Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand: A cross-sectional survey study

Rachael L. Morton, Nicole Lioufas, Kathryn Dansie, Suetonia C. Palmer, Matthew D. Jose, Rajesh Raj, Andrew Salmon, Matthew Sypek, Allison Tong, Marie Ludlow, Neil Boudville, Stephen McDonald

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Aim: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used in research to quantify how patients feel and function, and their experiences of care, however, knowledge of their utilization in routine nephrology is limited. Methods: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) PROMs working group conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of PROMs/PREMs use among renal ‘parent hospitals’. One survey per hospital was completed (August–November 2017). Descriptive statistics reported type and frequency of measures used and purpose of use. Results: Survey response rate was 100%. Fifty-five of 79 hospitals (70%) used at least one PROMs or PREMs for specific patient groups. PROMs were more likely to be collected from patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (45% of hospitals) than dialysis patients (32%, 31% and 28% of hospitals for home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and facility dialysis, respectively). Few renal transplanting hospitals (3%) collected PROMs. The Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) (40% of units), and the Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5 L) (25%), were most frequently used. The main reason for collecting PROMs was to inform clinical care (58%), and for PREMs was to fulfil private dialysis/hospital provider requirements (25%). The most commonly reported reason for not using PROMs in 24 hospitals was insufficient staff resources (79%). Sixty-two hospitals (78%) expressed interest in participating in a registry-based PROMs trial. Conclusion: Many renal hospitals in Australia and New Zealand collect PROMs and/or PREMs as part of clinical care with use varying by treatment modality. Resources are a key barrier to PROMs use.

LanguageEnglish
Pages14-21
Number of pages8
JournalNephrology
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2020

Keywords

  • chronic renal insufficiencychronic renal insufficiency
  • dialysis
  • patient-reported outcome measures
  • quality of life
  • registries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nephrology

Cite this

Morton, Rachael L. ; Lioufas, Nicole ; Dansie, Kathryn ; Palmer, Suetonia C. ; Jose, Matthew D. ; Raj, Rajesh ; Salmon, Andrew ; Sypek, Matthew ; Tong, Allison ; Ludlow, Marie ; Boudville, Neil ; McDonald, Stephen. / Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand : A cross-sectional survey study. In: Nephrology. 2020 ; Vol. 25, No. 1. pp. 14-21.
@article{91d1fe0a98984c57a58e328fb36dbd8e,
title = "Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand: A cross-sectional survey study",
abstract = "Aim: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used in research to quantify how patients feel and function, and their experiences of care, however, knowledge of their utilization in routine nephrology is limited. Methods: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) PROMs working group conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of PROMs/PREMs use among renal ‘parent hospitals’. One survey per hospital was completed (August–November 2017). Descriptive statistics reported type and frequency of measures used and purpose of use. Results: Survey response rate was 100{\%}. Fifty-five of 79 hospitals (70{\%}) used at least one PROMs or PREMs for specific patient groups. PROMs were more likely to be collected from patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (45{\%} of hospitals) than dialysis patients (32{\%}, 31{\%} and 28{\%} of hospitals for home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and facility dialysis, respectively). Few renal transplanting hospitals (3{\%}) collected PROMs. The Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) (40{\%} of units), and the Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5 L) (25{\%}), were most frequently used. The main reason for collecting PROMs was to inform clinical care (58{\%}), and for PREMs was to fulfil private dialysis/hospital provider requirements (25{\%}). The most commonly reported reason for not using PROMs in 24 hospitals was insufficient staff resources (79{\%}). Sixty-two hospitals (78{\%}) expressed interest in participating in a registry-based PROMs trial. Conclusion: Many renal hospitals in Australia and New Zealand collect PROMs and/or PREMs as part of clinical care with use varying by treatment modality. Resources are a key barrier to PROMs use.",
keywords = "chronic renal insufficiencychronic renal insufficiency, dialysis, patient-reported outcome measures, quality of life, registries",
author = "Morton, {Rachael L.} and Nicole Lioufas and Kathryn Dansie and Palmer, {Suetonia C.} and Jose, {Matthew D.} and Rajesh Raj and Andrew Salmon and Matthew Sypek and Allison Tong and Marie Ludlow and Neil Boudville and Stephen McDonald",
year = "2020",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/nep.13577",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "14--21",
journal = "Nephrology",
issn = "1320-5358",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand : A cross-sectional survey study. / Morton, Rachael L.; Lioufas, Nicole; Dansie, Kathryn; Palmer, Suetonia C.; Jose, Matthew D.; Raj, Rajesh; Salmon, Andrew; Sypek, Matthew; Tong, Allison; Ludlow, Marie; Boudville, Neil; McDonald, Stephen.

In: Nephrology, Vol. 25, No. 1, 01.01.2020, p. 14-21.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in renal units in Australia and New Zealand

T2 - Nephrology

AU - Morton, Rachael L.

AU - Lioufas, Nicole

AU - Dansie, Kathryn

AU - Palmer, Suetonia C.

AU - Jose, Matthew D.

AU - Raj, Rajesh

AU - Salmon, Andrew

AU - Sypek, Matthew

AU - Tong, Allison

AU - Ludlow, Marie

AU - Boudville, Neil

AU - McDonald, Stephen

PY - 2020/1/1

Y1 - 2020/1/1

N2 - Aim: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used in research to quantify how patients feel and function, and their experiences of care, however, knowledge of their utilization in routine nephrology is limited. Methods: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) PROMs working group conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of PROMs/PREMs use among renal ‘parent hospitals’. One survey per hospital was completed (August–November 2017). Descriptive statistics reported type and frequency of measures used and purpose of use. Results: Survey response rate was 100%. Fifty-five of 79 hospitals (70%) used at least one PROMs or PREMs for specific patient groups. PROMs were more likely to be collected from patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (45% of hospitals) than dialysis patients (32%, 31% and 28% of hospitals for home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and facility dialysis, respectively). Few renal transplanting hospitals (3%) collected PROMs. The Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) (40% of units), and the Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5 L) (25%), were most frequently used. The main reason for collecting PROMs was to inform clinical care (58%), and for PREMs was to fulfil private dialysis/hospital provider requirements (25%). The most commonly reported reason for not using PROMs in 24 hospitals was insufficient staff resources (79%). Sixty-two hospitals (78%) expressed interest in participating in a registry-based PROMs trial. Conclusion: Many renal hospitals in Australia and New Zealand collect PROMs and/or PREMs as part of clinical care with use varying by treatment modality. Resources are a key barrier to PROMs use.

AB - Aim: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used in research to quantify how patients feel and function, and their experiences of care, however, knowledge of their utilization in routine nephrology is limited. Methods: The Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry (ANZDATA) PROMs working group conducted a prospective cross-sectional survey of PROMs/PREMs use among renal ‘parent hospitals’. One survey per hospital was completed (August–November 2017). Descriptive statistics reported type and frequency of measures used and purpose of use. Results: Survey response rate was 100%. Fifty-five of 79 hospitals (70%) used at least one PROMs or PREMs for specific patient groups. PROMs were more likely to be collected from patients receiving comprehensive conservative care (45% of hospitals) than dialysis patients (32%, 31% and 28% of hospitals for home haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis and facility dialysis, respectively). Few renal transplanting hospitals (3%) collected PROMs. The Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale-Renal (IPOS-Renal) (40% of units), and the Euro-Qol (EQ-5D-5 L) (25%), were most frequently used. The main reason for collecting PROMs was to inform clinical care (58%), and for PREMs was to fulfil private dialysis/hospital provider requirements (25%). The most commonly reported reason for not using PROMs in 24 hospitals was insufficient staff resources (79%). Sixty-two hospitals (78%) expressed interest in participating in a registry-based PROMs trial. Conclusion: Many renal hospitals in Australia and New Zealand collect PROMs and/or PREMs as part of clinical care with use varying by treatment modality. Resources are a key barrier to PROMs use.

KW - chronic renal insufficiencychronic renal insufficiency

KW - dialysis

KW - patient-reported outcome measures

KW - quality of life

KW - registries

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065226418&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/nep.13577

DO - 10.1111/nep.13577

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 14

EP - 21

JO - Nephrology

JF - Nephrology

SN - 1320-5358

IS - 1

ER -