualitative study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(1), 223.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Unsworth, G., Cowie, H., & Green, A. (2012). Therapists’ and clients’ perceptions of routine outcome measurement in the NHS: A qualitative study. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research., 12(1), 71–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Ahluwalia, S. C., Giannitrapani, K. F., Dobscha, S. K., Cromer, R., & Lorenz, K. A. (2018). “It encourages them to complain”: A qualitative study of the unintended consequences of assessing patient-reported pain. The Journal of Pain, 19(5), 562–568.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Hughes, R., Aspinal, F., Addington-Hall, J. M., Dunckley, M., Faull, C., & Higginson, I. (2004). It just didn’t work: The realities of quality assessment in the English health care context. International Journal of Nursing Studies., 41(7), 705–712.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Mark, T. L., Johnson, G., Fortner, B., & Ryan, K. (2008). The benefits and challenges of using computer-assisted symptom assessments in oncology clinics: Results of a qualitative assessment. Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment, 7(5), 401–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Litchfield, I., Greenfield, S., Turner, G. M., Finnikin, S., & Calvert, M. J. (2021). Implementing PROMs in routine clinical care: A qualitative exploration of GP perspectives. BJGP Open. https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101135

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. O’Connor, M., Tanner, P. B., Miller, L., Watts, K. J., & Musiello, T. (2017). Detecting distress: Introducing routine screening in a gynecologic cancer setting. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 21(1), 79–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Schulman-Green, D., Cherlin, E. J., McCorkle, R., Carlson, M. D., Pace, K. B., Neigh, J., et al. (2010). Benefits and challenges in use of a standardized symptom assessment instrument in hospice. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 13(2), 155–159.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Thestrup Hansen, S., Kjerholt, M., Friis Christensen, S., Hølge-Hazelton, B., & Brodersen, J. (2019). Haematologists’ experiences implementing patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in an outpatient clinic: A qualitative study for applied practice. Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes., 3(1), 74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Cranley, L., & Doran, D. M. (2004). Nurses’ integration of outcomes assessment data into practice. Outcomes Management, 8(1), 13–18.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Korzeniowski, M., Kalyvas, M., Mahmud, A., Shenfield, C., Tong, C., Zaza, K., et al. (2016). Piloting prostate cancer patient-reported outcomesin clinical practice. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24(5), 1983–1990.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Locker, L. S., & Lübbe, A. S. (2015). Quality of life in palliative care: An analysis of quality-of-life assessment. Progress in Palliative Care, 23(4), 208–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Meehan, T., McCombes, S., Hatzipetrou, L., & Catchpoole, R. (2006). Introduction of routine outcome measures: Staff reactions and issues for consideration. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 13(5), 581–587.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Mason, L., & Poole, H. (2008). Healthcare professionals’ views of screening for postnatal depression. Community Practitioner, 81(4), 30–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Bouvette, M., Fothergill-Bourbonnais, F., & Perreault, A. (2002). Implementation of the pain and symptom assessment record (PSAR). Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(6), 685–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Scholle, S. H., Morton, S., Homco, J., Rodriguez, K., Anderson, D., Hahn, E., et al. (2018). Implementation of the PROMIS-29 in routine care for people with diabetes: Challenges and Opportunities. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 41(4), 274–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Schwartz, C. E., Merriman, M. P., Reed, G., & Byock, I. (2005). Evaluation of the Missoula-VITAS quality of life index–revised: Research tool or clinical tool? Journal of Palliative Medicine, 8(1), 121–135.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Baker, K. M., DeSanto-Madeya, S., & Banzett, R. B. (2017). Routine dyspnea assessment and documentation: Nurses’ experience yields wide acceptance. BMC Nursing, 16(1), 3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Baker, K. M., Vragovic, N. S., & Banzett, R. B. (2020). Intensive care nurses’ perceptions of routine dyspnea assessment. American Journal of Critical Care, 29(2), 132–139.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Bendtsen, P., Leijon, M., Sofie Sommer, A., & Kristenson, M. (2003). Measuring health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a routine hospital setting: Feasibility and perceived value. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 1, 5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Schmidt, H., Merkel, D., Koehler, M., Flechtner, H. H., Sigle, J., Klinge, B., et al. (2016). PRO-ONKO-selection of patient-reported outcome assessments for the clinical use in cancer patients—A mixed-method multicenter cross-sectional exploratory study. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24(6), 2503–2512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ryan, C. M., Lee, A. F., Kazis, L. E., Shapiro, G. D., Schneider, J. C., Goverman, J., et al. (2016). Is real-time feedback of burn-specific patient-reported outcome measures in clinical settings practical and useful? A pilot study implementing the young adult burn outcome questionnaire. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 37(1), 64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Mitchell, C., Dwyer, R., Hagan, T., & Mathers, N. (2011). Impact of the QOF and the NICE guideline in the diagnosis and management of depression: A qualitative study. British Journal of General Practice, 61(586), e279–e289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Colquhoun, H., Letts, L., Law, M., MacDermid, J., & Edwards, M. (2010). Feasibility of the Canadian occupational performance measure for routine use. British Journal of Occupational Therapy., 73(2), 48–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Snyder, C. F., Aaronson, N. K., Choucair, A. K., Elliott, T. E., Greenhalgh, J., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2012). Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: A review of the options and considerations. Quality of Life Research, 21(8), 1305–1314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel Campbell.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Campbell, R., Ju, A., King, M.T. et al. Perceived benefits and limitations of using patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice with individual patients: a systematic review of qualitative studies. Qual Life Res 31, 1597–1620 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03003-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-03003-z

Keywords

Navigation