Impact of an Enhanced Patient Reported Outcome Measurement (PROM) Strategy on PROM Completion Rates

Not Applicable

Recruiting

• Conditions: PROM

• Registration Number: NCT06078137
• Lead Sponsor: University of Texas at Austin

Brief Summary

in clinical practice has been curbed by issues related to the variability in use of these tools for decision-making, and universally poor completion rates over time. Patients may not see the relevance of responding to questions about their health, and the results may not be reviewed by the clinician or presented and visualized with the patient. The questions may seem impersonal (e.g. too general and not directly assessing their individual goals, motivations, aspirations), irrelevant (e.g., asking about symptoms of depression when a person is seeking musculoskeletal specialty care) and insensitive (e.g., asking about sensitive subjects at the outset thereby disengaging the individual), and redundant or awkward (e.g., presenting questions that seem very similar or administered in strange orders). Finally, PROMs may also confer some burden (e.g., long PROM questionnaires often used for research may be unnecessarily burdensome for patient care), and provide logistical challenges (e.g., difficulties in administering the tools at the right time points), adding to a poor patient experience.

Detailed Description

The investigator sought to assess the impact of an enhanced and more personalized PROM strategy to overcome these barriers by providing i) a primer ahead of PROMs administration, ii) simple 3-part survey capturing capability, comfort, and calm, iii) a short distress and misconception survey, iv) goal setting question, v) summary sheet of PRO scores, and vi) a commitment intervention. Patients will subsequently be requested to complete the CollaboRATE survey, JSPPE survey, and questions about their experience in relation to the new format of surveys (only if they were in the intervention group) before receiving a text message reminder around 6-weeks followed by a set of deprioritization questions and the 3-part capability, comfort, and calm survey.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2023-09-01
• Study First Submitted: 2023-09-28
• Status Verified: 2023-10
• Study First Submitted QC: 2023-10-05
• Last Update Submitted: 2023-10-05
• Study First Posted: 2023-10-11
• Last Update Posted: 2023-10-11
• Primary Completion: 2024-09-01
• Study Completion: 2024-09-01

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: RECRUITING
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 200

Inclusion Criteria

All new patients English and Spanish speakers

Exclusion criteria:

Cognitive deficiency precluding PROM completion Language other than English or Spanish

Exclusion Criteria

Not provided

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Completion of deprioritization options 1 or 2 at 6-week follow-up via text or email	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks	"1 = I got what I needed" "2 = I didn't receive anything useful" "3 = I'm still receiving care"
Completion of 3-survey patient-reported outcome measure at 6-week follow-up via Text	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks	We will assess the completion of 3-survey patient-reported outcome measure at 6-week follow-up via Text.
Completion of answered text	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks	We will assess the completion response rate.
Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy	through study completion, an average of 6 weeks	The Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy includes five 7-point scale questions and higher scores indicated greater perceived clinician empathy.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

University of Texas Health Austin; 🇺🇸 Austin, Texas, United States