Facilitators and barriers in the implementation and adoption of Patient Reported Outcomes Measurements in daily practice.

OBJECTIVES: At the Erasmus MC, Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are implemented on a hospital-wide scale. However, less than half of the patients and healthcare professionals (HCP) utilize these PROMs. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate facilitators and barriers for adoption of PROMs to develop guidance around implementation. METHODS: A mixed-methods study with a combination of interviews and focus groups, and questionnaires was conducted, involving patients, both PROM non-responders and PROM responders, HCPs, and medicine students and nurse specialists in training (hereafter 'students'). (Group)interview transcripts were subjected to thematic content analysis. Subsequently, questionnaires were developed and presented to all stakeholders to validate the findings. Last, identified themes and implementation recommendations were presented in a final questionnaire to the Value Based Healthcare Erasmus MC expert group to prioritize findings. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 15 patients, 14 HCPs and 4 students, and 2 focus groups with 5 students. The questionnaire was completed by 370/999 responders (37.0%), 173/1395 non-responders (12.5%), 44/194 HCPs (22.7%) and 40 students were reached via an open link. The identified facilitators and barriers were grouped into four overarching themes; training on PROMs at different levels in the education of (future) HCPS, motivate and reduce the burden for the HCP, implement generic and disease-specific PROMs simultaneously and motivate, activate and reduce the patient burden. CONCLUSIONS: Providing end-users with digital tools, implementation support and a clear hospital-wide vision are important, yet this does not guarantee successful adoption of PROMs. Successful adoption necessitates ongoing efforts to engage, motivate and train end-users.

Minimizing Population Health Loss in Times of Scarce Surgical Capacity During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Crisis and Beyond: A Modeling Study.

OBJECTIVES: Coronavirus disease 2019 has put unprecedented pressure on healthcare systems worldwide, leading to a reduction of the available healthcare capacity. Our objective was to develop a decision model to estimate the impact of postponing semielective surgical procedures on health, to support prioritization of care from a utilitarian perspective. METHODS: A cohort state-transition model was developed and applied to 43 semielective nonpediatric surgical procedures commonly performed in academic hospitals. Scenarios of delaying surgery from 2 weeks were compared with delaying up to 1 year and no surgery at all. Model parameters were based on registries, scientific literature, and the World Health Organization Global Burden of Disease study. For each surgical procedure, the model estimated the average expected disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per month of delay. RESULTS: Given the best available evidence, the 2 surgical procedures associated with most DALYs owing to delay were bypass surgery for Fontaine III/IV peripheral arterial disease (0.23 DALY/month, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.36) and transaortic valve implantation (0.15 DALY/month, 95% CI: 0.09-0.24). The 2 surgical procedures with the least DALYs were placing a shunt for dialysis (0.01, 95% CI: 0.005-0.01) and thyroid carcinoma resection (0.01, 95% CI: 0.01-0.02). CONCLUSION: Expected health loss owing to surgical delay can be objectively calculated with our decision model based on best available evidence, which can guide prioritization of surgical procedures to minimize population health loss in times of scarcity. The model results should be placed in the context of different ethical perspectives and combined with capacity management tools to facilitate large-scale implementation.

Self-Monitoring Kidney Function Post Transplantation: Reliability of Patient-Reported Data.

BACKGROUND: The high frequency of outpatient visits after kidney transplantation is burdensome to both the recovering patient and health care capacity. Self-monitoring kidney function offers a promising strategy to reduce the number of these outpatient visits. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate whether it is safe to rely on patients' self-measurements of creatinine and blood pressure, using data from a self-management randomized controlled trial. METHODS: For self-monitoring creatinine, each participant received a StatSensor Xpress-i Creatinine Meter and related test material. For self-monitoring blood pressure, each participant received a Microlife WatchBP Home, an oscillometric device for blood pressure self-measurement on the upper arm. Both devices had a memory function and the option to download stored values to a computer. During the first year post transplantation, 54 patients registered their self-measured creatinine values in a Web-based Self-Management Support System (SMSS) which provided automatic feedback on the registered values (eg, seek contact with hospital). Values registered in the SMSS were compared with those logged automatically in the creatinine device to study reliability of registered data. Adherence to measurement frequency was determined by comparing the number of requested with the number of performed measurements. To study adherence to provided feedback, SMSS-logged feedback and information from the electronic hospital files were analyzed. RESULTS: Level of adherence was highest during months 2-4 post transplantation with over 90% (42/47) of patients performing at least 75% of the requested measurements. Overall, 87.00% (3448/3963) of all registered creatinine values were entered correctly, although values were often registered several days later. If (the number of) measured and registered values deviated, the mean of registered creatinine values was significantly lower than what was measured, suggesting active selection of lower creatinine values. Adherence to SMSS feedback ranged from 53% (14/24) to 85% (33/39), depending on the specific feedback. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' tendency to postpone registration and to select lower creatinine values for registration and the suboptimal adherence to the feedback provided by the SMSS might challenge safety. This should be well considered when designing self-monitoring care systems, for example by ensuring that self-measured data are transferred automatically to an SMSS.

Renal transplant patient acceptance of a self-management support system.

BACKGROUND: Self-management support systems (SMSS) have been proposed for renal transplant patients to increase their autonomy and reduce the number of hospital visits. For the design and implementation of such systems, it is important to understand factors influencing patients' acceptance of a SMSS. This paper aims to identify these key factors. METHODS: From literature, possible factors and related questionnaire items were identified. Afterwards, focus groups with experts and patients were conducted to adapt the items to the application domain. To investigate acceptance of a SMSS and the influencing factors, fifty renal transplant patients answered the questionnaire before and after using the SMSS for 4 months. RESULTS: All the questionnaire constructs had a satisfactory or higher level of reliability. After using the SMSS for 4 months, trust and performance expectancy could explain part of the variation in behavioural intention of using the SMSS, but not beyond the explanation given by patients' affect towards the system, which accounted for 26% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that in future caregivers implementing a SMSS will benefit from taking steps to improve patients' affect as this was found to correlate with patients use intention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered in ToetsingOnline, a registry held by the Dutch Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects. The registration number is NL33387.058.11 , and the date of registration is 31st July 2012.

Application of a point of care creatinine device for trend monitoring in kidney transplant patients: fit for purpose?

BACKGROUND: The StatSensor® Xpress-i™, a point-of-care system for blood creatinine measurement, offers patients the possibility of self-monitoring creatinine. In this study, the analytical performance of the StatSensor® for both detecting current renal function and monitoring renal (dys)function in kidney transplant patients was examined. METHODS: Accuracy of the StatSensor® with capillary and venous whole blood was evaluated and compared to an isotopic dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS)-traceable enzymatic creatinine test in venous serum (n=138). Twenty Li-heparin samples were compared to the IDMS reference method performed by a Joint Committee for Traceability in Laboratory Medicine (JCTLM)-listed reference laboratory (RfB, Bonn, Germany). To evaluate StatSensor®'s suitability to monitor kidney function, both venous and capillary samples were obtained in 20 hospitalized transplantation patients. Venous samples were analyzed with an IDMS-traceable enzymatic test, capillary samples were measured using the StatSensor®. For all 2-day intervals, percentage change in creatinine was compared between both methods. RESULTS: The StatSensor® did not meet total allowable error criterion of 6.9%. Average overall CVa for the StatSensor® was 10.4% and 5.2% for capillary and venous whole blood results, respectively. Overall CVa for the central laboratory serum creatinine method was <1.5%. For monitoring renal (dys)function, total agreement of the StatSensor® with an IDMS-traceable enzymatic test was 68% using a 10% Δ change. No significant differences were found between the changes observed by both methods. CONCLUSIONS: Capillary blood testing with the StatSensor® is not advisable for determining current renal function with a single creatinine measurement in kidney transplant patients, mainly due to excessive analytical imprecision. However, our results suggest that capillary blood testing with the StatSensor® can be used for daily trend monitoring of kidney function after renal transplantation.

Patient experiences with self-monitoring renal function after renal transplantation: results from a single-center prospective pilot study.

BACKGROUND: After a kidney transplantation, patients have to visit the hospital often to monitor for early signs of graft rejection. Self-monitoring of creatinine in addition to blood pressure at home could alleviate the burden of frequent outpatient visits, but only if patients are willing to self-monitor and if they adhere to the self-monitoring measurement regimen. A prospective pilot study was conducted to assess patients' experiences and satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 3 months after transplantation, 30 patients registered self-measured creatinine and blood pressure values in an online record to which their physician had access to. Patients completed a questionnaire at baseline and follow-up to assess satisfaction, attitude, self-efficacy regarding self-monitoring, worries, and physician support. Adherence was studied by comparing the number of registered with the number of requested measurements. RESULTS: Patients were highly motivated to self-monitor kidney function, and reported high levels of general satisfaction. Level of satisfaction was positively related to perceived support from physicians (P<0.01), level of self-efficacy (P<0.01), and amount of trust in the accuracy of the creatinine meter (P<0.01). The use of both the creatinine and blood pressure meter was considered pleasant and useful, despite the level of trust in the accuracy of the creatinine device being relatively low. Trust in the accuracy of the creatinine device appeared to be related to level of variation in subsequent measurement results, with more variation being related to lower levels of trust. Protocol adherence was generally very high, although the range of adherence levels was large and increased over time. CONCLUSION: Patients' high levels of satisfaction suggest that at-home monitoring of creatinine and blood pressure after transplantation offers a promising strategy. Important prerequisites for safe implementation in transplant care seem to be support from physicians and patients' confidence in both their own self-monitoring skills and the accuracy of the devices used.