F4transkript version 6 pro#
Recently, research on PRO implementation focuses on electronic real-time collection investigating the potentials and challenges of new technologies. The graphical presentation of PRO has also been subject of interest in several investigations. Examples for facilitators include choosing PROs that are relevant to clinicians, providing feedback to clinicians on patients’ scores on an easily accessible format and educating clinicians on PRO use. support PRO implementation administratively or PROs being not connected to existing workflow. Identified barriers to implementing PROs include among other the clinicians’ belief of limited capacities to address PROs, limited resources in organizations to e.g. Barriers and facilitators for clinicians’ usage of PRO have been identified to be of primarily technical and behavioral nature. To date, however, PROs are still rarely used in routine oncological care in Germany.
There has therefore been increasing interest in integrating PROs into routine oncological practice in order to improve clinical care. PRO monitoring has also been associated with an improved quality of life and longer survival times, as it assists with treatment planning and can call attention to early disease progression.
PROs have been shown to facilitate interprofessional communications, as well as patient–clinician communications, and to support clinicians in their assessment of oncological patients’ symptoms by detecting underestimated side effects. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) appear to have a strong potential to contribute to patient-centered oncological care. Therefore, existing structures and processes in the certified colorectal cancer centers, as well as lessons learned from the literature on the implementation of PROs monitoring individual patients need to be taken into account. These findings indicate how PROs used for quality management purposes may also be used for the management of individual patients. Inhibiting and facilitating factors of an organizational and technical nature were identified. DiscussionĬlinicians had quite a positive attitude toward PROs and recognized their added value. Facilitating factors for the use of PROs in clinical routine work that were identified included access via electronic patient records, implementation of coordinating structures for PRO processes in the center, clear PRO reports that are easy to interpret, and measurements at relevant time points. Identified inhibiting factors for the use of PROs in clinical routine work were effortful access to PRO reports, lacking coordinating structures, time delays and time points of measurements as well as redundancy with other instruments. The interviewees were not using PRO in their routine clinical work, but they recognized its added value and pointed out potential example uses. The data was analyzed using a content-analysis approach. This analysis evaluated whether and how PROs that are primarily collected for quality management/benchmarking reasons could also be used for the management of individual patients. The interviewees were clinicians (physicians, nurses, psycho-oncologist and physician assistant) who care for colorectal cancer patients. Out of 103 centers that participated in a multicentric PRO quality management and benchmarking program in Germany, twelve oncological health-care providers from eight certified colorectal cancer centers were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. The analysis follows an exploratory approach. This content analysis identified factors that may inhibit or facilitate the additional use of PROMs for individual patient management. Currently, PROs are being used as performance measures in colorectal cancer centers in Germany. To date, however, PROs have rarely been implemented in Germany. There has been increasing interest in integrating patient-reported outcomes (PROs) into routine oncological practice.
0 kommentar(er)
