The routine collection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for long-term conditions in primary care: a cohort survey
Please note: this is a legacy publication from CPEC (formely PSSRU at LSE).
BMJ Open 4 2 e003968
Available online: 21 February 2014
Abstract
Objectives To evaluate the feasibility of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for long-term conditions (LTCs) in primary care Design A cohort postal survey conducted from September 2010 to April 2012 Setting Primary care practices (n=33) in London and the North-West of England Participants 4484 patients with a diagnosis of either asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, epilepsy, heart failure or stroke were sent a survey at baseline Main outcome measures Response rates for the baseline and follow-up surveys, and the EQ-5D, a generic patient-reported outcome measure. Results The baseline survey achieved a response rate of 38.4% (n=1721) and the follow-up 71.5% (n=1136). Response rates varied by LTC. Little change was found in health-related quality of life (-0.001 for the total sample), as assessed by the EQ-5D, between the baseline and follow-up surveys. Conclusions The response rate to the baseline survey was similar to that of other general practice surveys. It would be desirable to improve those by making the invitation to self-reports of health-related quality of life more engaging for patients. Current UK policy aims to assess health service performance in LTCs by means of using PROMs. The limited change in EQ-5D scores raises questions about optimal indicators for LTCs and appropriate time-lines for assessment. ?
Objectives To evaluate the feasibility of using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for long-term conditions (LTCs) in primary care Design A cohort postal survey conducted from September 2010 to April 2012 Setting Primary care practices (n=33) in London and the North-West of England Participants 4484 patients with a diagnosis of either asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, epilepsy, heart failure or stroke were sent a survey at baseline Main outcome measures Response rates for the baseline and follow-up surveys, and the EQ-5D, a generic patient-reported outcome measure. Results The baseline survey achieved a response rate of 38.4% (n=1721) and the follow-up 71.5% (n=1136). Response rates varied by LTC. Little change was found in health-related quality of life (-0.001 for the total sample), as assessed by the EQ-5D, between the baseline and follow-up surveys. Conclusions The response rate to the baseline survey was similar to that of other general practice surveys. It would be desirable to improve those by making the invitation to self-reports of health-related quality of life more engaging for patients. Current UK policy aims to assess health service performance in LTCs by means of using PROMs. The limited change in EQ-5D scores raises questions about optimal indicators for LTCs and appropriate time-lines for assessment. ?