Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Health Services Research and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

A systematic review of the impact of routine collection of patient reported outcome measures on patients, providers and health organisations in an oncologic setting

Jack Chen12*, Lixin Ou12 and Stephanie J Hollis12

Author Affiliations

1 The Simpson Centre for Health Services Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Liverpool 2170NSW, Australia

2 Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Level 1, AGSM Building, University of New South Wales, Randwick 2052, Australia

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Health Services Research 2013, 13:211  doi:10.1186/1472-6963-13-211

Published: 11 June 2013

Abstract

Background

Despite growing interest and urges by leading experts for the routine collection of patient reported outcome (PRO) measures in all general care patients, and in particular cancer patients, there has not been an updated comprehensive review of the evidence regarding the impact of adopting such a strategy on patients, service providers and organisations in an oncologic setting.

Methods

Based on a critical analysis of the three most recent systematic reviews, the current systematic review developed a six-method strategy in searching and reviewing the most relevant quantitative studies between January 2000 and October 2011 using a set of pre-determined inclusion criteria and theory-based outcome indicators. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to rate the quality and importance of the identified publications, and the synthesis of the evidence was conducted.

Results

The 27 identified studies showed strong evidence that the well-implemented PROs improved patient-provider communication and patient satisfaction. There was also growing evidence that it improved the monitoring of treatment response and the detection of unrecognised problems. However, there was a weak or non-existent evidence-base regarding the impact on changes to patient management and improved health outcomes, changes to patient health behaviour, the effectiveness of quality improvement of organisations, and on transparency, accountability, public reporting activities, and performance of the health care system.

Conclusions

Despite the existence of significant gaps in the evidence-base, there is growing evidence in support of routine PRO collection in enabling better and patient-centred care in cancer settings.

Keywords:
Cancer; Quality of Life; Patient Reported Outcomes; Health Services Research