Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36790557›Full record

ArticleThe patient2023

Improving Outcome-Driven Care in Multiple Myeloma Using Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Qualitative Evaluation Study.

Christine Bennink, Marleen de Mul, Marjolein van der Klift, Annemiek Broijl, Lidwine Tick, Eva de Jongh, Mirjam Garvelink, Dorien Lobbezoo, Pieter Sonneveld, Jan Hazelzet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 'So Let's Go On Like This?'-Shared Decision-Making and the Use of Outcome Information in Routine Care Management for People With Multiple Sclerosis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Christine BenninkDepartment of Haematology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. c.bennink@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID 0000-0001-8700-8598
Marleen de MulErasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marjolein van der KliftDepartment of Haematology, Amphia, Breda, The Netherlands.
Annemiek BroijlDepartment of Haematology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Lidwine TickDepartment of Haematology, Maxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Eva de JonghDepartment of Haematology, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Mirjam GarvelinkDepartment of Haematology, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Dorien LobbezooDepartment of Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Pieter SonneveldDepartment of Haematology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan HazelzetDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveMultiple myeloma is an incurable disease with a considerable illness and treatment burden, which negatively impacts patients' quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of multiple myeloma care in five Dutch hospitals, related to the three objectives of outcome-driven care, which are defined as (1) providing information for shared decision making in individual patient care, (2) supporting the learning capacity of healthcare professionals and healthcare institutions through benchmarking and (3) developing outcome-driven and patient-centred contracting by health insurers.

methodsIn this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews about experiences with patient-reported outcomes were conducted with patients, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders 2 years after implementation. Data were thematically analysed, and emerging topics were clustered around the three objectives of outcome-driven care.

resultsA total of 46 interviews were held (15 with patients, 16 with professionals and 15 with other stakeholders) that showed patients with multiple myeloma were willing to complete patient-reported outcomes, although integration of patient-reported outcomes in shared decision making fell short in clinical practice. Aggregated patient-reported outcomes were considered important for improving quality of care; however, data collection and data exchange are hindered by privacy legislation, limitations of IT systems and a lack of data standards. Patient-reported outcomes were expected to contribute to cost-effective multiple myeloma treatment, yet outcome-driven reimbursement is still lacking.

conclusionsOutcome-driven multiple myeloma care using patient-reported outcomes is feasible, provided that (1) patient-reported outcomes and shared decision making are integrated into clinical practice, (2) legal and technical obstacles hindering data collection are removed and (3) health insurers adjust their reimbursement plans to facilitate outcome-driven care.

Indexed as

Multiple MyelomaDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQualitative ResearchQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID36790557
PMCPMC9930010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.