ArticleBMJ open2020
Piloting a web-based systematic collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in chronic heart failure.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- The immaturity of patient engagement in value-based healthcare-A systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- Quality measurement for cardiovascular diseases and cancer in hospital value-based healthcare: a systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Health information systems integrating patient-reported outcomes and experience: a scoping review.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- APPROACH e-PROM system: a user-centered development and evaluation of an electronic patient-reported outcomes measurement system for management of coronary artery disease.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- The association between physical symptoms and self-care behaviours in heart failure patients with inadequate self-care behaviours: a cross-sectional study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2023Article
- Facing the challenges of PROM implementation in Dutch dialysis care: Patients' and professionals' perspectives.PloS one · 2023Article
- Virtual healthcare solutions in heart failure: a literature review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- The implementation, use and impact of patient reported outcome measures in value-based healthcare programmes: A scoping review.PloS one · 2023Article
- Including patient-reported measures in performance evaluation systems: Patient contribution in assessing and improving the healthcare systems.The International journal of health planning and management · 2022Article
- A longitudinal assessment of chronic care pathways in real-life: self-care and outcomes of chronic heart failure patients in Tuscany.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Quality of life and disease experience in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Spain: a mixed-methods study.BMJ open · 2021Observational
- A continuous PREMs and PROMs Observatory for elective hip and knee arthroplasty: study protocol.BMJ open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the feasibility of a digital and continuous collection and reporting of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) for chronic heart failure (CHF).
designA single-site pilot study was settled for evaluating the feasibility of the intervention, both using qualitative and quantitative data (ie, workshop, surveys).
settingThe pilot has been implemented in a Tuscan specialised hospital (Italy).
participants162 patients were involved. Inclusion criteria were: a previous diagnosis of HF, age ≥18 years, absence of cognitive impairment or active tumours, ability to provide informed consent to study participation.
interventionThe continuous collection and reporting of PROMs and PREMs has been designed and implemented in 2018. PREMs questionnaires for patients were developed, while Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-12 was used for assessing PROMs. Questionnaires are administered at specific time points: discharge; 30 days, 7 and 12 months after the discharge. Enrolment of patients, administration and real-time reporting of questionnaires are carried on through a digital platform. OUTCOME MEASURES: Enrolment, response and drop-out rates were considered to assess the feasibility of the intervention. Qualitative data were collected during meetings and workshops with health workers. The representativeness of the recruited sample with respect to the population characteristics was also evaluated.
resultsThe system has been successfully implemented during 2018. Response rates have been consistently above 50%, demonstrating patients' transversal willingness to participate. All the involved stakeholders acknowledged the feasibility of the design. The recruited sample is significantly different in terms of age and educational level compared with the overall population characteristics.
conclusionIt is possible to run a web-based systematic collection and reporting system for CHF patient-reported data. Systematic collection and reporting of PROMs and PREMs data allows professionals to increasingly assume CHF patient perspective in their daily work. Limitations will be used to improve the system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.