This preprint is under consideration at Systematic Reviews. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Protocol
Angela C Wolff
Trinity Western University School of Nursing
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3857-0706
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Substantial literature has highlighted the importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs, respectively) to collect clinically relevant information to better understand and address what matters to patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence about strategies for implementing individual-level PROMs and PREMs data by healthcare providers in their everyday practice.
Methods: This mixed method systematic review protocol describes the design of our synthesis of the peer-reviewed research evidence (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods), systematic reviews, organizational implementation projects, expert opinion, and grey literature. Keyword synonyms for “PROMs,” PREMs,” and “implementation” will be used to search eight databases with limiters of English from 2009 to 2019. Study selection criteria includes implementation at the point-of-care by healthcare providers in any practice setting. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using validated tools (e.g., Joanna Briggs Institute). Guided by the review questions, data extraction and synthesis will occur simultaneously to identify biographical information and methodological characteristics as well as classify study findings related to implementation processes and strategies. As part of the narrative synthesis approach, two frameworks will be utilized: (a) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify influential factors of PROMs and PREMs implementation and (b) Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) to illicit strategies. Data management will be undertaken using NVivo 12TM.
Discussion: Data from PROMs and PREMs are critical to adopt a person-centred approach to healthcare. Findings from this review will guide subsequent phases of a larger project that includes interviews and a consensus-building forum with end users to create guidelines for implementing PROMs and PREMs at the point of care.
Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020182904
Keywords
Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), Patient reported outcomes (PROs), Routine outcome monitoring (ROM), Patient reported experience measures (PREMs), Knowledge translation (KT), Patient-centred care (PCC), Clinical decision-making, Clinicians, Healthcare providers, Implementation
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 2
Posted 06 Apr, 2021
No community comments so far
Review #1 received
Received 20 Apr, 2021
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Apr, 2021
Editor assigned
On 05 Apr, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 Apr, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 05 Apr, 2021
Editor invited
On 05 Apr, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 31 Mar, 2021
First submitted
On 29 Mar, 2021
No comments provided
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2021
Editorial decision: Reject before peer review
On 16 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 16 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 08 Oct, 2020
First submitted
On 07 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Health Economics & Outcomes Research
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This preprint is under consideration at Systematic Reviews. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Protocol
Angela C Wolff
Trinity Western University School of Nursing
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3857-0706
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 2
Posted 06 Apr, 2021
No community comments so far
Review #1 received
Received 20 Apr, 2021
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 20 Apr, 2021
Editor assigned
On 05 Apr, 2021
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 05 Apr, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 05 Apr, 2021
Editor invited
On 05 Apr, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 31 Mar, 2021
First submitted
On 29 Mar, 2021
No comments provided
Editor assigned
On 16 Feb, 2021
Editorial decision: Reject before peer review
On 16 Feb, 2021
Editor invited
On 16 Feb, 2021
Submission checks complete
On 08 Oct, 2020
First submitted
On 07 Oct, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Health Economics & Outcomes Research
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Substantial literature has highlighted the importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs, respectively) to collect clinically relevant information to better understand and address what matters to patients. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence about strategies for implementing individual-level PROMs and PREMs data by healthcare providers in their everyday practice.
Methods: This mixed method systematic review protocol describes the design of our synthesis of the peer-reviewed research evidence (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods), systematic reviews, organizational implementation projects, expert opinion, and grey literature. Keyword synonyms for “PROMs,” PREMs,” and “implementation” will be used to search eight databases with limiters of English from 2009 to 2019. Study selection criteria includes implementation at the point-of-care by healthcare providers in any practice setting. Eligible studies will be critically appraised using validated tools (e.g., Joanna Briggs Institute). Guided by the review questions, data extraction and synthesis will occur simultaneously to identify biographical information and methodological characteristics as well as classify study findings related to implementation processes and strategies. As part of the narrative synthesis approach, two frameworks will be utilized: (a) Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify influential factors of PROMs and PREMs implementation and (b) Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) to illicit strategies. Data management will be undertaken using NVivo 12TM.
Discussion: Data from PROMs and PREMs are critical to adopt a person-centred approach to healthcare. Findings from this review will guide subsequent phases of a larger project that includes interviews and a consensus-building forum with end users to create guidelines for implementing PROMs and PREMs at the point of care.
Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020182904
Loading...