10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Health Data Processes: A Framework for Analyzing and Discussing Efficient Use and Reuse of Health Data With a Focus on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The collection and use of patient health data are central to any kind of activity in the health care system. These data may be produced during routine clinical processes or obtained directly from the patient using patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. Although efficiency and other reasons justify data availability for a range of potentially relevant uses, these data are nearly always collected for a single specific purpose. The health care literature reflects this narrow scope, and there is limited literature on the joint use of health data for daily clinical use, clinical research, surveillance, and administrative purposes. The aim of this paper is to provide a framework for discussing the efficient use of health data with a specific focus on the role of PRO measures. PRO data may be used at an individual patient level to inform patient care or shared decision making and to tailor care to individual needs or group-level needs as a complement to health record data, such as that on mortality and readmission, in order to inform service delivery and measure the real-world effectiveness of treatment. PRO measures may be used either for their own sake, to provide valuable information from the patient perspective, or as a proxy for clinical data that would otherwise not be feasible to collect. We introduce a framework to analyze any health care activity that involves health data. The framework consists of four data processes (patient identification, data collection, data aggregation and data use), further structured into two dichotomous dimensions in each data process (level: group vs patient; timeframe: ad hoc vs systematic). This framework is used to analyze various health activities with respect to joint use of data, considering the technical, legal, organizational, and logistical challenges that characterize each data process. Finally, we propose a model for joint use of health data with data collected during follow-up as a base. Demands for health data will continue to increase, which will further add to the need for the concerted use and reuse of PRO data for parallel purposes. Repeated and uncoordinated PRO data collection for the same patient for different purposes results in misuse of resources for the patient and the health care system as well as reduced response rates owing to questionnaire fatigue. PRO data can be routinely collected both at the hospital (from inpatients as well as outpatients) and outside of hospital settings; in primary or social care settings; or in the patient’s home, provided the health informatics infrastructure is in place. In the future, clinical settings are likely to be a prominent source of PRO data; however, we are also likely to see increased remote collection of PRO data by patients in their own home (telePRO). Data collection for research and quality surveillance will have to adapt to this circumstance and adopt complementary data capture methods that take advantage of the utility of PRO data collected during daily clinical practice. The European Union’s regulation with respect to the protection of personal data—General Data Protection Regulation—imposes severe restrictions on the use of health data for parallel purposes, and steps should be taken to alleviate the consequences while still protecting personal data against misuse.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature.

          The purpose of this paper is to summarize the best evidence regarding the impact of providing patient-reported outcomes (PRO) information to health care professionals in daily clinical practice. Systematic review of randomized clinical trials (Medline, Cochrane Library; reference lists of previous systematic reviews; and requests to authors and experts in the field). Out of 1,861 identified references published between 1978 and 2007, 34 articles corresponding to 28 original studies proved eligible. Most trials (19) were conducted in primary care settings performed in the USA (21) and assessed adult patients (25). Information provided to professionals included generic health status (10), mental health (14), and other (6). Most studies suffered from methodologic limitations, including analysis that did not correspond with the unit of allocation. In most trials, the impact of PRO was limited. Fifteen of 23 studies (65%) measuring process of care observed at least one significant result favoring the intervention, as did eight of 17 (47%) that measured outcomes of care. Methodological concerns limit the strength of inference regarding the impact of providing PRO information to clinicians. Results suggest great heterogeneity of impact; contexts and interventions that will yield important benefits remain to be clearly defined.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Maximising the impact of patient reported outcome assessment for patients and society

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              AmbuFlex: tele-patient-reported outcomes (telePRO) as the basis for follow-up in chronic and malignant diseases

              Purpose A tele-patient-reported outcome (telePRO) model includes outpatients’ reports of symptoms and health status from home before or instead of visiting the outpatient clinic. In the generic PRO system, AmbuFlex, telePRO is used to decide whether a patient needs an outpatient visit and is thus a tool for better symptom assessment, more patient-centred care, and more efficient use of resources. Specific PROs are developed for each patient group. In this paper we describe our experiences with large-scale implementations of telePRO as the basis for follow-up in chronic and malignant diseases using the generic PRO system AmbuFlex. Methods The AmbuFlex concept consists of three generic elements: PRO data collection, PRO-based automated decision algorithm, and PRO-based graphical overview for clinical decision support. Experiences were described with respect to these elements. Results By December 2015, AmbuFlex was implemented in nine diagnostic groups in Denmark. A total of 13,135 outpatients from 15 clinics have been individually referred. From epilepsy clinics, about 70 % of all their outpatients were referred. The response rates for the initial questionnaire were 81–98 %. Of 8256 telePRO-based contacts from epilepsy outpatients, up to 48 % were handled without other contact than the PRO assessment. Clinicians as well as patients reported high satisfaction with the system. Conclusion The results indicate that telePRO is feasible and may be recommended as the platform for follow-up in several patient groups with chronic and malignant diseases and with many consecutive outpatient contacts.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Med Internet Res
                J. Med. Internet Res
                JMIR
                Journal of Medical Internet Research
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                1439-4456
                1438-8871
                May 2019
                21 May 2019
                : 21
                : 5
                : e12412
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Occupational Medicine, University Research Clinic AmbuFlex/WestChronic Aarhus University Herning Denmark
                [2 ] Department of Clinical Epidemiology Aarhus University Hospital Aarhus Denmark
                [3 ] University of Exeter Collaboration for Academic Primary Care, Health Services & Policy Research Group National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (South West Peninsula) University of Exeter Exeter United Kingdom
                [4 ] Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research Institute of Applied Health Research University of Birmingham, Edgbaston Birmingham United Kingdom
                [5 ] National Institute for Health Research Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre and National Institute for Health Research Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre University of Birmingham, Edgbaston Birmingham United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Niels Henrik Ingvar Hjollund niehjo@ 123456rm.dk
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6697-6597
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9299-1555
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7679-6741
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1856-837X
                Article
                v21i5e12412
                10.2196/12412
                6547770
                31115347
                80a26326-838d-41e5-845f-b4e01c4d5748
                ©Niels Henrik Ingvar Hjollund, José Maria Valderas, Derek Kyte, Melanie Jane Calvert. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 21.05.2019.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.jmir.org/.as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 5 October 2018
                : 20 December 2018
                : 2 March 2019
                : 24 March 2019
                Categories
                Viewpoint
                Viewpoint

                Medicine
                medical informatics,patient-reported outcome,patient-physician relationship,data collection

                Comments

                Comment on this article