Bringing the patient voice into quality assessment: National stakeholder perceptions of facilitators and barriers for the use of PROs as performance measures.

Authors

Angela Stover

Angela M. Stover

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

Angela M. Stover, Arlene Chung, Jennifer Jansen, Ethan M. Basch

Organizations

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC

Research Funding

Other

Background: An emerging trend in quality improvement is to incorporate the patient voice into performance metrics for routine care delivery using patient-reported outcomes (PRO). For instance, patients may complete a questionnaire about how well their symptoms are controlled (e.g., nausea). High-quality care is then determined by adjusting scores and comparing similar practices on symptom control. However, stakeholder (clinicians, administrators, and researchers) perspectives of facilitators and barriers are not well characterized because PRO performance measures are an emerging concept. Methods: Key informant interviews were conducted with 35 stakeholders (9 medical oncology clinicians, 13 administrators, and 13 health services researchers) from 5 healthcare systems across the U.S. Interview guides were used to elicit perceptions of barriers, facilitators, and acceptability for using PROs as performance measures. Transcripts were content analyzed by stakeholder group using standard methodology. Results: Clinicians reported barriers that were structural (e.g., complexity of programming electronic health record [EHR] changes) and process-oriented (e.g., changing clinic workflow to accommodate PRO review and alerts). Clinicians noted concerns about appropriate adjustments to ensure fair quality comparisons across practices. Clinicians and administrators reported structural barriers such as reimbursement and staff training, and outcome barriers such as choosing symptoms that have clear treatment guidelines. Facilitators included dashboards to visually display results that are intuitive and easily accessible in the EHR. Researchers focused on standardization and selecting thresholds for symptom alerts. Conclusions: Clinicians, administrators, and researchers reported barriers to the integration of PROs as quality measures. These barriers are mainly structural- and process-oriented but generally did not focus on acceptability. Facilitators focused on presenting PRO scores in an easily interpretable and accessible way within the EHR. Results will inform multi-site feasibility testing of PROs as quality metrics.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2017 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Cost, Value, and Policy in Quality; Practice of Quality

Track

Cost, Value, and Policy in Quality,Practice of Quality

Sub Track

Involving Patients in Quality Care

Citation

J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl 8S; abstract 61)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2017.35.8_suppl.61

Abstract #

61

Poster Bd #

C2

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2023 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

CodeX quality measures for cancer: Leveraging FHIR and mCODE to support digital quality measures.

First Author: Anthony DiDonato

Abstract

2023 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Quality metrics at scale: Deriving time to first cancer treatment from electronic health records.

First Author: Arjun Sondhi