Abstract
Many of us believe there are major benefits to be gained by using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in routine clinical practice. However, demonstrating tangible benefits has frequently proved elusive. Although randomised clinical trials (RCTs) have become accepted as the standard for comparing alternative forms of clinical interventions, when evaluating the effectiveness of PROs there are a number of challenges both in terms of study design and the subsequent analysis. Despite this, to date, of those investigators who have used RCTs, relatively few have used anything other than simple two-group randomisation and comparisons. Most of these trials have also failed to demonstrate convincing benefits to patient outcomes. We suggest that the use of PROs may result in modest yet important improvements to patient outcomes, and that these benefits may be obscured in conventional individual patient trials because of contamination effects. The advantages of alternative designs such as cross-over studies and in particular cluster-randomised trials are illustrated.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- HRQL:
-
Health-related quality of life
- ICC:
-
Intracluster correlation
- PRO:
-
Patient-reported outcome
- RCT:
-
Randomised controlled trial
References
Fayers, P. M., Jones, D. R., & Girling, D. J. (1985). Measurement of quality of life in cancer clinical trials. Cancer Treatment Symposia, 2, 25–30.
Fayers, P. M. (1995). MRC quality of life studies using a daily diary card—practical lessons learned from cancer trials. Quality of Life Research, 4, 343–352. doi:10.1007/BF01593887.
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, 401–416. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.1999.00209.x.
Espallargues, M., Valderas, J. M., & Alonso, J. (2000). Provision of feedback on perceived health status to health care professionals: A systematic review of its impact. Medical Care, 38, 175–186. doi:10.1097/00005650-200002000-00007.
Gilbody, M., House, A. O., & Sheldon, T. A. (2001). Routinely administered questionnaires for depression and anxiety: Systematic review. British Medical Journal, 322, 406–409. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7283.406.
Velikova, G., & Wright, P. (2005). Individual patient monitoring. In P. M. Fayers & R. D. Hays (Eds.), Assessing quality of life in clinical trials: Methods and practice (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Valderas, J. M., Kotzeva, A., Espallargues, M., Guyatt, G., Ferrans, C. E., Halyard, M. Y., et al. (2007). The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: A systematic review of the literature. Quality of Life Research, 17, 179–193. doi:10.1007/s11136-007-9295-0.
Clayton, J. M., Butow, P. N., Tattersall, M. H. N., Devine, R. J., Simpson, J. M., Aggarwal, G., et al. (2007). Randomised controlled trial of a prompt list to help advanced cancer patients and their caregivers to ask questions about prognosis and end-of-life care. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 25, 715–723. doi:10.1200/JCO.2006.06.7827.
Brown, R. F., Butow, P. N., Dunn, S. M., & Tattersall, M. H. N. (2001). Promoting patient participation and shortening cancer consultations: a randomised trial. British Journal of Cancer, 85, 1273–1279. doi:10.1054/bjoc.2001.2073.
Velikova, G., Booth, L., Smith, A. B., Brown, P. M., Lynch, P., Brown, J. A., et al. (2004). Measuring quality of life in oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: a randomised controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 714–724. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078.
Detmar, S. B., Muller, M. J., Schornagel, J. H., Wever, L. D. V., & Aaronson, N. L. (2002). Health-related quality-of-life assessment and patient-physician communication: A randomised controlled trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, 3027–3034. doi:10.1001/jama.288.23.3027.
Donner, A., & Klar, N. (2000). Design and analysis of cluster-randomised trials in health research. London, UK: Arnold.
Fayers, P. M., & King, M. (2008). A highly significant difference in baseline characteristics: The play of chance or evidence of a more selective game? Quality of Life Research, 17. doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9390-x.
Fayers, P. M., & King, M. (2008). The baseline characteristics did not differ significantly. Quality of Life Research, 17, 1047–1048. doi:10.1007/s11136-008-9382-x.
Priebe, S., McCabe, R., Bullenkamp, J., Hansson, L., Lauber, C., Martinez-Leal, R., et al. (2007). Structured patient-clinician communication and 1-year outcome in community mental healthcare: cluster-randomised controlled trial. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 191, 420–426. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.107.036939.
Priebe, S., Huxley, P., Knight, S., & Evans, S. (1999). Application and results of the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 45, 7–12. doi:10.1177/002076409904500102.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fayers, P.M. Evaluating the effectiveness of using PROs in clinical practice: a role for cluster-randomised trials. Qual Life Res 17, 1315–1321 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9391-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9391-9