Abstract
OBJECTIVES:The National Institutes of Health (NIH) created the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to allow efficient, online measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), but it remains untested whether PROMIS improves outcomes. Here, we aimed to compare the impact of gastrointestinal (GI) PROMIS measures vs. usual care on patient outcomes.METHODS:We performed a pragmatic clinical trial with an off-on study design alternating weekly between intervention (GI PROMIS) and control arms at one Veterans Affairs and three university-affiliated specialty clinics. Adults with GI symptoms were eligible. Intervention patients completed GI PROMIS symptom questionnaires on an e-portal 1 week before their visit; PROs were available for review by patients and their providers before and during the clinic visit. Usual care patients were managed according to customary practices. Our primary outcome was patient satisfaction as determined by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included provider interpersonal skills (Doctors' Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire (DISQ)) and shared decision-making (9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)).RESULTS:There were 217 and 154 patients in the GI PROMIS and control arms, respectively. Patient satisfaction was similar between groups (P>0.05). Intervention patients had similar assessments of their providers' interpersonal skills (DISQ 89.4±11.7 vs. 89.8±16.0, P=0.79) and shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9 79.3±12.4 vs. 79.0±22.0, P=0.85) vs. controls.CONCLUSIONS:This is the first controlled trial examining the impact of NIH PROMIS in clinical practice. One-time use of GI PROMIS did not improve patient satisfaction or assessment of provider interpersonal skills and shared decision-making. Future studies examining how to optimize PROs in clinical practice are encouraged before widespread adoption.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1546-1556 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | American Journal of Gastroenterology |
| Volume | 111 |
| Issue number | 11 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 1 2016 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Hepatology
- Gastroenterology
Cite this
Impact of National Institutes of Health Gastrointestinal PROMIS Measures in Clinical Practice : Results of a Multicenter Controlled Trial. / Almario, Christopher V.; Chey, William D.; Khanna, Dinesh; Mosadeghi, Sasan; Ahmed, Shahzad; Afghani, Elham; Whitman, Cynthia; Fuller, Garth; Reid, Mark; Bolus, Roger; Dennis, Buddy; Encarnacion, Rey; Martinez, Bibiana; Soares, Jennifer; Modi, Rushaba; Agarwal, Nikhil; Lee, Aaron; Kubomoto, Scott; Sharma, Gobind; Bolus, Sally; Spiegel, Brennan M.R.
In: American Journal of Gastroenterology, Vol. 111, No. 11, 01.11.2016, p. 1546-1556.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Impact of National Institutes of Health Gastrointestinal PROMIS Measures in Clinical Practice
T2 - Results of a Multicenter Controlled Trial
AU - Almario, Christopher V.
AU - Chey, William D.
AU - Khanna, Dinesh
AU - Mosadeghi, Sasan
AU - Ahmed, Shahzad
AU - Afghani, Elham
AU - Whitman, Cynthia
AU - Fuller, Garth
AU - Reid, Mark
AU - Bolus, Roger
AU - Dennis, Buddy
AU - Encarnacion, Rey
AU - Martinez, Bibiana
AU - Soares, Jennifer
AU - Modi, Rushaba
AU - Agarwal, Nikhil
AU - Lee, Aaron
AU - Kubomoto, Scott
AU - Sharma, Gobind
AU - Bolus, Sally
AU - Spiegel, Brennan M.R.
PY - 2016/11/1
Y1 - 2016/11/1
N2 - OBJECTIVES:The National Institutes of Health (NIH) created the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to allow efficient, online measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), but it remains untested whether PROMIS improves outcomes. Here, we aimed to compare the impact of gastrointestinal (GI) PROMIS measures vs. usual care on patient outcomes.METHODS:We performed a pragmatic clinical trial with an off-on study design alternating weekly between intervention (GI PROMIS) and control arms at one Veterans Affairs and three university-affiliated specialty clinics. Adults with GI symptoms were eligible. Intervention patients completed GI PROMIS symptom questionnaires on an e-portal 1 week before their visit; PROs were available for review by patients and their providers before and during the clinic visit. Usual care patients were managed according to customary practices. Our primary outcome was patient satisfaction as determined by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included provider interpersonal skills (Doctors' Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire (DISQ)) and shared decision-making (9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)).RESULTS:There were 217 and 154 patients in the GI PROMIS and control arms, respectively. Patient satisfaction was similar between groups (P>0.05). Intervention patients had similar assessments of their providers' interpersonal skills (DISQ 89.4±11.7 vs. 89.8±16.0, P=0.79) and shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9 79.3±12.4 vs. 79.0±22.0, P=0.85) vs. controls.CONCLUSIONS:This is the first controlled trial examining the impact of NIH PROMIS in clinical practice. One-time use of GI PROMIS did not improve patient satisfaction or assessment of provider interpersonal skills and shared decision-making. Future studies examining how to optimize PROs in clinical practice are encouraged before widespread adoption.
AB - OBJECTIVES:The National Institutes of Health (NIH) created the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) to allow efficient, online measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs), but it remains untested whether PROMIS improves outcomes. Here, we aimed to compare the impact of gastrointestinal (GI) PROMIS measures vs. usual care on patient outcomes.METHODS:We performed a pragmatic clinical trial with an off-on study design alternating weekly between intervention (GI PROMIS) and control arms at one Veterans Affairs and three university-affiliated specialty clinics. Adults with GI symptoms were eligible. Intervention patients completed GI PROMIS symptom questionnaires on an e-portal 1 week before their visit; PROs were available for review by patients and their providers before and during the clinic visit. Usual care patients were managed according to customary practices. Our primary outcome was patient satisfaction as determined by the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included provider interpersonal skills (Doctors' Interpersonal Skills Questionnaire (DISQ)) and shared decision-making (9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9)).RESULTS:There were 217 and 154 patients in the GI PROMIS and control arms, respectively. Patient satisfaction was similar between groups (P>0.05). Intervention patients had similar assessments of their providers' interpersonal skills (DISQ 89.4±11.7 vs. 89.8±16.0, P=0.79) and shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9 79.3±12.4 vs. 79.0±22.0, P=0.85) vs. controls.CONCLUSIONS:This is the first controlled trial examining the impact of NIH PROMIS in clinical practice. One-time use of GI PROMIS did not improve patient satisfaction or assessment of provider interpersonal skills and shared decision-making. Future studies examining how to optimize PROs in clinical practice are encouraged before widespread adoption.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84980378517&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84980378517&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/ajg.2016.305
DO - 10.1038/ajg.2016.305
M3 - Article
C2 - 27481311
AN - SCOPUS:84980378517
VL - 111
SP - 1546
EP - 1556
JO - American Journal of Gastroenterology
JF - American Journal of Gastroenterology
SN - 0002-9270
IS - 11
ER -