Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measurements in chronic and malignant diseases: ten years' experience with PRO-algorithm-based patient-clinician interaction (telePRO) in AmbuFlex.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported Outcome (PRO) measures may be used as the basis for out-patient follow-up instead of fixed appointments. The patients attend follow-up from home by filling in questionnaires developed for that specific aim and patient group (telePRO). The questionnaires are handled in real time by a specific algorithm, which assigns an outcome color reflecting clinical need. The specific questionnaires and algorithms (named solutions) are constructed in a consensus process with clinicians. We aimed to describe AmbuFlex' telePRO solutions and the algorithm outcomes and variation between patient groups, and to discuss possible applications and challenges. METHODS: TelePRO solutions with more than 100 processed questionnaires were included in the analysis. Data were retrieved together with data from national registers. Characteristics of patients, questionnaires and outcomes were tabulated for each solution. Graphs were constructed depicting the overall and within-patient distribution of algorithm outcomes for each solution. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2021, 29 specific telePRO solutions were implemented within 24 different ICD-10 groups. A total of 42,015 patients were referred and answered 171,268 questionnaires. An existing applicable instrument with cut-off values was available for four solutions, whereas items were selected or developed ad hoc for the other solutions. Mean age ranged from 10.7 (Pain in children) to 73.3 years (chronic kidney disease). Mortality among referred patients varied between 0 (obesity, asthma, endometriosis and pain in children) and 528 per 1000 patient years (Lung cancer). There was substantial variation in algorithm outcome across patient groups while different solutions within the same patient group varied little. DISCUSSION: TelePRO can be applied in diseases where PRO can reflect clinical status and needs. Questionnaires and algorithms should be adapted for the specific patient groups and clinical aims. When PRO is used as replacement for clinical contact, special carefulness should be observed with respect to patient safety.

AmbuFlex: tele-patient-reported outcomes (telePRO) as the basis for follow-up in chronic and malignant diseases.

PURPOSE: A tele-patient-reported outcome (telePRO) model includes outpatients' reports of symptoms and health status from home before or instead of visiting the outpatient clinic. In the generic PRO system, AmbuFlex, telePRO is used to decide whether a patient needs an outpatient visit and is thus a tool for better symptom assessment, more patient-centred care, and more efficient use of resources. Specific PROs are developed for each patient group. In this paper we describe our experiences with large-scale implementations of telePRO as the basis for follow-up in chronic and malignant diseases using the generic PRO system AmbuFlex. METHODS: The AmbuFlex concept consists of three generic elements: PRO data collection, PRO-based automated decision algorithm, and PRO-based graphical overview for clinical decision support. Experiences were described with respect to these elements. RESULTS: By December 2015, AmbuFlex was implemented in nine diagnostic groups in Denmark. A total of 13,135 outpatients from 15 clinics have been individually referred. From epilepsy clinics, about 70 % of all their outpatients were referred. The response rates for the initial questionnaire were 81-98 %. Of 8256 telePRO-based contacts from epilepsy outpatients, up to 48 % were handled without other contact than the PRO assessment. Clinicians as well as patients reported high satisfaction with the system. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that telePRO is feasible and may be recommended as the platform for follow-up in several patient groups with chronic and malignant diseases and with many consecutive outpatient contacts.

Study protocol for optimising glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring, carbohydrate counting with automated bolus calculation, or both? A randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: There are beneficial effects of advanced carbohydrate counting with an automatic bolus calculator (ABC) and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) in persons with type 1 diabetes. We aim to compare the effects of isCGM, training in carbohydrate counting with ABC and the combination of the two concepts with standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multi-centre randomised controlled trial with inclusion criteria: ≥18 years, type 1 diabetes ≥1 year, injection therapy, HbA1c >53 mmol/mol, whereas daily use of carbohydrate counting and/or CGM/isCGM wear are exclusion criteria. Inclusion was initiated in October 2018 and is ongoing. Eligible persons are randomised into four groups: standard care, ABC, isCGM or ABC+isCGM. Devices used are FreeStyle Libre Flash and smart phone diabetes application mySugr. Participants attend group courses according to treatment allocation with different educational contents. Participants are followed for 26 weeks with clinical visits and telephone consultations. At baseline and at study end, participants wear blinded CGM, have blood samples performed and fill in questionnaires on person-related outcomes, and at baseline also on personality traits and hypoglycaemia awareness. The primary outcome is the difference in time spent in normoglycaemia (4-10 mmol/L) at study end versus baseline between the isCGM group and the standard care group. Secondary outcomes will also be analysed. Results are expected in 2020. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Regional Scientific Ethics Committee approval (H-17040573). Results will be sought disseminated at conferences and in high impact journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrial.gov registry (NCT03682237).

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in lung cancer: Experiences from a nationwide feasibility study.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the feasibility of a nationwide collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in a lung cancer population as well as in various sub-populations, and to describe the characteristics of responders compared to non-responders. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients diagnosed with lung cancer in Denmark are registered in the Danish Lung Cancer Registry (DLCR). The 7,295 patients registered in DLCR from 1 October 2013 until 30 September 2015 who had received treatment were eligible. Using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 questionnaires, we employed two different methods of delivery, resulting in two different project parts. In project part 1, the baseline questionnaire was handed out at the hospital departments before treatment. The following questionnaires were sent out as paper versions three times within one year. In project part 2, all questionnaires were electronic versions delivered in association with planned hospital visits. RESULTS: Of the 7,295 lung cancer patients 4,229 (58%) completed at least one questionnaire, and 2,459 completed two or more. Only 562 baseline questionnaires were returned before treatment (7.7%), whereas 43.4%-57.4% of the potential responders completed the following questionnaires. The best response rates were achieved among patients treated with surgery and among patients who discussed their questionnaires with health care personnel. When comparing patient characteristics, responders had a significantly better health and a higher socioeconomic position than non-responders. CONCLUSION: A decentralised model used for delivering the initial questionnaire to the patients was insufficient. It is our estimation that sending out electronic versions of the baseline questionnaires, as was done with the following questionnaires, would result in a significantly better patient coverage. Despite the severe morbidity and high mortality rate in lung cancer, reasonable response rates were achieved at follow-ups to this method, and PRO collection in this population was feasible.

[An introduction to patient reported outcome measures in quality assessment]. / En introduktion til patient reported outcome measures i kvalitetsarbejdet.

Patient reported outcome measures (PROM) have the potential to change how we measure quality in health care as well as promoting patient centered care. PROMs are any report of the status of a patient's health condition that comes directly from the patient, without interpretation of the patient's response by a clinician or anyone else. PROMs are used on an aggregated level to measure differences in quality between providers of health care. PROMs are also used on an individual level to address the patients' most bothersome needs. National consensus on development and implementation of PROM is needed.