Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Knowledge, use and attitudes of healthcare professionals towards patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at a comprehensive cancer center.
Brunelli, Cinzia; Zito, Emanuela; Alfieri, Sara; Borreani, Claudia; Roli, Anna; Caraceni, Augusto; Apolone, Giovanni.
Afiliação
  • Brunelli C; Palliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
  • Zito E; Information and Communication Technology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
  • Alfieri S; Clinical Psychology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy. sara.alfieri@istitutotumori.mi.it.
  • Borreani C; Clinical Psychology Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, 20133, Milan, Italy.
  • Roli A; Quality, Education and Data Protection Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
  • Caraceni A; Palliative Care, Pain Therapy and Rehabilitation Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
  • Apolone G; Scientific Directorate, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
BMC Cancer ; 22(1): 161, 2022 Feb 10.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35144569
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Despite evidence of the positive impact of routine assessment of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), their systematic collection is not widely implemented in cancer care.

AIM:

To assess the knowledge, use and attitudes of healthcare professionals (HCPs) towards PROMs and electronically collected PROMs (ePROMs) in clinical practice and research and to explore respondent-related factors associated with the above dimensions.

METHOD:

An ad hoc developed online survey was administered to all HCPs employed in clinical activity in an Italian comprehensive cancer center. The survey investigated which PROMs were known and used, as well as HCPs' opinions on the advantages and drawbacks of routine PROM assessment, including electronic assessment (ePROM). Linear and logistic regression models were used for association analyses.

RESULTS:

Five Hundred Eleven of nine hundred ninety-two invited HCPs (52%) provided analyzable responses. 68% were women, 46% were nurses and 42% physicians, and 52.5% had > 20 years seniority. The average number of PROMs known was six among 17 proposed. All proved to be under-used (< 28%) except unidimensional and multidimensional pain scales (77 and 36%). Respondents expressed an overall positive attitude towards PROMs, with strengths outweighing weaknesses (mean overall scores 3.6 and 2.9, respectively, on a 1-5 scale). 67% of respondents preferred electronic collection over paper and pencil. Profession was associated with knowledge and use (physicians reported knowing more PROMs than other professionals) and with a preference for electronic collection (nurses were less likely to prefer the electronic format than physicians). Senior HCPs were slightly more critical about both PROMs and electronic administration.

CONCLUSIONS:

This survey indicates an acceptable level of knowledge of common PROM tools but low usage in practice. Based on the generally positive attitude of HCPs, routine implementation of ePROMs can be promoted as long as adequate resources and training are provided. TRIAL REGISTRATION Not registered.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde / Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde / Pessoal de Saúde / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente / Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde / Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde / Pessoal de Saúde / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente / Neoplasias Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article