Do patients have a say? A narrative review of the development of patient-reported outcome measures used in elective procedures for coronary revascularisation
MetadataShow full item record
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) capture health information from the patient’s perspective that can be used when weighing up benefits, risks and costs of treatment. This is important for elective procedures such as those for coronary revascularisation. Patients should be involved in the development of PROMs to accurately capture outcomes that are important for the patient. The aims of this review are to identify if patients were involved in the development of cardiovascular-specific PROMs used for assessing outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation, and to explore what methods were used to capture patient perspectives. Methods: PROMs for evaluating outcomes from elective coronary revascularisation were identified from a previous review and an updated systematic search. The studies describing the development of the PROMs were reviewed for information on patient input in their conceptual and/or item development. Results: 24 PROMs were identified from a previous review and three additional PROMs were identified from the updated search. Full texts were obtained for 26 of the 27 PROMs. The 26 studies (11 multidimensional, 15 unidimensional) were reviewed. Only nine studies reported developing PROMs using patient input. For eight PROMs, the inclusion of patient input could not be judged due to insufficient information in the full text. Conclusions: Only nine of the 26 reviewed PROMs used in elective coronary revascularisation reported involving patients in their conceptual and/or item development, while patient input was unclear for eight PROMs. These findings suggest that the patient’s perspective is often overlooked or poorly described in the development of PROMs.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Development of a percutaneous coronary intervention patient level composite measure for a clinical quality registryAyton, D.; Soh, S.E.; Morello, R.; Ahern, S.; Earnest, A.; Brennan, A.; Lefkovits, J.; Evans, S.; Reid, Christopher ; Ruseckaite, R.; McNeil, J. (2020)© 2020 The Author(s). Background: Composite measures combine data to provide a comprehensive view of patient outcomes. Despite composite measures being a valuable tool to assess post-intervention outcomes, the patient ...
Exploring patient-reported outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention: A qualitative studyAyton, D.; Barker, A.; Peeters, G.; Berkovic, D.; Lefkovits, J.; Brennan, A.; Evans, S.; Zalcberg, J.; Reid, Christopher; Stoelwinder, J.; Mcneil, J. (2017)© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a common cardiac procedure used to treat obstructive coronary artery disease. Patient-centred care is a priority in cardiovascular ...
Improving care for people undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: elements of effective interventionsRolley, John Xavier (2009)Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) are a frequent strategy for myocardial revascularisation in both the elective and emergency setting. In contrast to surgical techniques such as coronary artery bypass grafting ...