Impact of an Enhanced Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) Strategy on PROM Completion Rates

Impact of an Enhanced Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) Strategy on PROM Completion Rates, Decision Support, and Patient Experience: A Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Study

in clinical practice has been curbed by issues related to the variability in use of these tools for decision-making, and universally poor completion rates over time. Patients may not see the relevance of responding to questions about their health, and the results may not be reviewed by the clinician or presented and visualized with the patient. The questions may seem impersonal (e.g. too general and not directly assessing their individual goals, motivations, aspirations), irrelevant (e.g., asking about symptoms of depression when a person is seeking musculoskeletal specialty care) and insensitive (e.g., asking about sensitive subjects at the outset thereby disengaging the individual), and redundant or awkward (e.g., presenting questions that seem very similar or administered in strange orders). Finally, PROMs may also confer some burden (e.g., long PROM questionnaires often used for research may be unnecessarily burdensome for patient care), and provide logistical challenges (e.g., difficulties in administering the tools at the right time points), adding to a poor patient experience.

Study Overview

• Status: Recruiting
• Conditions: PROM
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy

Detailed Description

The investigator sought to assess the impact of an enhanced and more personalized PROM strategy to overcome these barriers by providing i) a primer ahead of PROMs administration, ii) simple 3-part survey capturing capability, comfort, and calm, iii) a short distress and misconception survey, iv) goal setting question, v) summary sheet of PRO scores, and vi) a commitment intervention. Patients will subsequently be requested to complete the CollaboRATE survey, JSPPE survey, and questions about their experience in relation to the new format of surveys (only if they were in the intervention group) before receiving a text message reminder around 6-weeks followed by a set of deprioritization questions and the 3-part capability, comfort, and calm survey.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Estimated): 200
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Sina Ramtin; Phone Number: 5124955067; Email: sina.ramtin@austin.utexas.edu

Study Locations

• United States
  • Texas
    • Austin, Texas, United States, 78701
      • Recruiting
      • University of Texas Health Austin
      • Contact: Sina Ramtin; Phone Number: 512-495-5067; Email: sina.ramtin@austin.utexas.edu

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

All new patients English and Spanish speakers

Exclusion criteria:

Cognitive deficiency precluding PROM completion Language other than English or Spanish

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Basic Science
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
• Masking: Single

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Intervention Group; Patients randomized to intervention receive both usual Patient reported outcome measure (PROM) and new PROMs strategy (on the technology platform for English speakers and on REDCap/Qualtrix for Spanish Speakers) done after rooming.	Other: Usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy; Patients randomized to intervention receive both usual PROMs and new PROMs strategy
No Intervention: Control group; Patients go through the registration process which includes PROMs completion using Ipads. Enrolled in the room at the end of the visit.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Completion of 3-survey patient-reported outcome measure at 6-week follow-up via Text	We will assess the completion of 3-survey patient-reported outcome measure at 6-week follow-up via Text.	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks
Completion of answered text	We will assess the completion response rate.	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks
Completion of deprioritization options 1 or 2 at 6-week follow-up via text or email	"1 = I got what I needed" "2 = I didn't receive anything useful" "3 = I'm still receiving care"	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks
Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy	The Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy includes five 7-point scale questions and higher scores indicated greater perceived clinician empathy.	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University of Texas at Austin
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: David Ring, MD, Professor of orthopedic surgery at The university of Texas at Austin

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): September 1, 2023
• Primary Completion (Estimated): September 1, 2024
• Study Completion (Estimated): September 1, 2024

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 28, 2023
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: October 5, 2023
• First Posted (Actual): October 11, 2023

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): October 11, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: October 5, 2023
• Last Verified: October 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Pregnancy Complications; Obstetric Labor Complications; Female Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy Complications; Urogenital Diseases; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture
• Other Study ID Numbers: STUDY00001696

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No