Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE:
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient's perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives.

METHODS:
PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development.

RESULTS:
24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text.

CONCLUSIONS:
Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient's perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1369-1380
Number of pages12
JournalQuality of Life Research
Volume27
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2018

Keywords

  • Coronary artery disease
  • Patient-reported outcome measures
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Quality of life

Cite this

@article{572e3a3d17d5477abbe1d5cb365852bb,
title = "Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation",
abstract = "PURPOSE:Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient's perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives.METHODS:PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development.RESULTS:24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text.CONCLUSIONS:Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient's perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.",
keywords = "Coronary artery disease, Patient-reported outcome measures, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Quality of life",
author = "Peeters, {Geeske M.E.E.} and Anna Barker and Jason Talevski and Ilana Ackerman and Ayton, {Darshini R.} and Reid, {Christopher M.} and Evans, {Susan M.} and Stoelwinder, {Johannes U.} and McNeil, {John J.}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11136-018-1795-6",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "1369--1380",
journal = "Quality of Life Research",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation

AU - Peeters, Geeske M.E.E.

AU - Barker, Anna

AU - Talevski, Jason

AU - Ackerman, Ilana

AU - Ayton, Darshini R.

AU - Reid, Christopher M.

AU - Evans, Susan M.

AU - Stoelwinder, Johannes U.

AU - McNeil, John J.

PY - 2018/5/1

Y1 - 2018/5/1

N2 - PURPOSE:Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient's perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives.METHODS:PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development.RESULTS:24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text.CONCLUSIONS:Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient's perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.

AB - PURPOSE:Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient's perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives.METHODS:PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development.RESULTS:24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text.CONCLUSIONS:Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient's perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.

KW - Coronary artery disease

KW - Patient-reported outcome measures

KW - Percutaneous coronary intervention

KW - Quality of life

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041120788&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-018-1795-6

DO - 10.1007/s11136-018-1795-6

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 1369

EP - 1380

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 5

ER -