Feasibility of Obtaining Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a High-Volume Multidisciplinary Surgical Limb Salvage Center.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.7547/22-064
Adaah A Sayyed, Rebecca Yamamoto, Christopher Choi, Jina Lee, Jayson N Atves, John S Steinberg, David H Song, Christopher E Attinger, Kenneth L Fan, Karen K Evans
{"title":"Feasibility of Obtaining Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a High-Volume Multidisciplinary Surgical Limb Salvage Center.","authors":"Adaah A Sayyed, Rebecca Yamamoto, Christopher Choi, Jina Lee, Jayson N Atves, John S Steinberg, David H Song, Christopher E Attinger, Kenneth L Fan, Karen K Evans","doi":"10.7547/22-064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Completion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is labor-intensive but paramount in improving patient-centered care, allowing for advancement of techniques and scrutinization of outcomes. We report the feasibility of PROM collection and reporting for patients seen in a high-volume, multidisciplinary, tertiary limb salvage center to determine pain and functionality outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The center received grant funding resources for large-scale PROM collection. Patients completed either tablet or paper surveys. Functionality and pain PROMs included 1) Neuro-QoL Lower Extremity Function-Mobility, 2) Numerical Rating Scale, 3) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity, and 4) PROMIS Pain Interference. Research assistants attended clinic daily to administer surveys. Patients were categorized into the following groups: amputation, flap reconstruction, other surgical management, and nonsurgical management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred sets of each survey were administered to 420 patients across 2 months, with 16% of patients (n = 80) completing multiple sets at separate visits. The completion rate among eligible patients was 90% or greater for each PROM. Of the respondents, 133 (31.7%) were seen for previous amputation, 32 (7.6%) for local or free flap reconstruction, 68 (16.2%) for other surgical management (eg, debridement, arthroplasty), and 295 (70.2%) for nonsurgical management (eg, lymphedema, hidradenitis).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We report that integration of PROM collection in a high-volume limb salvage center is feasible. These metrics allow measurement of the impact and effectiveness of salvage or amputation surgeries from patients' perspectives, providing quantification of satisfaction and aspects of health-related quality of life, improved patient advocacy, and an evidence-based approach to surgical management.</p>","PeriodicalId":17241,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","volume":"114 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7547/22-064","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Completion of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is labor-intensive but paramount in improving patient-centered care, allowing for advancement of techniques and scrutinization of outcomes. We report the feasibility of PROM collection and reporting for patients seen in a high-volume, multidisciplinary, tertiary limb salvage center to determine pain and functionality outcomes.

Methods: The center received grant funding resources for large-scale PROM collection. Patients completed either tablet or paper surveys. Functionality and pain PROMs included 1) Neuro-QoL Lower Extremity Function-Mobility, 2) Numerical Rating Scale, 3) Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity, and 4) PROMIS Pain Interference. Research assistants attended clinic daily to administer surveys. Patients were categorized into the following groups: amputation, flap reconstruction, other surgical management, and nonsurgical management.

Results: Five hundred sets of each survey were administered to 420 patients across 2 months, with 16% of patients (n = 80) completing multiple sets at separate visits. The completion rate among eligible patients was 90% or greater for each PROM. Of the respondents, 133 (31.7%) were seen for previous amputation, 32 (7.6%) for local or free flap reconstruction, 68 (16.2%) for other surgical management (eg, debridement, arthroplasty), and 295 (70.2%) for nonsurgical management (eg, lymphedema, hidradenitis).

Conclusions: We report that integration of PROM collection in a high-volume limb salvage center is feasible. These metrics allow measurement of the impact and effectiveness of salvage or amputation surgeries from patients' perspectives, providing quantification of satisfaction and aspects of health-related quality of life, improved patient advocacy, and an evidence-based approach to surgical management.

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
在大容量多学科肢体救治中心获取患者报告结果的可行性。
背景:完成患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)是一项劳动密集型工作,但对于改善以患者为中心的护理至关重要,可促进技术的进步和结果的仔细检查。我们报告了在一个大容量、多学科、三级肢体救治中心就诊的患者收集和报告 PROM 的可行性,以确定疼痛和功能结果:该中心获得了用于大规模收集 PROM 的拨款。患者填写平板电脑或纸质调查问卷。功能和疼痛 PROM 包括:1)Neuro-QoL 下肢功能-活动度;2)数字评分量表;3)患者报告结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)疼痛强度;4)PROMIS 疼痛干扰。研究助理每天到诊所进行调查。患者被分为以下几组:截肢、皮瓣重建、其他手术治疗和非手术治疗:在两个月内对 420 名患者进行了 500 组调查,其中 16% 的患者(n = 80)在不同的就诊时间完成了多组调查。符合条件的患者中,每项 PROM 的完成率均在 90% 或以上。在受访者中,133 人(31.7%)因既往截肢就诊,32 人(7.6%)因局部或游离皮瓣重建就诊,68 人(16.2%)因其他手术治疗(如清创术、关节成形术)就诊,295 人(70.2%)因非手术治疗(如淋巴水肿、坐骨神经炎)就诊:我们的报告表明,在一个大容量肢体救治中心整合 PROM 收集是可行的。这些指标可以从患者的角度衡量抢救或截肢手术的影响和效果,提供满意度和健康相关生活质量方面的量化指标,改善患者权益,并为手术管理提供循证方法。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, the official journal of the Association, is the oldest and most frequently cited peer-reviewed journal in the profession of foot and ankle medicine. Founded in 1907 and appearing 6 times per year, it publishes research studies, case reports, literature reviews, special communications, clinical correspondence, letters to the editor, book reviews, and various other types of submissions. The Journal is included in major indexing and abstracting services for biomedical literature.
期刊最新文献
Antifungal Activity of Efinaconazole Compared with Fluconazole, Itraconazole, and Terbinafine Against Terbinafine- and Itraconazole-Resistant/Susceptible Clinical Isolates of Dermatophytes, Candida, and Molds. Evaluation and Management of Idiopathic Unilateral Footdrop. Disease Knowledge and Behavior Regarding the Diabetic Foot in Persons at Different Risks for Foot Ulceration According to the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot Guidelines. Pedal Vessel Calcification and Risk of Major Adverse Foot Events in the Diabetic Neuropathic, Nephropathic Foot. Complication Rates of Minimally Invasive Chevron Osteotomy for Correction of Hallux Abductovalgus: A Systematic Review.
×
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