Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2020

01-12-2020 | Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis | Research

Patient and clinician opinions of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of patients with rare diseases: a qualitative study

Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Rare diseases may be life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions. Patient care needs are often complex and challenging to coordinate and deliver effectively. Rare diseases and their clinical management may therefore substantially impact on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL). The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may complement clinical assessments by elucidating patients’ perspectives on their health status and care priorities. This study explored the opinions of patients and clinicians on the use of PROMs in the management of patients with rare diseases in routine clinical practice.

Methods

A total of 15 semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted with four patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC); five renal transplant recipients; and six PSC doctors from University Hospitals Birmingham (UHB) NHS Foundation Trust. A focus group session was also conducted with 10 clinical staff members (doctors, nurses and other allied health professionals from UHB). The suitability and acceptability of the Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ) and the Short Form 12 (SF12) were assessed by patients with PSC and their doctors while the Paediatric quality of life inventory Transplant Module (PedsQL-TM) and the EuroQoL-5 dimensions (EQ. 5D) were evaluated by the renal transplant recipients and their doctors. The discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Coding of the transcripts was done using the Nvivo 11 Plus software. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify the main themes and subthemes.

Results

Four themes were identified, namely: (i) potential benefits of PROMs in the management of rare diseases; (ii) views on selected questionnaires; (iii) practical considerations for implementation; and (iv) potential facilitators and barriers of implementation. Patients and clinicians suggested that the use of ePROMs may facilitate patient-centred care by promoting patient-clinician communication, highlighting aspects of HRQOL that are important to patients and encouraging patient involvement in their care. They also felt that the disease-specific CLDQ and PedsQL-TM were more relevant than the generic SF12 and EQ-5D.

Conclusions

Patients with rare diseases often experience impaired HRQOL. The use of an ePROM system may enhance the routine management of patients with rare diseases.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Wastfelt M, Fadeel B, Henter JI. A journey of hope: lessons learned from studies on rare diseases and orphan drugs. J Intern Med. 2006;260(1):1–10.PubMedCrossRef
2.
3.
van Balen EC et al. Patient perspectives on novel treatments in Haemophilia: a qualitative study. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. 2019;13(2):201-10.
4.
Aiyegbusi OL, et al. A patient-centred approach to measuring quality in kidney care: patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures. Curr Opin Nephrol Hypertens. 2017;26(6):442–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
FDA. Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: use in medicinal product development to support labeling claims. Silver Spring: US Department of Health and Human Services Food and drug administration; 2009.
6.
Stevenson DA, Carey JC. Health-related quality of life measures in genetic disorders: an outcome variable for consideration in clinical trials. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2009;151c(3):255–60.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Cheng KKF, Clark AM. Qualitative methods and patient-reported outcomes: measures development and adaptation. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16(1):1609406917702983.CrossRef
8.
Aiyegbusi OL, et al. Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in adult patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review protocol. BMJ Open. 2016;6(10):e012014.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Aiyegbusi OL, et al. Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in adult patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12(6):e0179733.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Aymé S, et al. Common elements in rare kidney diseases: conclusions from a kidney disease: improving global outcomes (KDIGO) controversies conference. Kidney Int. 2017;92(4):796–808.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
12.
13.
14.
Dobbels F, et al. Adherence to the immunosuppressive regimen in pediatric kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review. Pediatr Transplant. 2010;14(5):603–13.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Foster BJ, et al. The impact of age at transfer from pediatric to adult-oriented care on renal allograft survival. Pediatr Transplant. 2011;15(7):750–9.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Loiselle KA, et al. Longitudinal stability of medication adherence among adolescent solid organ transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant. 2015;19(4):428–35.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Williamson KD, Chapman RW. Primary sclerosing cholangitis: a clinical update. Br Med Bull. 2015;114(1):53–64.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Bjornsson E, Angulo P. Cholangiocarcinoma in young individuals with and without primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102(8):1677–82.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Ponsioen C. Diagnosis, prognosis, and Management of Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis. Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2013;9(7):453–65.
20.
Gotthardt DN, et al. Pruritus is associated with severely impaired quality of life in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;26(12):1374–9.PubMed
21.
22.
Fosby B, Karlsen TH, Melum E. Recurrence and rejection in liver transplantation for primary sclerosing cholangitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18(1):1–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
23.
Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349–57.PubMedCrossRef
24.
25.
Morgan DL, Kreuger RA. In: Morgan DL, editor. When to use focus groups and why’ in Successful Focus Groups. London: Sage; 1993.
26.
McMullan C, et al. Adapting to ulcerative colitis to try to live a 'normal' life: a qualitative study of patients' experiences in the midlands region of England. BMJ Open. 2017;7(8):e017544.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
27.
Younossi ZM, et al. Development of a disease specific questionnaire to measure health related quality of life in patients with chronic liver disease. Gut. 1999;45(2):295–300.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Jenkinson C, et al. A shorter form health survey: can the SF-12 replicate results from the SF-36 in longitudinal studies? J Public Health Med. 1997;19(2):179–86.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Varni JW, Seid M, Rode CA. The PedsQL: measurement model for the pediatric quality of life inventory. Med Care. 1999;37(2):126–39.PubMedCrossRef
30.
31.
Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Ware, J.E., Jr. And C.D. Sherbourne, The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care, 1992. 30(6): p. 473–483.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Johnson JA, et al. Valuation of EuroQOL (EQ-5D) health states in an adult US sample. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998;13(4):421–33.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Weissberg-Benchell J, et al. Pediatric health-related quality of life: feasibility, reliability and validity of the PedsQL™ transplant module. Am J Transplant. 2010;10(7):1677–85.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Varni JW, Seid M, Kurtin PS. PedsQL 4.0: reliability and validity of the pediatric quality of life inventory version 4.0 generic core scales in healthy and patient populations. Med Care. 2001;39(8):800–12.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Green J, Thorogood N. Qualitative Methods for Health Research. London: SAGE Publications; 2009.
37.
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.CrossRef
38.
Green J, et al. Generating best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2007;31(6):545–50.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Johansen H, et al. Health-related quality of life for children with rare diagnoses, their parents' satisfaction with life and the association between the two. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:152.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
40.
41.
Valderas JM, et al. The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(2):179–93.PubMedCrossRef
42.
Greenhalgh J, Meadows K. The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review. J Eval Clin Pract. 1999;5(4):401–16.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Haskard Zolnierek, K.B. And M.R. DiMatteo, Physician Communication and Patient Adherence to Treatment: A Meta-analysis. Med Care, 2009. 47(8): p. 826–834.PubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
Snyder CF, et al. Implementing patient-reported outcomes assessment in clinical practice: a review of the options and considerations. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(8):1305–14.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Basch E, et al. Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine Cancer treatment: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(6):557–65.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Aiyegbusi OL, et al. Patient and clinician perspectives on electronic patient-reported outcome measures in the Management of Advanced CKD: a qualitative study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2019;74(2):167-78.
47.
Greenhalgh T, et al. Virtual online consultations: advantages and limitations (VOCAL) study. BMJ Open. 2016;6(1):e009388.
48.
Jones G, et al. Evaluating the impact of a ‘virtual clinic’ on patient experience, personal and provider costs of care in urinary incontinence: a randomised controlled trial. PLoS One. 2018;13(1):e0189174.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Kotecha A, et al. Qualitative investigation of patients’ experience of a glaucoma virtual clinic in a specialist ophthalmic hospital in London, UK. BMJ Open. 2015;5(12):e009463.
50.
Ruther A, et al. Aspects of patient reported outcomes in rare diseases: a discussion paper. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016;32(3):126–30.PubMedCrossRef
51.
52.
Benito de Valle, M., et al., Factors that reduce health-related quality of life in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2012. 10(7): p. 769–775.e2.
53.
Younossi ZM, et al. Assessment of utilities and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic liver disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96:579.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Younossi ZM, et al. Cholestatic liver diseases and health-related quality of life. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95(2):497–502.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Younossi ZM, et al. Development and validation of a primary sclerosing cholangitis-specific patient-reported outcomes instrument: the PSC PRO. Hepatology. 2018;68(1):155–65.PubMedCrossRef
56.
Isa F, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures used in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018;16(1):133.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
57.
Li M, Harris I, Lu ZK. Differences in proxy-reported and patient-reported outcomes: assessing health and functional status among medicare beneficiaries. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
58.
EMA. Appendix 2 to the Guideline on the Evaluation of Anticancer Medicinal Products in Man: The Use of Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measures in Oncology Studies. London: European medicines Agency Committee for Medicinal Products for human use; 2016.
59.
Chung AE, et al. Patient free text reporting of symptomatic adverse events in cancer clinical research using the National Cancer Institute’s patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE). J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2019;26(4):276–85.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
60.
Philpot LM, et al. Barriers and Benefits to the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Routine Clinical Care: A Qualitative Study. Am J Med Qual. 2017:1062860617745986.
61.
62.
Neelamekam S, et al. The impact of lipoprotein lipase deficiency on health-related quality of life: a detailed, structured, qualitative study. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2017;12(1):156.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
63.
Metadata
Title
Patient and clinician opinions of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the management of patients with rare diseases: a qualitative study
Publication date
01-12-2020
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7525
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01438-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research

Acceptable health and ageing: results of a cross-sectional study from Hungary

Research

Racial/ethnic differences in health-related quality of life among Hawaii adult population

Research

Personality traits and the risk of becoming lonely in old age: A 5-year follow-up study

Research

Health-related quality of life and flourishing in current and former recreational and elite cricketers

Research

Switch from intravenous or intramuscular to subcutaneous hepatitis B immunoglobulin: effect on quality of life after liver transplantation

Research

Development of two psychological experience questionnaires for screening violence-related mental health disorders of non-psychiatric inpatients