Health system implementation of the PROMIS Cognitive Function Screener in the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit: framing as abilities versus concerns

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Pub Date : 2024-04-10 DOI:10.1186/s41687-024-00699-8
Jordan M. Harrison, Natalie C. Ernecoff, Jin-Shei Lai, Janel Hanmer, Rebecca Weir, Anthony Rodriguez, Michelle M. Langer, Maria O. Edelen
{"title":"Health system implementation of the PROMIS Cognitive Function Screener in the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit: framing as abilities versus concerns","authors":"Jordan M. Harrison, Natalie C. Ernecoff, Jin-Shei Lai, Janel Hanmer, Rebecca Weir, Anthony Rodriguez, Michelle M. Langer, Maria O. Edelen","doi":"10.1186/s41687-024-00699-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cognitive assessment is a required component of the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV). In this prospective study, we evaluated acceptability and usefulness of a patient-reported outcome measure (the PROMIS® Cognitive Function Screener, or PRO-CS) to screen for cognitive impairment during the AWV. We compared two versions of the PRO-CS: Abilities and Concerns. We developed PRO-CS Abilities and PRO-CS Concerns using items from the PROMIS Cognitive Function item banks. We partnered with a large health system in Pennsylvania to implement an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated version of the 4-item PRO-CS into their AWV workflow. PRO-CS Abilities was implemented in June 2022 and then replaced with PRO-CS Concerns in October 2022. We used EHR data to evaluate scores on Abilities versus Concerns and their association with patient characteristics. We gathered feedback from providers on experiences with the PRO-CS and conducted cognitive interviews with patients to evaluate their preferences for Abilities versus Concerns. Between June 2022 and January 2023, 3,088 patients completed PRO-CS Abilities and 2,614 patients completed PRO-CS Concerns. Mean T-scores for Abilities (54.8) were slightly higher (indicating better cognition) than for Concerns (52.6). 10% of scores on Abilities and 13% of scores on Concerns indicated concern for cognitive impairment (T-score < 45). Both Abilities and Concerns were associated with clinical characteristics as hypothesized, with lower scores for patients with cognitive impairment diagnoses and those requiring assistance with instrumental activities of daily living. Abilities and Concerns had similar negative correlations with depression (r= -0.31 versus r= -0.33) and anxiety (r= -0.28 for both), while Abilities had a slightly stronger positive correlation with self-rated health (r = 0.34 versus r = 0.28). In interviews, providers commented that the PRO-CS could be useful to facilitate conversations about cognition, though several providers noted potential limitations of patient self-report. Feedback from patients indicated a preference for PRO-CS Concerns. Our findings suggest potential utility of the PRO-CS for cognitive screening in the Medicare AWV. PRO-CS Abilities and Concerns had similar associations with patient clinical characteristics, but the Concerns version was more acceptable to patients.","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-024-00699-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cognitive assessment is a required component of the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV). In this prospective study, we evaluated acceptability and usefulness of a patient-reported outcome measure (the PROMIS® Cognitive Function Screener, or PRO-CS) to screen for cognitive impairment during the AWV. We compared two versions of the PRO-CS: Abilities and Concerns. We developed PRO-CS Abilities and PRO-CS Concerns using items from the PROMIS Cognitive Function item banks. We partnered with a large health system in Pennsylvania to implement an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated version of the 4-item PRO-CS into their AWV workflow. PRO-CS Abilities was implemented in June 2022 and then replaced with PRO-CS Concerns in October 2022. We used EHR data to evaluate scores on Abilities versus Concerns and their association with patient characteristics. We gathered feedback from providers on experiences with the PRO-CS and conducted cognitive interviews with patients to evaluate their preferences for Abilities versus Concerns. Between June 2022 and January 2023, 3,088 patients completed PRO-CS Abilities and 2,614 patients completed PRO-CS Concerns. Mean T-scores for Abilities (54.8) were slightly higher (indicating better cognition) than for Concerns (52.6). 10% of scores on Abilities and 13% of scores on Concerns indicated concern for cognitive impairment (T-score < 45). Both Abilities and Concerns were associated with clinical characteristics as hypothesized, with lower scores for patients with cognitive impairment diagnoses and those requiring assistance with instrumental activities of daily living. Abilities and Concerns had similar negative correlations with depression (r= -0.31 versus r= -0.33) and anxiety (r= -0.28 for both), while Abilities had a slightly stronger positive correlation with self-rated health (r = 0.34 versus r = 0.28). In interviews, providers commented that the PRO-CS could be useful to facilitate conversations about cognition, though several providers noted potential limitations of patient self-report. Feedback from patients indicated a preference for PRO-CS Concerns. Our findings suggest potential utility of the PRO-CS for cognitive screening in the Medicare AWV. PRO-CS Abilities and Concerns had similar associations with patient clinical characteristics, but the Concerns version was more acceptable to patients.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医疗系统在医疗保险年度健康访视中实施 PROMIS 认知功能筛查:能力与关注点的框架划分
认知评估是医疗保险年度健康检查(AWV)的必要组成部分。在这项前瞻性研究中,我们评估了患者报告结果测量(PROMIS® 认知功能筛查器,简称 PRO-CS)的可接受性和实用性,以便在年度健康访视期间筛查认知功能障碍。我们比较了 PRO-CS 的两个版本:能力和关注。我们使用 PROMIS 认知功能项目库中的项目开发了 PRO-CS 能力项目和 PRO-CS 关注项目。我们与宾夕法尼亚州的一家大型医疗系统合作,在其 AWV 工作流程中实施了 4 个项目 PRO-CS 的电子健康记录 (EHR) 集成版本。PRO-CS Abilities 于 2022 年 6 月实施,2022 年 10 月被 PRO-CS Concerns 取代。我们使用电子病历数据来评估 "能力 "与 "关注 "的得分及其与患者特征的关联。我们收集了医疗服务提供者对 PRO-CS 使用经验的反馈,并对患者进行了认知访谈,以评估他们对 "能力 "与 "关注 "的偏好。2022 年 6 月至 2023 年 1 月期间,3088 名患者完成了 PRO-CS 能力项目,2614 名患者完成了 PRO-CS 关注项目。能力 "的平均 T 值(54.8)略高于 "关注"(52.6)(表明认知能力更强)。10%的 "能力 "评分和 13% 的 "关注 "评分显示出对认知障碍的担忧(T 值小于 45)。正如假设的那样,"能力 "和 "关注 "都与临床特征有关,诊断出认知障碍的患者和需要日常生活工具帮助的患者得分较低。能力 "和 "关注 "与抑郁(r=-0.31 对 r=-0.33)和焦虑(r=-0.28)具有相似的负相关性,而 "能力 "与自评健康(r=0.34 对 r=0.28)具有稍强的正相关性。在访谈中,医疗服务提供者认为 PRO-CS 有助于促进有关认知的对话,但也有几位医疗服务提供者指出了患者自我报告的潜在局限性。患者的反馈表明他们更倾向于使用 PRO-CS 关注点。我们的研究结果表明,PRO-CS 在医疗保险 AWV 的认知筛查中具有潜在的实用性。PRO-CS "能力 "和 "关注 "与患者临床特征的相关性相似,但 "关注 "版本更容易被患者接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Australian private healthcare staff perspectives on patient reported experience measures (PREMs): a qualitative interview study. Coping difficulties after inpatient hospital treatment: validity and reliability of the German version of the post-discharge coping difficulty scale. Machine learning models including patient-reported outcome data in oncology: a systematic literature review and analysis of their reporting quality. Tests employed in the psychometric validation of the Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale (ITAS) in T2DM patients; a systematic review of the literature. Associations between symptom-based long COVID clusters and long-term quality of life, work and daily activities among individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 at a national retail pharmacy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1