 An Evidence-Based Theory About PRO Use in Kidney Care: A Realist SynthesisKara Schick-Makaroff (),
Adrienne Levay (),
Stephanie Thompson (),
Rachel Flynn (),
Richard Sawatzky (),
Onouma Thummapol (),
Scott Klarenbach (),
Mehri Karimi-Dehkordi () and
Joanne Greenhalgh ()
The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2022, vol. 15, issue 1, No 3, 38 pages Abstract: Abstract Background There is international interest on the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in nephrology. Objectives Our objectives were to develop a kidney-specific program theory about use of PROs in nephrology that may enhance person-centered care, both at individual and aggregated levels of care, and to test and refine this theory through a systematic review of the empirical literature. Together, these objectives articulate what works or does not work, for whom, and why. Methods Realist synthesis methodology guided the electronic database and gray literature searches (in January 2017 and October 2018), screening, and extraction conducted independently by three reviewers. Sources included all nephrology patients and/or practitioners. Through a process of extraction and synthesis, each included source was examined to assess how contexts may trigger mechanisms to influence specific outcomes. Results After screening 19,961 references, 84 theoretical and 34 empirical sources were used. PROs are proposed to be useful for providing nephrology care through three types of use. The first type is use of individual-level PRO data at point of care, receiving the majority of theoretical and empirical explorations. Clinician use to support person-centered care, and patient use to support patient engagement, are purported to improve satisfaction, health, and quality of life. Contextual factors specific to the kidney care setting that may influence the use of PRO data include the complexity of kidney disease symptom burden, symptoms that may be stigmatized, comorbidities, and time or administrative constraints in dialysis settings. Electronic collection of PROs may facilitate PRO use given these contexts. The second type is use of aggregated PRO data at point of care, including public reporting of PROs to inform decisions at point of care and improve quality of care, and use of PROs for treatment decisions. The third type is use of aggregated PRO data by organizations, including publicly available PRO data to compare centers. In single-payer systems, regular collection of PROs by dialysis centers can be achieved through economic incentives. Both the second and third types of PRO use include pressures that may trigger quality improvement processes. Conclusion The current state of the evidence is primarily theoretical. There is pressing need for empirical research to improve the evidence-base of PRO use at individual and aggregated levels of nephrology care. Date: 2022 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:15:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-021-00530-2 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00530-2 Access Statistics for this article The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.