PSU19 Promoting Quality - Preliminary Results of a CROSS Sector Implementation of Patient-Reported Outcomes to Improve Quality of Care for Knee and HIP Replacements

Abstract Introduction 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients have called for the assessment of the quality of care to establish measurable quality indicators in order to ensure that every patient with STEMI receives the best possible care. We investigated the quality indicators of health care services in Poland provided to STEMI patients. Methods The Polish Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes (PL-ACS) is an ongoing, nationwide, multicenter, prospective, observational study of consecutively hospitalized patients with the whole spectrum of ACS in Poland. For the purpose of assessing quality indicators, we included 8,279 patients from the PL-ACS Registry hospitalized with STEMI between January 1 and December 31, 2018. Results All emergency medical services (EMS) are equipped with ECG/defibrillators. 408 of 8,279 patients (4.9%) arrived at PCI center by self-transport, 4,791 patients (57.9%) patients arrived at PCI center by direct EMS transport, and 2,900 patients (37.2%) were transferred from non-PCI facilities. Whilst 95.1% of STEMI patients arriving in the first 12 hours received reperfusion therapy, the rates of timely reperfusion were much lower (ranging from 39.4% to 55.0% for various STEMI pathways). 7,807 patients (94.3%) underwent PCI as a mode of primary reperfusion strategy. The median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 46% and was assessed before discharge in 86.0% of patients. 489 of 8,279 patients (5.9%) died during hospital stay. Optimal medical therapy is prescribed in 50–85% of patients depending on various clinical settings. Only one in two STEMI patient is enrolled in a cardiac rehabilitation program at discharge. No patient-reported outcomes were recorded in the PL-ACS Registry. Figure 1 Conclusions The results of this study identified areas of healthcare systems that require solid improvement. These include prehospital ECG decision strategy, direct transport to PCI center, timely reperfusion, guidelines-based medical therapy (in particular in patients with heart failure), referral to cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs. More importantly, we recognized an urgent need for the initiation of recording quality indicators associated with patient-reported outcomes.

Download Full-text

A New Way to Listen to Patients: Heeding Patient Reported Experiences to Improve Quality of Care

Canadian Journal of Cardiology ◽

10.1016/j.cjca.2019.05.026 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 35 (10) ◽

pp. 1265-1266 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Michelle M. Graham ◽

Colleen M. Norris

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Care ◽

Improve Quality ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Nurse, oncologist, and patient impressions of electronic symptom monitoring via patient-reported outcomes in community oncology practices: Qualitative results from the U.S. national PRO-TECT trial (AFT-39, NCT03249090).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2020.38.15_suppl.7044 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. 7044-7044

Author(s):

Ethan M. Basch ◽

Randall Teal ◽

Amylou C. Dueck ◽

Jennifer Jansen ◽

Sydney Henson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Care ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Positive Impact ◽

Care Delivery ◽

Routine Care ◽

Office Visits ◽

Symptom Monitoring ◽

Community Oncology ◽

Patient Reported

7044 Background: There is growing interest to implement electronic patient-reported outcomes in oncology practices for symptom monitoring. It is not well known what nurse, physician, and patient impressions of benefits, acceptability, and challenges are in routine care use. Methods: PRO-TECT is an ongoing U.S. national trial including 26 community oncology practices across 15 states that implemented PRO symptom monitoring [NCT03249090]. Patients complete weekly PROs between visits, nurses receive alerts for severe/worsening symptoms, and oncologists review PROs at office visits. Interviews were conducted with 147 stakeholders including nurses (N = 46), oncologists (N = 27), data managers (N = 15), and patients (N = 59). Each stakeholder group had different interview guides with overlapping topics to explore experiences with the PRO system. Interviews lasted 15-60 minutes, were digitally recorded, transcribed, and entered into a qualitative analysis software program. A codebook was developed from the research questions, interview guides, and discussions with the project team. Standardized coding methods were applied, with transcripts double coded for thematic analysis. Feedback surveys were also completed by nurses (N = 57), oncologists (N = 38), and patients (N = 435). Results: Key benefits perceived across stakeholder groups included increased patient self-awareness of symptoms; improved direct communication of patients with care teams; more open and honest conveying of symptom experiences; ability to track symptoms over time; and increased involvement of patients in their own care. Most stakeholders felt PRO symptom monitoring had a positive impact on quality of care delivery, and believed benefits of PROs outweighed necessary staff efforts. Challenges included additional work by nurses to review and respond to alerts, staff turnover requiring retraining, and limited time of oncologists. In the survey, 39/56 (70%) nurses felt the PRO system improved quality of care; 27/33 (82%) oncologists noted PROs were useful for team discussions and care delivery; and 320/434 (74%) patients agreed that weekly PRO reporting improved discussions with their care team. Conclusions: Clinicians and patients perceived weekly PRO symptom monitoring between visits to be valuable despite added staff effort. Results of additional analyses are forthcoming. Clinical trial information: NCT03249090 .

Download Full-text

Implementing a Method for Evaluating Patient-Reported Outcomes Associated With Oral Oncolytic Therapy

Journal of Oncology Practice ◽

10.1200/jop.2016.018390 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 13 (4) ◽

pp. e395-e400 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Emily Mackler ◽

Laura Petersen ◽

Jane Severson ◽

Douglas W. Blayney ◽

Lydia L. Benitez ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Care ◽

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Symptom Burden ◽

Oncolytic Therapy ◽

Patients With Cancer ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale ◽

Oral Oncolytics

Introduction: The paradigm shift in health care toward value-based reimbursement has brought emphasis to providing better quality of care to patients with chronic diseases, including patients with cancer. In accordance with providing better quality of care to patients, there has been a growing interest in evaluating quality of life through patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r) is a tool that can be used to assess PROs and has been validated for use in patients with cancer. This initiative sought to use this standard assessment tool to acquire PROs concerning symptom burden from patients prescribed oral oncolytics. Patients and Methods: Eight oncology practices in the state of Michigan used a modified ESAS-r to evaluate symptom burden of patients prescribed oral oncolytics before each outpatient visit. Thirteen symptoms were categorized as mild (0 to 3), moderate (4 to 6), or severe (7 to 10). Results: A total of 1,235 modified ESAS-r surveys were collected and analyzed; 82.5% of symptoms were categorized as mild, 11.9% of symptoms were categorized as moderate, and 5.6% of symptoms were categorized as severe. Conclusion: PROs can be evaluated through the use of a standardized tool, such as the ESAS-r, in oncology patients receiving oral oncolytic therapy. Implementing such a tool in both community and academic practices is feasible and may facilitate improvements in the quality of care.

Download Full-text