Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36894797›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2023

PROMs and PREMs in routine perinatal care: mixed methods evaluation of their implementation into integrated obstetric care networks.

Anne L Depla, Bettine Pluut, Marije Lamain-de Ruiter, Anna W Kersten, Inge M Evers, Arie Franx, Mireille N Bekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2023. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Woman-Centered Care: Standardized Outcomes Measure.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023
    Article
  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

7 authors.

Anne L DeplaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4502-2812
Bettine PluutErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7984-8279
Marije Lamain-de RuiterDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5616-5686
Anna W KerstenDepartment of Public Health, Julius Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Inge M EversDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2323-2889
Arie FranxErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8801-5546
Mireille N BekkerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Wilhelmina Children's Hospital, University Medical Centre Utrecht, KE.04.123.1, Lundlaan 6, 3584 EA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. m.n.bekker-3@umcutrecht.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-7372-4291

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the transition towards value-based healthcare, patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROM and PREM) are recommended by international collaborations and government programs to guide clinical practice and quality improvement. For many conditions, using PROM/PREM over the complete continuum of care requires implementation across care organizations and disciplines. Along PROM/PREM implementation in obstetric care networks (OCN), we aimed to evaluate implementation outcomes and the processes influencing these outcomes in the complex context of care networks across the continuum of perinatal care.

methodsThree OCN in the Netherlands implemented PROM/PREM in routine practice, using an internationally developed outcomes set with care professionals and patient advocates. Their aim was to use PROM/PREM results individually to guide patient-specific care decisions and at group-level to improve quality of care. The implementation process was designed following the principles of action research: iteratively planning implementation, action, data generation and reflection to refine subsequent actions, involving both researchers and care professionals. During the one-year implementation period in each OCN, implementation outcomes and processes were evaluated in this mixed-methods study. Data generation (including observation, surveys and focus groups) and analysis were guided by two theoretical implementation frameworks: the Normalization Process Theory and Proctor's taxonomy for implementation outcomes. Qualitative findings were supplemented with survey data to solidify findings in a broader group of care professionals.

resultsCare professionals in OCN found the use of PROM/PREM acceptable and appropriate, recognized their benefits and felt facilitated in their patient-centered goals and vision. However, feasibility for daily practice was low, mainly due to IT issues and time constraints. Hence PROM/PREM implementation did not sustain, but strategies for future PROM/PREM implementation were formulated in all OCN. Processes contributing positively to implementation outcomes were internalization (understand the value) and initiation (driven by key-participants), whereas challenges in relational integration (maintain confidence) and reconfiguration (refine activities) affected implementation negatively.

conclusionAlthough implementation did not sustain, network-broad PROM/PREM use in clinic and quality improvement matched professionals' motivation. This study provides recommendations to implement PROM/PREM meaningfully in practice in ways that support professionals in their drive towards patient-centered care. In order for PROM/PREM to fulfill their potential for value-based healthcare, our work highlights the need for sustainable IT infrastructures, as well as an iterative approach to refine their complex implementation into local contexts.

Indexed as

CognitionPerinatal CareChildDelivery of Health CareFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInfant, NewbornPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPregnancyAction researchImplementation sciencePatient-reported experience measuresPatient-reported outcome measuresPerinatal careValue-based healthcare

Identifiers

PMID36894797
PMCPMC9998006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.