关于在门诊医疗中使用患者报告的经验和患者报告的结果措施的观点。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2025.2451749
Ron D Hays, Denise D Quigley
{"title":"关于在门诊医疗中使用患者报告的经验和患者报告的结果措施的观点。","authors":"Ron D Hays, Denise D Quigley","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2451749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are patient reports about their healthcare, whereas patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are reports about their functioning and well-being regarding physical, mental, and social health. We provide a perspective on using PREMs and PROMs in ambulatory healthcare.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>We conducted a narrative review of the literature about using PREMs and PROMs in research and clinical practice, identified challenges and possibilities for addressing them, and provided suggestions for future research and clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Substantial progress in using PREMs and PROMs has occurred during the last half-century. Collecting and reporting PREMs to clinicians in ambulatory care settings has improved communication with patients, diagnosis, and treatment, which may improve patients' health. Optimal use requires appropriate data analysis, minimizing implementation barriers, and facilitating interpretation of PREMs and PROMs in clinical practice. Also, formal structures and processes that include patient and family input into care improvement are needed (e.g. patient and family advisory councils as partners in co-design and coproduction of quality improvement). PREMs and PROMs have been used primarily in more affluent countries (e.g. the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Japan, and Portugal), but this is expected to increase in many countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A perspective on the use of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measures in ambulatory healthcare.\",\"authors\":\"Ron D Hays, Denise D Quigley\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14737167.2025.2451749\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are patient reports about their healthcare, whereas patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are reports about their functioning and well-being regarding physical, mental, and social health. We provide a perspective on using PREMs and PROMs in ambulatory healthcare.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>We conducted a narrative review of the literature about using PREMs and PROMs in research and clinical practice, identified challenges and possibilities for addressing them, and provided suggestions for future research and clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Substantial progress in using PREMs and PROMs has occurred during the last half-century. Collecting and reporting PREMs to clinicians in ambulatory care settings has improved communication with patients, diagnosis, and treatment, which may improve patients' health. Optimal use requires appropriate data analysis, minimizing implementation barriers, and facilitating interpretation of PREMs and PROMs in clinical practice. Also, formal structures and processes that include patient and family input into care improvement are needed (e.g. patient and family advisory councils as partners in co-design and coproduction of quality improvement). PREMs and PROMs have been used primarily in more affluent countries (e.g. the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Japan, and Portugal), but this is expected to increase in many countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2451749\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2451749","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者报告的体验测量(PREMs)是患者关于其医疗保健的报告,而患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)是关于其身体、心理和社会健康的功能和福祉的报告。我们提供了在门诊医疗中使用prem和prom的观点。涉及领域:我们对在研究和临床实践中使用prem和prom的文献进行了叙述性回顾,确定了挑战和解决这些挑战的可能性,并为未来的研究和临床实践提供了建议。专家意见:在过去的半个世纪里,在使用prem和prom方面取得了实质性的进展。收集prem并将其报告给门诊护理机构的临床医生,可以改善与患者、诊断和治疗的沟通,从而改善患者的健康状况。最佳使用需要适当的数据分析,最大限度地减少实施障碍,并促进临床实践中prem和prom的解释。此外,还需要有正式的结构和流程,将患者和家属的意见纳入改善护理的工作中(例如,患者和家属咨询委员会作为共同设计和共同生产质量改善工作的伙伴)。prem和prom主要在较富裕的国家(如美国、澳大利亚、英国、荷兰、日本和葡萄牙)使用,但预计在许多国家会增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
A perspective on the use of patient-reported experience and patient-reported outcome measures in ambulatory healthcare.

Introduction: Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are patient reports about their healthcare, whereas patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are reports about their functioning and well-being regarding physical, mental, and social health. We provide a perspective on using PREMs and PROMs in ambulatory healthcare.

Areas covered: We conducted a narrative review of the literature about using PREMs and PROMs in research and clinical practice, identified challenges and possibilities for addressing them, and provided suggestions for future research and clinical practice.

Expert opinion: Substantial progress in using PREMs and PROMs has occurred during the last half-century. Collecting and reporting PREMs to clinicians in ambulatory care settings has improved communication with patients, diagnosis, and treatment, which may improve patients' health. Optimal use requires appropriate data analysis, minimizing implementation barriers, and facilitating interpretation of PREMs and PROMs in clinical practice. Also, formal structures and processes that include patient and family input into care improvement are needed (e.g. patient and family advisory councils as partners in co-design and coproduction of quality improvement). PREMs and PROMs have been used primarily in more affluent countries (e.g. the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Japan, and Portugal), but this is expected to increase in many countries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
期刊最新文献
Preferences of nurses in the United Kingdom for attributes of pediatric hexavalent vaccines: a discrete-choice experiment. Patient-relevance of outcome measures in breast cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional comparative analysis of patient preferences and trials conducted between 2014 and 2024. Evaluation of biological drug consumption in Italy during 2022: a comparative analysis between two healthcare facilities. Cost comparison of F(ab')2 and Fab antivenoms for pit viper envenomation in the United States: a real-world analysis. Autologous stem-cell transplantation and maintenance therapy for transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients: cost-effectiveness analysis based on a network meta-analysis.
×
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