Barriers and Opportunities for Patient-Reported Outcome Implementation: A National Pediatrician Survey in the United States

Abstract

Purpose: To characterize pediatricians’ perceived barriers and areas of confidence in assessing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the U.S., and to test associations of these factors with implementing PRO assessment. Methods: Using a random sample from the members of American Medical Association, we recruited general pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists to complete a survey (July 2011 to December 2013). Perceived barriers and confidence in PRO assessment were compared by age, pediatric specialty (general pediatrics, seven subspecialties), practice settings (academic, private), and region of practice. Multivariable logistic regressions tested associations of demographic factors, barriers, and confidence factors with the implementation of PRO assessment. Findings: The survey was completed by 458 participants (response rate 48.5%); of these, 40.4%, 15.9%, 15.5%, and 8.1% were general pediatricians, cardiology, hematology/oncology, and pulmonary specialists, respectively. PRO assessment was implemented by 29.0% of the pediatricians. The top five barriers for PRO assessment included limited time/manpower (79.0%), limited training (77.4%), lengthy PRO instruments (76%), lack of meaningful cut-offs on PRO scores (75.5%), and unavailable PRO instruments (75.0%). Limited knowledge of PROs (OR 4.10; 95% CI 2.21, 7.60) and unavailability of PRO instruments (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.01, 3.49) increased the odds of not implementing the assessment, whereas confidence in PRO assessments compatible with norms (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23, 0.72) and perceived benefit over clinical judgment alone (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.31, 0.93) decreased the odds of not implementing the assessment. Interpretation: significant barriers to PRO assessment in pediatric settings suggest the need for providing training, resources, and practical guidance toward implementation. Patient or Public Contribution: healthcare service users contributed to this study by completing a survey and providing feedback about the barriers and areas of confidence in assessing PROs for pediatric populations.

Evaluation of Health-Related Quality of Life in Adolescents With Obesity: A Randomized Qualitative Study Among Healthcare Professionals

“…Integration of PROMs in real-world clinical practice is still limited due to a multifactorial set of hindering factors [ 28 ]. Since HRQoL tools constitute the most frequently used generic PROMs, a number of factors burden their application.…”

Validation of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Pediatric Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (ICIQ-CLUTS) for Spanish-speaking children

“…Different barriers to the use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in clinical care with the paediatric population have been identified in the literature [25]. In this case, the ICIQ-CLUTS questionnaire is feasible because it takes little time for children or parents to complete it (less than 4 min), and it is simple to score, reasons that facilitate its use in clinical daily routine.…”

A Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Childhood Cancer

“…Some previous review studies have identified the measurement properties of extant PRO measures [ 22 , 25 ], and other reviews have identified uncertainty about the clinical validity of PRO measures as an implementation barrier [ 18 , 19 ]. To bridge these review topics, we have identified often unreported measurement properties that could provide evidence about the clinical utility of the PRO measures including clinical anchors, clinically meaningful cutpoints and MIDs, responsiveness, predictive validity, response-shift effects, and cross-cultural validity.…”

“…In addition, clinicians report the lack of clinically meaningful cutpoints and MIDs as another application barrier [ 18 , 19 ]. Only four of the extant generic PRO measures included in our review established cutpoints and/or MIDs.…”

“…and comorbid symptoms have been shown to affect HRQOL [ 12 , 13 , 14 ] and adverse health outcomes [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]. Even though PRO measures play an important role in pediatric oncology, clinicians report barriers to using these measures in their practices, such as the lack of training to administer, score, and interpret PROs, the lack of clinically meaningful cutpoints to aid in interpretation, and uncertainty about the validity of various PRO measures [ 18 , 19 ].…”