Patient and Staff Experiences of Embedding Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Distress Screening and Quality of Life Assessment, Into Routine Melanoma Care: A Mixed‐Methods Study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Patient and Staff Experiences of Embedding Electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Distress Screening and Quality of Life Assessment, Into Routine Melanoma Care: A Mixed‐Methods Study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Dempsey, Kathy (AUTHOR), Saw, Robyn (AUTHOR), Bartula, Iris (AUTHOR), Lo, Serigne N. (AUTHOR), Menzies, Alexander M. (AUTHOR), Long, Georgina V. (AUTHOR), Lawn, Craig (AUTHOR), Chung, Julian (AUTHOR), Pennington, Thomas (AUTHOR), Boyle, Frances (AUTHOR), Spillane, Andrew (AUTHOR), Dieng, Mbathio (AUTHOR), Saks, Dina (AUTHOR), Lai‐Kwon, Julia (AUTHOR), Thompson, Jake R. (AUTHOR), Morton, Rachael L. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Psycho-Oncology. Dec2024, Vol. 33 Issue 12, p1-10. 10p. |
| Subjects: | Patient reported outcome measures, Patient experience, Patients' attitudes, Psychological distress, Administrative efficiency |
| Abstract: | Objective: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly collected in melanoma research. However, they are not used to guide immediate clinical care in Australia. This study explored the views and experiences of patients with Stage III melanoma and clinic staff during implementation of an electronic Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures in melanoma (ePROMs‐MEL) pilot to assess distress and quality of life. Methods: A prospective mixed‐methods study in specialist melanoma clinics in Sydney, Australia between May 2021 and February 2023. Forty‐two post‐ePROMs implementation surveys and 17 semi‐structured interviews were undertaken among patients and staff (including oncologists, melanoma nurses and clinic managers). Survey responses were tabulated using Likert scales and interview transcripts analysed thematically. Results: Of the 31 patient survey responses, over 90% reported ePROMs were easy to complete and measured important components of their health and wellbeing. Of the 11 staff surveys, over 50% reported ePROMs to be useful when allied health referrals were accessible but found implementation disruptive to clinic workflows. Six themes about ePROMs in clinical care emerged during data analysis: (1) promoting self‐reflection; (2) conversation‐starters; (3) timing and setting; (4) fit for purpose questionnaires; (5) resource issues; (6) value and limitations of ePROMs. Conclusion: Patients overwhelmingly supported the real‐time collection of ePROMs for their immediate care. In contrast, staff support was conditional on resources to maximise clinical care efficiency and minimise administrative burden. Trial Registration: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12620001149954.aspx. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Psycho-Oncology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective: Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly collected in melanoma research. However, they are not used to guide immediate clinical care in Australia. This study explored the views and experiences of patients with Stage III melanoma and clinic staff during implementation of an electronic Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures in melanoma (ePROMs‐MEL) pilot to assess distress and quality of life. Methods: A prospective mixed‐methods study in specialist melanoma clinics in Sydney, Australia between May 2021 and February 2023. Forty‐two post‐ePROMs implementation surveys and 17 semi‐structured interviews were undertaken among patients and staff (including oncologists, melanoma nurses and clinic managers). Survey responses were tabulated using Likert scales and interview transcripts analysed thematically. Results: Of the 31 patient survey responses, over 90% reported ePROMs were easy to complete and measured important components of their health and wellbeing. Of the 11 staff surveys, over 50% reported ePROMs to be useful when allied health referrals were accessible but found implementation disruptive to clinic workflows. Six themes about ePROMs in clinical care emerged during data analysis: (1) promoting self‐reflection; (2) conversation‐starters; (3) timing and setting; (4) fit for purpose questionnaires; (5) resource issues; (6) value and limitations of ePROMs. Conclusion: Patients overwhelmingly supported the real‐time collection of ePROMs for their immediate care. In contrast, staff support was conditional on resources to maximise clinical care efficiency and minimise administrative burden. Trial Registration: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12620001149954.aspx. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 10579249 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/pon.70053 |
