Patient and clinician perspectives on electronic patient-reported outcome measures in the management of advanced CKD: a qualitative study

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Colleges, School and Institutes

External organisations

  • Department of Renal Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
  • NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust and University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Abstract

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) can substantially affect patients' health-related quality of life. Electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) may capture symptoms and health-related quality of life and assist in the management of CKD. This study explored patient and clinician views on the use of a renal ePROM system.

STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 12 patients with stage 4 or 5 CKD (non-dialysis dependent); 22 clinicians (6 CKD community nurses, 1 clinical psychologist, 10 nephrologists, 3 specialist registrars, and 2 renal surgeons) in the United Kingdom.

ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussion during which patients received paper versions of the Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36 and the Integrated Patient Outcome Scale-Renal to exemplify the type of content that could be included in an ePROM. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts.

RESULTS: 4 themes were identified: (1) general opinions of PROMs, (2) potential benefits and applications of an ePROM system, (3) practical considerations for the implementation of ePROMs, and (4) concerns, barriers, and facilitators. Patients were willing to complete ePROMs on a regular basis as part of their care despite clinician concerns about patient burden. Patients assessed the questionnaires favorably. Clinicians suggested that the extent of adoption of renal ePROM systems in routine clinical settings should be based on evidence of significant impact on patient outcomes. Clinicians were concerned that an ePROM system may raise patient expectations to unrealistic levels and expose clinicians to the risk for litigation. Patients and clinicians identified potential benefits and highlighted issues and concerns that need to be addressed to ensure the successful implementation of the renal ePROM system.

LIMITATIONS: Transferability of the findings may be limited because only English-speaking participants were recruited to the study.

CONCLUSIONS: A renal ePROM system may play a supportive role in the routine clinical management of patients with advanced CKD if the concerns of clinicians and patients can be sufficiently addressed.

Bibliographic note

Copyright © 2019 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)167-178
Number of pages12
JournalAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases
Volume74
Issue number2
Early online date16 Apr 2019
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2019

Keywords

  • CKD, Chronic kidney disease, HRQOL, PRO, QOL, chronic renal failure, doctor-patient communication, ePROM, electronic patient-reported outcome measures, focus group, health-related quality of life, interview, nephrology practice, patient-reported outcome, qualitative research, renal disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas