Clinicians and patients views of metrics of change derived from patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for comparing providers performance of surgery

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2012, Pages

  Hildon, Zoe ^a   Neuburger, Jenny ^a   Allwood, Dominique ^a   Van Der Meulen, Jan ^a   Black, Nick ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SELF REPORT; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS; SURGERY; UNITED KINGDOM; VARICOSIS;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SELF REPORT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPECIALTIES, SURGICAL; VARICOSE VEINS;

EID: 84862498012     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-171     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Guidance on the routine collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for the NHS in England. Department of Health 2009/10 [ http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/ digitalasset/dh-092625.pdf ]
2. How can patients' views of their care enhance quality improvement? Black N, Jenkinson C, BMJ 2009 339 202 6
3. The NHS improvement plan: putting people at the heart of public services. Department of Health 2010 [ http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consumdh/groups/dh- digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh-4084522.pdf
4. Patient choice. Robertson R, Thorlby R, The Kings Fund 2008 2008
5. The NHS in England: the operating framework for 2008/9. 2010 [ http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/@ dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh-091446.pdf
6. Impact of format and content of visual display of data on comprehension, choice and preference: a systematic review. Hildon Z, Allwood D, Black N, Int J Qual Health Care 2012 24 55 64 10.1093/intqhc/mzr072 22166856
7. Patients views of the format and content of statistical comparisons of healthcare performance. Hildon Z, Allwood D, Black N, Patient Educ Couns in press
8. Clinicians views of formats of performance comparisons. Allwood D, Hildon Z, Black N, J Eval Clin Pract 2011 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01777.x
9. EuroQol: the current state of play. Brooks R, EuroQol Group, Health Policy 1996 37 53 72 10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6 10158943 (Pubitemid 26191458)
10. Cheung K, Oemar M, Oppe M, Rabin R, EQ-5D User Guide: Basic Information on how to Use the EQ-5D. Version 2.0 EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam 2009
11. Euroqol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990 16 199 208 10109801
12. Towards measurement of outcome for patients with varicose veins. Garratt AM, Macdonald LM, Ruta DA, Russell IT, Buckingham JK, Krukowski ZH, Qual Health Care 1993 2 5 10 10.1136/qshc.2.1.5 10132081
13. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D, J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996 78 185 90 8666621 (Pubitemid 26096988)
14. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A, J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998 80-B 63 9
15. Petticrew M, Roberts H, Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford 2005
16. Statistical methods for healthcare regulation: rating screening and surveillance. Spiepelhalter D, Sherlaw-Johnson C, Bardsley M, Blut I, Wood C, Grigg OJR, R J Statist Soc A 2012 175 1 25 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2011.01010.x
17. Comparative analyses of pre-test:post-test research designs. Laird N, Amer Statistician 1983 37 329 330
18. Outcomes of elective surgery undertaken in Independent Sector Treatment Centres and NHS providers in England: the Patient Outcomes in Surgery Audit. Chard J, Kuczawski M, Black N, van der Meulen J, BMJ 2011 343 6404 10.1136/bmj.d6404 22012180
19. Randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. I: Three month follow up of health outcomes. Shepperd S, Harwood D, Jenkinson C, Gray A, Vessey M, Morgan P, BMJ 1998 316 1786 1791 10.1136/bmj.316.7147.1786 9624068 (Pubitemid 28269154)
20. Six month outcomes after emergency admission of elderly patients to a community or a district general hospital. Round A, Crabb T, Buckingham K, Mejzner R, Pearce V, Ayres R, Weeks C, Hamilton W, Family Practice 2004 21 173 179 10.1093/fampra/cmh212 15020387 (Pubitemid 38489400)
21. The evaluation of a model of primary mental health care in rural Tasmania. Campbell A, Aust J Rural Health 2005 13 142 148 10.1111/j.1440-1854. 2005.00694.x 15932483 (Pubitemid 40975437)
22. Short hospital stay augmented with education and home-based rehabilitation improves function and quality of life after hip replacement: Randomized study of 50 patients with 6 months of follow-up. Siggeirsdottir K, Olafsson O, Jonsson H, Iwarsson S, Gudnason V, Jonsson BY, Acta Orthop 2005 76 555 562 10.1080/17453670510041565 16195074 (Pubitemid 41232788)
23. A randomized controlled trial to evaluate intensity of community-based rehabilitation provision following stroke or hip fracture in old age: Results at 12-month follow-up. Ryan T, Enderby P, Rigby AS, Int J Disabil Hum Dev 2006 5 83 89 (Pubitemid 46409189)
24. Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in elective surgery. Browne J, Jamieson E, Lewsey J, van der Meulen J, Black N, Cairns J, Lamping D, Smith S, Department of Health 2007 [ http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/php/hsrp/research/proms- report-12-dec-07.pdf ]
25. Mathematical coupling accounted for the association between baseline severity and minimally important difference value. Browne J, van der Meulen JH, Lewsey JD, Lamping DL, Black N, J Clin Epidemiol 2009 63 865 874
26. Judge A, Arden N, Cooper C, Dieppe P, A statistical tool for individual prediction for individual risk and benefit from knee replacement surgery NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement, London 2010
27. Predictors of improved quality of life 1 year after pacemaker implantation. van Eck JWM, van Hemel NM, van den BA, Taks W, Grobbee DE, Moons KGM, Am Heart J 2008 156 491 97 10.1016/j.ahj.2008.04.029 18760131
28. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Walters SJ, Brazier JE, Qual Life Res 2005 14 1523 32 10.1007/s11136-004-7713-0 16110932 (Pubitemid 40848233)
29. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH, Control Clin Trials 1989 10 407e15
30. Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean? Kvien TK, Heiberg T, Hagen KB, Ann Rheum Dis 2007 66 Suppl-3 ii40 iii41 17934093
31. Minimal clinically important change for pain intensity, functional status, and general health status in patients with nonspecific low back pain. van der Roer N, Ostelo RW, Bekkering GE, van Tulder MW, de Vet HC, Spine 2006 31 578 82 10.1097/01.brs.0000201293.57439.47 16508555
32. Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Norman G, Wyrwich KW, Sloan JA, Med Care 2003 41 582 92 12719681
33. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) and continuous antipsychotic treatment: 3-year results from the schizophrenia health outcomes (SOHO) study. Alonso J, Croudace T, Brown J, Gasquet I, Knapp M, Suarez D, Novick D, Value Health 2009 12 536 543 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00495.x 19900255
34. Quality of life of patients with advanced HIV/AIDS: Measuring the impact of both AIDS-defining events and non-AIDS serious adverse events. Anis AH, Nosyk B, Sun H, Guh DP, Bansback N, Li X, Barnett PG, Joyce V, Swanson KM, Kyriakides TC, Holodniy M, Cameron DW, Brown ST, J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2009 51 631 639 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181a4f00d 19430303
35. Coping strategies as determinants of quality of life in stroke patients: A longitudinal study. Darlington A, Dippel DWJ, Ribbers GM, van Balen R, Passchier J, Busschbach JJ, Cerebrovasc Dis 2007 23 401 407 10.1159/000101463 17406109 (Pubitemid 46742329)
36. Does waiting for total hip replacement matter? Prospective cohort study. Hajat S, Fitzpatrick R, Morris R, Reeves B, Rigge M, Williams O, Murray D, Gregg P, J Health Serv Res Policy 2002 7 19 25 10.1258/1355819021927638 11822257 (Pubitemid 34041773)
37. Continuing inequality: Gender and social class influences on self perceived health after a heart attack. Lacey EA, Walters SJ, J Epidemiol Community Health 2003 57 622 627 10.1136/jech.57.8.622 12883071 (Pubitemid 36930291)
38. SWISSspine: A nationwide registry for health technology assessment of lumbar disc prostheses. Schluessmann E, Diel P, Aghayev E, Zweig T, Moulin P, Roder C, SWISSspine Registry Group, Eur Spine J 2009 18 851 61 10.1007/s00586-009-0934-8 19301042
39. Health Outcome Measures in the evaluation of total hip Arthroplasties - a comparison between the Harris Hip score and the Oxford Hip Score. Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ, J Arthroplasty 2005 20 1037 1041 10.1016/j.arth.2005.04.017 16376260 (Pubitemid 41820991)
40. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Health Measurement Scales. A practical guide to their development and use Oxford University Press, Oxford 2008