Dataset Information

Use of patient reported experience measure and patient reported outcome measures to evaluate differences in surgical or non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) in humeral shaft fractures managed with or without surgery against patient reported outcome measures (PROMs).

Methods

Adult patients treated for a humeral shaft fracture between June 2015 and August 2017 were included in non-surgery and surgery (early and late surgery) groups. The PREM questionnaire was based on patient and clinician feedback obtained during focus groups and was posted to patients. PROMs included the short form-12 (SF-12) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, stiffness, function and satisfaction.

Results

Eighty-one patients responded, 54 patients were treated in a brace and 27 with surgery (13 early, 14 late). There was moderate positive correlation between PREM and VAS satisfaction and function and moderate negative correlation with VAS pain and stiffness. There was also moderate positive correlation between PREM and SF-12 mental and weak positive correlation with SF-12 physical. The late surgery group had poorer PREMs (expectations, p = 0.002 and friends & family test, p = 0.0001) and PROMs (VAS satisfaction, p = 0.005) compared to the early surgery group.

Conclusions

PREMs can be used in conjunction with PROMs to improve the patient's quality of care and as a means of identifying, at an early stage, those patients not doing well and to offer surgery.

SUBMITTER: Athanatos L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10078821 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Use of patient reported experience measure and patient reported outcome measures to evaluate differences in surgical or non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures.

Athanatos Lambros L Sandean Darren P DP Burgula Maitravaarun M Lee Bethan B Pandey Radhakant R Singh Harvinder P HP

Shoulder & elbow 20211026 2

<h4>Background</h4>The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) in humeral shaft fractures managed with or without surgery against patient reported outcome measures (PROMs).<h4>Methods</h4>Adult patients treated for a humeral shaft fracture between June 2015 and August 2017 were included in non-surgery and surgery (early and late surgery) groups. The PREM questionnaire was based on patient and clinician feedback obtained during focus groups and wa ...[more]

PMID: 37035617

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported experience measures are tools used to gather feedback from patients about their experiences of healthcare services, which are crucial for improving the quality of care from the perspective of patients. The aim of this systematic review was to identify surgery-related patient-reported experience measures, evaluate their psychometric properties, appraise and identify recurring themes within qualitative studies on surgical care, and identify potential bias in study designs.MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database, and the Cochrane Library, along with clinical trial registries, were searched for articles on surgery-specific patient-reported experience measures and qualitative studies on patients' experiences up to 21 September 2023. Manual coding was used for theme identification and grouping based on thematic synthesis principles. Joanna Briggs Institute tools were used for risk-of-bias assessment and a revised version of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments checklist was used for appraisal of patient-reported experience measures.ResultsA total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria, identifying seven patient-reported experience measures. Key patient experience themes included communication with healthcare providers, care setting environment, overall satisfaction, pre-admission information, coordination of care, waiting time, surgical experience, post-surgery support, impact on life, and healthcare information and technology management. Internal consistency was reported adequately across all patient-reported experience measures. Other psychometric properties were questionable.ConclusionInadequate psychometric evaluations of some patient-reported experience measures in surgery highlight the need for rigorous validity and reliability assessments. Identification of thematic patterns emphasizes the importance of ongoing research to explore patients' experiences in surgical contexts. Clinical staff can use this information to enhance communication, reduce waiting time, and improve the overall patient experience by addressing highlighted areas.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough most humeral nonunions are successfully treated with a single procedure, some humeral nonunions are more difficult to heal and require multiple procedures. Current literature does not provide evidence describing how the prognosis for surgical repair in patients who develop humeral diaphyseal nonunions may be affected by initial operative versus nonoperative treatment.Questions/purposesThe purpose of this study was to assess whether operative versus nonoperative treatment of acute humeral shaft fractures impacts outcome of subsequent repairs of humeral nonunions (NU) including the need for additional surgery and a comparison of pain relief (Visual Analogue Scale for pain) and functional outcome (Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment).MethodsThirty-four patients with humeral shaft nonunion were evaluated of which 15 patients had been treated operatively (OF), and 19 patients had been treated nonoperatively (NO) for their initial humerus shaft fracture. All patients underwent plating with autogenous bone graft or allograft ± bone morphogenic protein (BMP) 2 or 7 as their final NU repair surgery prior to healing. We compared functional outcome and pain for both cohorts and determined risk factors for requiring more than 1 nonunion repair surgery.ResultsThe mean time of final follow-up was 14.7 ± 10.4 months. Thirty-three of 34 NUs (97.1%) healed. Patients who underwent OF of their original fracture were more likely to require more than 1 NU repair surgery (66.7 vs. 0%, p < 0.01). Of the 15 patients who underwent initial OF, 33.0% required 1 NU surgery, 33.0% required 2 NU surgeries, and 33.0% required 3 NU surgeries. Patients who underwent initial OF were more likely to require >6 months to achieve union (40.0 vs. 10.5%, p = 0.04). At final follow-up, there was no difference in functional outcome or pain scores. Initial OF was the only independent predictor of needing more than 1 NU repair surgery (OR 70.1 CI 2.8-1762.3) to achieve healing.ConclusionHumeral shaft nonunions following initial operative fixation of the index fracture is more resistant to achieving union when compared to nonunions forming after initial nonoperative treatment. When final healing is achieved, there is no difference in function or pain.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study was performed to determine (1) the incidence of humeral shaft fractures within the Medicare noncancer population, (2) the trends in utilization of humeral shaft fixation techniques by plate-and-screw devices and intramedullary nails, (3) differences in procedure times, and (4) the outcomes of individuals as measured by rate of secondary operations and 1-year mortality.Design/settingRetrospective comparative cohort analysis. A cancer-free Medicare part B claims sample derived from a 5% sample from the years 1993 to 2007 was analyzed.Patients/interventionOur cohorts were generated by diagnostic and procedural codes for humeral shaft fractures.Main outcome measurementThe incidence of humeral shaft fracture and trend in operative fixation were evaluated for all years of data. Surgical times were assessed by anesthesia Current Procedural Terminology codes. Outcomes and complications were assessed by Current Procedural Terminology codes. The proportion of individuals experiencing complications and 1-year mortality were compared by proportion hazards.ResultsWe identified 1385 claims for humeral shaft fractures over 15 years, with an adjusted rate of between 12.0 and 23.4 fractures per 100,000 beneficiaries. We identified 511 individuals who received surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures, 451 of whom had complete 1-year follow-up data. Nail fixation was more prevalent than plate fixation most years and had shorter anesthesia time by 27.1 minutes (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the complication rates between the 2 groups as measured by incidence of secondary operations and 1-year mortality.ConclusionsIntramedullary nails are used for the majority of operative humeral shaft fractures among Medicare beneficiaries. Nailing has a shorter mean operative time. The 2 surgical techniques had no significant differences in terms of risk of secondary procedures and 1-year mortality.Level of evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:BackgroundWith the rise of digital health technologies and telemedicine, the need for evidence-based evaluation is growing. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are recommended as an essential part of the evaluation of telemedicine. For the first time, a systematic review has been conducted to investigate the use of PROMs and PREMs in the evaluation studies of telemedicine covering all application types and medical purposes.ObjectiveThis study investigates the following research questions: in which scenarios are PROMs and PREMs collected for evaluation purposes, which PROM and PREM outcome domains have been covered and how often, which outcome measurement instruments have been used and how often, does the selection and quantity of PROMs and PREMs differ between study types and application types, and has the use of PROMs and PREMs changed over time.MethodsWe conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases and included studies published from inception until April 2, 2020. We included studies evaluating telemedicine with patients as the main users; these studies reported PROMs and PREMs within randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, noncontrolled trials, and feasibility trials in English and German.ResultsOf the identified 2671 studies, 303 (11.34%) were included; of the 303 studies, 67 (22.1%) were feasibility studies, 70 (23.1%) were noncontrolled trials, 20 (6.6%) were controlled trials, and 146 (48.2%) were randomized controlled trials. Health-related quality of life (n=310; mean 1.02, SD 1.05), emotional function (n=244; mean 0.81, SD 1.18), and adherence (n=103; mean 0.34, SD 0.53) were the most frequently assessed outcome domains. Self-developed PROMs were used in 21.4% (65/303) of the studies, and self-developed PREMs were used in 22.3% (68/303). PROMs (n=884) were assessed more frequently than PREMs (n=234). As the evidence level of the studies increased, the number of PROMs also increased (τ=-0.45), and the number of PREMs decreased (τ=0.35). Since 2000, not only has the number of studies using PROMs and PREMs increased, but the level of evidence and the number of outcome measurement instruments used have also increased, with the number of PREMs permanently remaining at a lower level.ConclusionsThere have been increasingly more studies, particularly high-evidence studies, which use PROMs and PREMs to evaluate telemedicine. PROMs have been used more frequently than PREMs. With the increasing maturity stage of telemedicine applications and higher evidence level, the use of PROMs increased in line with the recommendations of evaluation guidelines. Health-related quality of life and emotional function were measured in almost all the studies. Simultaneously, health literacy as a precondition for using the application adequately, alongside proper training and guidance, has rarely been reported. Further efforts should be pursued to standardize PROM and PREM collection in evaluation studies of telemedicine.

Project description:ObjectivesTo identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.DesignSystematic review.Primary and secondary outcome measuresWhich PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.Results1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.ConclusionsClinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability.Prospero registration numberCRD42018086737.

Dataset Information

Use of patient reported experience measure and patient reported outcome measures to evaluate differences in surgical or non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Use of patient reported experience measure and patient reported outcome measures to evaluate differences in surgical or non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets