Retrospectively patient-reported pre-event health status showed strong association and agreement with contemporaneous reports

Kwong, Esther; Black, Nick

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.09.002

Cited by 28 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are three possible explanations. First, it may be that patients recall their prior QoL as worse than it was, although no such bias was detected in studies of elective surgery when retrospective and contemporary reports were compared 14 15. Second, it may be that patients’ baseline disease-specific QoL was already lowered due to the presence of subacute symptoms prior to their AMI, but were not at the clinical threshold that warranted medical attention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To determine the feasibility of employing PROMs in emergency NHS admissions, an exploratory feasibility study was conducted in patients admitted with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) 13. Success of recruiting patients soon after admission and of obtaining their recollected state of health prior to their admission to provide a baseline assessment has been reported 13–15…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionRoutine measurement of the outcome of myocardial infarction is usually limited to immediate morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to determine the response to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) 3 months later, identify response bias and explore the feasibility of comparing outcome with their recalled view of their prior health state.MethodsPatients admitted with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to five percutaneous coronary intervention centres were invited to complete a retrospective questionnaire containing the EQ-5D-3L and short form Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7). Response rate for a 3-month mailed follow-up questionnaire and potential response biases were assessed. Patients’ outcomes were compared with their baseline using χ2 and paired t-test to assess for differences.ResultsOf 392 patients contacted, 260 (66.3%) responded. Responders were more likely to be older, female, more affluent and have a higher EQ-5D at baseline. Three months after surgery, patients’ SAQ-7 and angina symptom subscale returned to their baseline score. The physical limitation subscale score was worse than at baseline (79.9 vs 73.2, p=0.002), whereas the quality-of-life subscale was better (66.6 vs 73.9; p<0.001). The EQ-5D-3L index score was similar at 3 months to baseline (0.82 vs 0.79). Evidence of bias arising from responders being in better general health at baseline needs further investigation and, if confirmed, needs to be taken into account in interpreting PROMs data.ConclusionIt is feasible to use PROMs routinely to assess the impact of emergency admissions of patients with STEMI. A larger demonstration project with more sites is needed to confirm these findings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent literature review on the relationship between retrospective and contemporary health status reports found strong agreement when the recall period is short [ 5 ]. However, only six studies have been undertaken of which only one was conducted in the UK [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agreement between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip and knee replacement patients

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo investigate the relationship between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the influence on this relationship of patients’ age and socio-economic status and the length of time.MethodsPatients undergoing hip or knee replacement in four hospitals who had completed a pre-operative questionnaire were invited to recall their pre-operative health status shortly after surgery. The questionnaires included a disease-specific (Oxford Hip Score; Oxford Knee Score) and generic (EQ-5D-3L) PROM. Consistency and absolute agreement between contemporary and retrospective reports were investigated using intraclass correlations (ICCs). Differences were visualised using Bland–Altman plots. Linear regression analysis explored whether retrospective can predict contemporary PROMs.ResultsPatients’ recalled health statuses were similar to their contemporaneous reports, with no significant systematic bias. Absolute agreement for disease-specific PROMs was very strong (ICC 0.82) and stronger than for the generic PROM (ICC 0.60, 0.62). Agreement was consistently strong across the range of severity of a patient’s condition, age and socio-economic status. Patients’ age and socio-economic status had no significant influence on size of difference and direction of recall, although reliability of recall was slightly worse among the over-75s versus under-60s for hips (Oxford Hip Score ICC 0.88 vs. 0.78). Mean retrospective PROMs for groups or populations of patients can reliably predict what mean contemporary reports of PROMs would have been.ConclusionRetrospective PROMs can be used to obtain a baseline assessment of health status when contemporary collection is not feasible or cost effective. Research is needed to determine the feasibility of retrospective PROMs in emergency admissions.

show abstract

“…That study found strong agreement between retrospective and contemporary disease-specific PROs and EQ-5D, with intra-class correlation coefficients of 0.8 for the disease-specific PROs (Oxford Hip Score and Oxford Knee Score), and 0.6 for the EQ-5D. 3,4 An alternative approach that has been suggested is to derive expected PRO scores from respondents to general population surveys. Nine of the ten studies that have compared retrospective and population PRO scores have been conducted with trauma patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

<p>Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?</p>

Kwong

Abel

Black

2020

PROM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retrospectively patient-reported pre-event health status showed strong association and agreement with contemporaneous reports

Abstract: Retrospective collection offers a means of assessing PROMs in unexpected emergency admissions. However, further research is needed to establish the best policy for their use.

Cited by 28 publications

References 37 publications

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Using patient-reported outcome measures for primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Agreement between retrospectively and contemporaneously collected patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in hip and knee replacement patients

<p>Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?</p>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About