Toward patient-centered care: a systematic review of how to ask questions that matter to patients

Alicia Rosenzveig, Ayse Kuspinar, Stella S Daskalopoulou, Nancy E Mayo, Alicia Rosenzveig, Ayse Kuspinar, Stella S Daskalopoulou, Nancy E Mayo

Abstract

Clinicians rarely systematically document how their patients are feeling. Single item questions have been created to help obtain and monitor patient relevant outcomes, a requirement of patient-centered care.The objective of this review was to identify the psychometric properties for single items related to health aspects that only the patient can report (health perception, stress, pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and sleep quality). A secondary objective was to create a bank of valid single items in a format suitable for use in clinical practice.Data sources used were Ovid MEDLINE (1948 to May 2013), EMBASE (1960 to May 2013), and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1960 to May 2013).For the study appraisal, 24 articles were systematically reviewed. A critical appraisal tool was used to determine the quality of articles.Items were included if they were tested as single items, related to the construct, measured symptom severity, and referred to recent experiences.The psychometric properties of each item were extracted. Validity and reliability was observed for the items when compared with clinical interviews or well-validated measures. The items for general health perception and anxiety showed weak to moderate strength correlations (r = 0.28-0.70). The depression and stress items showed good area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85 and 0.73-0.88, respectively, with high sensitivity and specificity. The fatigue item demonstrated a strong effect size and correlations up to r = 0.80. The 2 pain items and the sleep item showed high reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.85, κ = 0.76, ICC = 0.9, respectively).The search targeted articles about psychometric properties of single items. Articles that did not have this as the primary objective may have been missed. Furthermore, not all the articles included had the complete set of psychometric properties for each item.There is sufficient evidence to warrant the use of single items in clinical practice. They are simple, easily implemented, and efficient and thus provide an alternative to multi-item questionnaires. To facilitate their use, the top performing items were combined into the visual analog health states, which provides a quick profile of how the patient is feeling. This information would be useful for regular long-term monitoring.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Flowchart of the literature search.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
How are you today? Visual analog health states.

References

    1. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. Washington, DC: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; 2013.
    1. Greenhalgh J, Meadows K. The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review. J Eval Clin Pract. 1999;5:401–416.
    1. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4:293–307.
    1. Velikova G, Wright P. Individual patient monitoring. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed New York: Oxford University Press; 2005:291–306.
    1. Bennett AV, Jensen RE, Basch E. Electronic patient-reported outcome systems in oncology clinical practice. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:337–347.
    1. Snyder CF, Herman JM, White SM, et al. When using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice, the measure matters: a randomized controlled trial. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10:e299–e306.
    1. Rose M, Bezjak A. Logistics of collecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical practice: an overview and practical examples. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:125–136.
    1. Paterson C. Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. BMJ. 1996;312:1016–1020.
    1. Greenhalgh J, Long AF, Flynn R. The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory? Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:833–843.
    1. Higginson IJ, Carr AJ. Measuring quality of life: using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. BMJ. 2001;322:1297–1300.
    1. Joyce CRB, McGee HM, O’Boyle CA. Individual Quality of Life: Approaches to Conceptualisation and Assessment. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Taylor & Francis; 1999.
    1. Fayers P, Hays R. Evaluating mult-item scales. Assessing Quality of Life in Clinical Trials. 2nd ed New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.
    1. Greenhalgh J. The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res. 2009;18:115–123.
    1. Chlan LL. Relationship between two anxiety instruments in patients receiving mechanical ventilatory support. J Adv Nurs. 2004;48:493–499.
    1. DeSalvo KB, Fisher WP, Tran K, et al. Assessing measurement properties of two single-item general health measures. Qual Life Res. 2006;15:191–201.
    1. McKinley S, Stein-Parbury J, Chehelnabi A, et al. Assessment of anxiety in intensive care patients by using the Faces Anxiety Scale. Am J Crit Care. 2004;13:146–152.
    1. McKinley S, Madronio C. Validity of the Faces Anxiety Scale for the assessment of state anxiety in intensive care patients not receiving mechanical ventilation. J Psychosom Res. 2008;64:503–507.
    1. Bowling A. Just one question: if one question works, why ask several? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59:342–345.
    1. McKinley S, Coote K, Stein-Parbury J. Development and testing of a Faces Scale for the assessment of anxiety in critically ill patients. J Adv Nurs. 2003;41:73–79.
    1. Surti B, Spiegel B, Ippoliti A, et al. Assessing health status in inflammatory bowel disease using a novel single-item numeric rating scale. Dig Dis Sci. 2013;58:1313–1321.
    1. United States Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry on patient-reported outcome measures—use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Federal Registry. 2009;74:65132–65133.
    1. Chalut DS, Ducharme FM, Davis GM. The Preschool Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM): a responsive index of acute asthma severity. J Pediatr. 2000;137:762–768.
    1. Mattis S. Dementia Rating Scale. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1988.
    1. Cameron JI, Cheung AM, Streiner DL, et al. Factor structure and reliability of the brain impairment behavior scale. J Neurosci Nurs. 2008;40:40–47.
    1. Bogousslavsky J. William Feinberg lecture 2002: emotions, mood, and behavior after stroke. Stroke. 2003;34:1046–1050.
    1. Guyatt GH, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ, et al. The 6-minute walk: a new measure of exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart failure. Can Med Assoc J. 1985;132:919–923.
    1. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel lndex. Md St Med J. 1965;14:61–65.
    1. Cella DF, Perry SW. Reliability and concurrent validity of three visual-analogue mood scales. Psychol Rep. 1986;59:827–833.
    1. Revicki DA, Kawata AK, Harnam N, et al. Predicting EuroQol (EQ-5D) scores from the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) global items and domain item banks in a United States sample. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:783–791.
    1. Mayo NE, Hum S, Kuspinar A. Methods and measures: what’s new for MS? Mult Scler. 2013;19:709–713.
    1. Brink Y, Louw QA. Clinical instruments: reliability and validity critical appraisal. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18:1126–1132.
    1. Bulli F, Miccinesi G, Maruelli A, et al. The measure of psychological distress in cancer patients: the use of Distress Thermometer in the Oncological Rehabilitation Center of Florence. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17:771–779.
    1. Goebel S, Mehdorn HM. Measurement of psychological distress in patients with intracranial tumours: the NCCN distress thermometer. J Neurooncol. 2011;104:357–364.
    1. Gunnarsdottir S, Thorvaldsdottir GH, Fridriksdottir N, et al. The psychometric properties of the Icelandic version of the distress thermometer and problem list. Psychooncology. 2012;21:730–736.
    1. Hegel MT, Collins ED, Kearing S, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the Distress Thermometer for depression in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. Psychooncology. 2008;17:556–560.
    1. Jacobsen PB, Donovan KA, Trask PC, et al. Screening for psychologic distress in ambulatory cancer patients. Cancer. 2005;103:1494–1502.
    1. Keir ST, Calhoun-Eagan RD, Swartz JJ, et al. Screening for distress in patients with brain cancer using the NCCN’s rapid screening measure. Psychooncology. 2008;17:621–625.
    1. Thekkumpurath P, Venkateswaran C, Kumar M, et al. Screening for psychological distress in palliative care: performance of touch screen questionnaires compared with semistructured psychiatric interview. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009;38:597–605.
    1. Akechi T, Okuyama T, Sugawara Y, et al. Screening for depression in terminally ill cancer patients in Japan. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2006;31:5–12.
    1. Chochinov HM, Wilson KG, Enns M, et al. “Are you depressed?” Screening for depression in the terminally ill. Am J Psychiatry. 1997;154:674–676.
    1. Kawase E, Karasawa K, Shimotsu S, et al. Evaluation of a one- question interview for depression in a radiation oncology department in Japan. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2006;28:321–322.
    1. Ayalon L, Goldfracht M, Bech P. ‘Do you think you suffer from depression?’ Reevaluating the use of a single item question for the screening of depression in older primary care patients. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2010;25:497–502.
    1. Jesse DE, Graham M. Are you often sad and depressed? Brief measures to identify women at risk for depression in pregnancy. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2005;30:40–45.
    1. Watkins CL, Lightbody CE, Sutton CJ, et al. Evaluation of a single-item screening tool for depression after stroke: a cohort study. Clin Rehabil. 2007;21:846–852.
    1. De Jong MM, An K, McKinley S, et al. Using a 0–10 scale for assessment of anxiety in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2005;24:139–146.
    1. Elliot D. Comparison of three instruments for measuring patient anxiety in a coronary care unit. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 1993;9:195–200.
    1. Schwartz AL, Meek PM, Nail LM, et al. Measurement of fatigue: determining minimally important clinical differences. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:239–244.
    1. van Hooff ML, Geurts SA, Kompier MA, et al. “How fatigued do you currently feel?” Convergent and discriminant validity of a single-item fatigue measure. J Occup Health. 2007;49:224–234.
    1. ten Klooster PM, Vlaar AP, Taal E, et al. The validity and reliability of the graphic rating scale and verbal rating scale for measuring pain across cultures: a study in Egyptian and Dutch women with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin J Pain. 2006;22:827–830.
    1. Rohrer JE, Herman DC, Merry SP, et al. Validity of overall self-rated health as an outcome measure in small samples: a pilot study involving a case series. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15:366–369.
    1. Cappelleri JC, Bushmakin AG, McDermott AM, et al. Psychometric properties of a single-item scale to assess sleep quality among individuals with fibromyalgia. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009;7:54.
    1. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Gibbons E, et al. Inter-rater agreement and reliability of the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments) checklist. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:82.
    1. de Vet H, Terwee C, Mokkink L, et al. Measurement in Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
    1. Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford P, et al. Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures: A Guide to Enhanced Clinical Decision Making. 2nd ed Toronto, ON: Canadian Physiotherapy Association; 2002.
    1. Feldt L, Brennan R. Reliability. In: Linn R, ed. Educational Measurement. Pheonix: Oryx Press; 1993;105–146.
    1. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:155–159.
    1. Schneeweiss S, Seeger JD, Maclure M, et al. Performance of comorbidity scores to control for confounding in epidemiologic studies using claims data. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154:854–864.
    1. Landis JR, Koch GG. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 1977;33:363–374.
    1. Ware Jr. JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey. Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220–233.
    1. Freyd M. The Graphic Rating Scale. J Educ Psychol. 1923;14:83–102.
    1. Hayes M, Patterson D. Experimental development of the graphic rating method. Psychol Bull. 1921;18:98–113.
    1. Unden AL, Andreasson A, Elofsson S, et al. Inflammatory cytokines, behaviour and age as determinants of self-rated health in women. Clin Sci (Lond). 2007;112:363–373.
    1. Christian LM, Glaser R, Porter K, et al. Poorer self-rated health is associated with elevated inflammatory markers among older adults. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011;36:1495–1504.
    1. Tanno K, Ohsawa M, Onoda T, et al. Poor self-rated health is significantly associated with elevated C-reactive protein levels in women, but not in men, in the Japanese general population. J Psychosom Res. 2012;73:225–231.
    1. Jylha M, Volpato S, Guralnik JM. Self-rated health showed a graded association with frequently used biomarkers in a large population sample. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:465–471.
    1. Kahn MW. Etiquette-based medicine. New Engl J Med. 2008;358:1988–1989.
    1. Block L, Hutzler L, Habicht R, et al. Do internal medicine interns practice etiquette-based communication? A critical look at the inpatient encounter. J Hosp Med. 2013;8:631–634.
    1. Fogarty LA, Curbow BA, Wingard JR, et al. Can 40 seconds of compassion reduce patient anxiety? J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:371–379.
    1. Griffith CH, III, Wilson JF, Langer S, et al. House staff nonverbal communication skills and standardized patient satisfaction. J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18:170–174.
    1. Tackett S, Tad-y D, Rios R, et al. Appraising the practice of etiquette-based medicine in the inpatient setting. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;7:908–913.
    1. Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13:227–236.
    1. Ahles TA, Ruckdeschel JC, Blanchard EB. Cancer-related pain—II. Assessment with visual analogue scales. J Psychosom Res. 1984;28:121–124.
    1. Downie WW, Leatham PA, Rhind VM, et al. Studies with pain rating scales. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37:378–381.
    1. Seymour RA. The use of pain scales in assessing the efficacy of analgesics in post-operative dental pain. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1982;23:441–444.
    1. Folstein MF, Luria R. Reliability, validity, and clinical application of the visual analogue mood scale. Psychol Med. 1973;3:479–486.
    1. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, et al. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain. 1983;17:45–56.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera