Format

Send to

Choose Destination
  • This is a preview / test site. Please update your PubMed URL to pubmed.gov.
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Value Health. 2015 Jun;18(4):493-504. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.018. Epub 2015 May 21.

Methods for Developing Patient-Reported Outcome-Based Performance Measures (PRO-PMs).

Author information

  • 1University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. Electronic address: ebasch@med.unc.edu.
  • 2University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, USA.
  • 3University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
  • 4Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  • 5Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (Patient Representative), USA.
  • 6Parkinson Pipeline Project, Washington, DC (Patient Representative), USA.
  • 7Research Advocacy Network, Plano, TX (Patient Representative), USA.
  • 8London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, England.
  • 9American Medical Association, Chicago, IL, USA.
  • 10Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To recommend methods for assessing quality of care via patient-reported outcome-based performance measures (PRO-PMs) of symptoms, functional status, and quality of life.

METHODS:

A Technical Expert Panel was assembled by the American Medical Association-convened Physician Consortium for Performance Improvement. An environmental scan and structured literature review were conducted to identify quality programs that integrate PRO-PMs. Key methodological considerations in the design, implementation, and analysis of these PRO-PM data were systematically identified. Recommended methods for addressing each identified consideration were developed on the basis of published patient-reported outcome (PRO) standards and refined through public comment. Literature review focused on programs using PROs to assess performance and on PRO guidance documents.

RESULTS:

Thirteen PRO programs and 10 guidance documents were identified. Nine best practices were developed, including the following: provide a rationale for measuring the outcome and for using a PRO-PM; describe the context of use; select a measure that is meaningful to patients with adequate psychometric properties; provide evidence of the measure's sensitivity to differences in care; address missing data and risk adjustment; and provide a framework for implementation, interpretation, dissemination, and continuous refinement.

CONCLUSION:

Methods for integrating PROs into performance measurement are available.

KEYWORDS:

PRO-PM; patient-reported outcome; performance measurement; quality

PMID:
26091604
DOI:
10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.018
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center