Why it is hard to use PROMs and PREMs in routine health and care

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) show the results of healthcare activities as rated by patients and others. Patients or their proxies record feedback using questionnaires. These can enhance quality for all and tailored care for individuals. This paper describes obstacles that inhibit widespread use of PROMs and PREMs and some potential solutions. Implementation is a prerequisite for any innovation to succeed. Health and care services are complex and people need to be engaged at every level. Most people are cautious about proven innovations such as PROMs and PREMs but champions and leaders can help them engage. The NASSS framework (reasons for Non-adoption, Abandonment and failure to Scale up, Spread or Sustain digital health innovations) helps indicate that implementation is complex why it may be resisted. The Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) approach aids implementation and helps ensure that everyone knows who should do what, when, where, how and why. Noise is an under-appreciated problem, especially when tracking patients over time such as before and after treatment. Interoperability of PROMs and PREMs with electronic health records should use Fast Health Interoperability Resources and internationally accepted coding schemes such as SNOMED CT and LOINC. Most projects need multiple measures to meet the needs of everyone involved. Measure selection should focus on their relevance, ease of use, and response rates. If these problems are avoided or mitigated, PROMs and PREMs can help deliver better patient outcomes, patient experience, staff satisfaction and health equity.