Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35798915›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2022

Implementing PROMS for elective surgery patients: feasibility, response rate, degree of recovery and patient acceptability.

Natasha K Brusco, Victoria Atkinson, Jeffrey Woods, Paul S Myles, Anita Hodge, Cathy Jones, Damien Lloyd, Vincent Rovtar, Amanda M Clifford, Meg E Morris

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06075108 (P-KIDs CARE), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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.

NCT06075108 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

P-KIDs CARE: An Intervention to Address Health Systems Delays to Care for Injured Children in Tanzania

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of UtahRan2024 to 2028Enrolled284ConditionsAccidental Injuries, Global Child Health, Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Public Health System ResearchArmsP-KIDs CARE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Eligibility definitions and response rate accuracy in studies using routinely collected PROMs: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Multinational stakeholder engagement to inform future development and refinement of the EuroQol toddler and infant populations (EQ-TIPS).The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026
    Article
  4. Developing the EuroQol toddler and infant populations (EQ-TIPS) instrument: qualitative analysis of expert views on content validity and conceptual challenges.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Feasibility of implementing a codesigned patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) collection system for older adults in acute and sub-acute hospital settings.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Healthcare consumer acceptability of routine use of the EQ-5D-5L in clinical care: a cross-sectional survey.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  13. Using a multi-stakeholder co-design process to develop a health service organisation-wide patient reported outcome measure collection system.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
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

10 authors.

Natasha K BruscoAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8825-5109
Victoria AtkinsonAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Jeffrey WoodsAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Paul S MylesAnaesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Central Clinical School, Alfred Hospital and Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Anita HodgeAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Cathy JonesAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Damien LloydAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Vincent RovtarHealthscope Limited, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Amanda M CliffordSchool of Allied Health, Health Research Institute, Ageing Research Centre, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Meg E MorrisAcademic and Research Collaborative in Health (ARCH), La Trobe University, Bundoora, VIC, Australia. M.Morris@latrobe.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient reported outcome measures (PROMs) engage patients in co-evaluation of their health and wellbeing outcomes. This study aimed to determine the feasibility, response rate, degree of recovery and patient acceptability of a PROM survey for elective surgery.

methodsWe sampled patients with a broad range of elective surgeries from four major Australian hospitals to evaluate (1) feasibility of the technology used to implement the PROMs across geographically dispersed sites, (2) response rates for automated short message service (SMS) versus email survey delivery formats, (3) the degree of recovery at one and four weeks post-surgery as measured by the Quality of Recovery 15 Item PROM (QoR-15), and (4) patient acceptability of PROMS based on survey and focus group results. Feasibility and acceptability recommendations were then co-designed with stakeholders, based on the data.

resultsOver three months there were 5985 surveys responses from 20,052 surveys (30% response rate). Feasibility testing revealed minor and infrequent technical difficulties in automated email and SMS administration of PROMs prior to surgery. The response rate for the QoR-15 was 34.8% (n = 3108/8919) for SMS and 25.8% (n = 2877/11,133) for email. Mean QoR-15 scores were 122.1 (SD 25.2; n = 1021); 113.1 (SD 27.7; n = 1906) and 123.4 (SD 26.84; n = 1051) for pre-surgery and one and four weeks post-surgery, respectively. One week after surgery, 825 of the 1906 responses (43%) exceeded 122.6 (pre-surgery average), and at four weeks post-surgery, 676 of the 1051 responses (64%) exceeded 122.6 (pre-surgery average). The PROM survey was highly acceptable with 76% (n = 2830/3739) of patients rating 8/10 or above for acceptability. Fourteen patient driven recommendations were then co-developed.

conclusionAdministering PROMS electronically for elective surgery hospital patients was feasible, acceptable and discriminated changes in surgical recovery over time. Patient co-design and involvement provided innovative and practical solutions to implementation and new recommendations for implementation. Trial Registration and Ethical Approval ACTRN12621000298819 (Phase I and II) and ACTRN12621000969864 (Phase III). Ethics approval has been obtained from La Trobe University (Australia) Human Research Ethics Committee (HEC20479). KEY POINTS: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) help to engage patients in understanding their health and wellbeing outcomes. This study aimed to determine how patients feel about completing a PROM survey before and after elective surgery, and to develop a set of recommendations on how to roll out the survey, based on patient feedback. We found that implementing an electronic PROM survey before and after elective surgery was relatively easy to do and was well accepted by patients. Consumer feedback throughout the project enabled co-design of innovative and practical solutions to PROM survey administration.

Indexed as

AcceptabilityCo-designConsumerFeasibilityHospitalImplementation sciencePatient reported outcome measure (PROM)Quality of recoverySafety

Identifiers

PMID35798915
PMCPMC9263014

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.