Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32320141›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2020

Patient-reported experience measures are essential to improving quality of care for chronic wounds: An international qualitative study.

Lee Squitieri, Elena Tsangaris, Anne F Klassen, Emiel L W G van Haren, Lotte Poulsen, Natasha M Longmire, Tert C van Alphen, Maarten M Hoogbergen, Jens Ahm Sorensen, Karen Cross and 1 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The Role of Communication in Managing Chronic Lower Limb Wounds.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Lee SquitieriRobert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Elena TsangarisDepartment of Surgery, Patient Reported Outcome, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Anne F KlassenDepartment of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Emiel L W G van HarenDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Lotte PoulsenDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Natasha M LongmireDepartment of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Tert C van AlphenDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Maarten M HoogbergenDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Jens Ahm SorensenDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Karen CrossDivision of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrea L PusicDepartment of Surgery, Patient Reported Outcome, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional quality measures for chronic wounds have focused on objective outcomes that are challenging to risk adjust, lack patient input, and have limited ability to inform quality improvement interventions. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) provide information from the patient perspective regarding health care quality and have potential to improve patient-centredness, increase care efficiency, and generate actionable data for quality improvement. The purpose of this study was to understand patient experiences and health care processes that impact quality of care among patients with chronic wounds. Sixty patients at least 18 years of age with various wound aetiologies were recruited from Canada, Denmark, The Netherlands, and the United States as part of a larger phase 1 qualitative study to develop a patient-reported outcome measure for chronic wounds (WOUND-Q). All patients had a chronic wound for at least 3 months, were fluent in their native speaking language, and able to participate in a one-on-one semi-structured interview. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Interpretive description was used to identify recurrent themes relating to patient experience and quality of care. We identified five domains (care coordination, establishing/obtaining care, information delivery, patient-provider interaction, and treatment delivery) and 21 sub-domains (access to patient information, interdisciplinary communication, encounter efficiency, provider availability, specialist referral, staff professionalism, travel/convenience, modality, reciprocity, understandability/consistency, accountability, continuity, credentials, rapport, appropriateness, complication management, continuity, environment/setting, equipment and supply needs, expectation, and patient-centred) as potential opportunities to measure and improve quality of care in the chronic wound population. PREMs for chronic wounds represent an important opportunity to engage patients and longitudinally assess quality across clinical settings and providers. Future research should focus on developing PREMs to complement traditional objective and patient-reported outcome measures for chronic wounds.

Indexed as

InternationalityPractice Guidelines as TopicAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCanadaChronic DiseaseDenmarkFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPatient SatisfactionQualitative Researchexperienceinternationalpatient-reportedqualitativewounds

Identifiers

PMID32320141
PMCPMC7949344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.