Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Stroke | Protocol

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) use in post-stroke patient care and clinical practice: a realist synthesis protocol

Authors: A. Smith, J. Hewitt, T. J. Quinn, M. Robling

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is growing interest in the use of routine patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to influence the care of individual patients with stroke. However, there are significant gaps in our understanding as to how PROMs influence post-stroke patient care and clinical practice. This is due to factors including the number of purported uses for PROMs and that PROMs are complex interventions, which attempt to stimulate varied actions or behaviours. Therefore, the objective of this realist synthesis is to offer theory-based explanations as to how PROMs influence post-stroke clinical practice and patient care.

Methods

This is a protocol for a realist synthesis, which involves three distinct phases: theory building (phase 1), theory testing and refinement (phase 2) and synthesis (phase 3). Phase 1 will develop initial rough programme theories (IRPTs), through literature searches (from January 2000 onwards) of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and the grey literature. Only secondary sources will be included that contribute to the development of IRPTs. Only two IRPTs, prioritised by the stakeholder group, will be taken forward to be tested and refined during phase 2. Further novel searches will be employed in phase 2, utilising the same criteria as phase 1; however, phase 2 searches will not utilise grey literature searches, and only primary research studies that contribute to the refinement of programme theories under investigation will be included. Two independent reviewers will screen and select all returned results. The reviewers will code and annotate relevant sources, resulting in ‘fragments’ to be extracted and graded based on the richness of their contribution to explanation and causal insight. Further, these fragments will be organised into ‘Context-Mechanism-Outcome’ configurations. Phase 3 of the review will involve the synthesis of context-mechanism-outcome configurations to form middle-range theory-based explanations and developed logic models for stakeholders to understand how PROMs in post-stroke clinical practice and patient care work for whom, how and under what circumstances.

Discussion

The resulting realist synthesis will provide guidance on the implementation of PROMs within routine post-stroke clinical practice and patient care and act as a touchstone for further testing and refinement of PROMs programmes.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42020138649.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. National clinical guideline for stroke. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2016. Intercollegiate Stroke Working Party. National clinical guideline for stroke. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2016.
8.
go back to reference MacIsaac R, Ali M, Peters M, English C, Rodgers H, Jenkinson C, et al. Derivation and validation of a modified short form of the stroke impact scale. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(5):e003108.CrossRef MacIsaac R, Ali M, Peters M, English C, Rodgers H, Jenkinson C, et al. Derivation and validation of a modified short form of the stroke impact scale. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(5):e003108.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: SAGE; 1997. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: SAGE; 1997.
12.
go back to reference Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.CrossRef Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Shearn K, Allmark P, Piercy H, Hirst J. Building realist program theory for large complex and messy interventions. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16(1):1609406917741796.CrossRef Shearn K, Allmark P, Piercy H, Hirst J. Building realist program theory for large complex and messy interventions. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16(1):1609406917741796.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist synthesis an introduction. London: ESRC Working Paper Series; 2004. Pawson R, Greenhalgh T, Harvey G, Walshe K. Realist synthesis an introduction. London: ESRC Working Paper Series; 2004.
23.
go back to reference Harman GH. The inference to the best explanation. Philos Rev. 1965;74(1):88.CrossRef Harman GH. The inference to the best explanation. Philos Rev. 1965;74(1):88.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) use in post-stroke patient care and clinical practice: a realist synthesis protocol
Authors
A. Smith
J. Hewitt
T. J. Quinn
M. Robling
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keywords
Stroke
Care
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01682-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Systematic Reviews 1/2021 Go to the issue