Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Sports Medicine: A Concise Resource for Clinicians and Researchers
| Autor: | Kenneth C. Lam, Ashley N Marshall, Alison R. Snyder Valier |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Health Knowledge
Attitudes Practice medicine.medical_specialty Patient-Reported Outcomes Sports medicine Physical Therapy Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation Sports Medicine Patient care 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Resource (project management) Patient-Centered Care Surveys and Questionnaires medicine Humans Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Patient Reported Outcome Measures Health related quality of life 030222 orthopedics Physical Education and Training business.industry Outcome measures Reproducibility of Results 030229 sport sciences General Medicine Patient-centered care Quality Improvement female genital diseases and pregnancy complications Family medicine Quality of Life Patient-reported outcome business |
| Zdroj: | J Athl Train |
| ISSN: | 1062-6050 |
| DOI: | 10.4085/1062-6050-171-19 |
| Popis: | Background Despite the importance of assessing patient outcomes during patient care, current evidence suggests relatively limited use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) by athletic trainers (ATs). Major barriers to PROM use include lack of knowledge, navigating the intricate process of assessing a wide variety of PROMs, and selecting the most appropriate PROM to use for care. A concise resource for ATs to consult when selecting and implementing PROMs may help facilitate the use of PROMs in athletic health care. Objective To review the instrument essentials and clinical utility of PROMs used by ATs. Methods We studied 11 lower extremity region–specific, 10 upper extremity region–specific, 6 generic, and 3 single-item PROMs based on the endorsement of at least 10% of ATs who use PROMs, as reported in a recent investigation of PROM use in athletic training. A literature search was conducted for each included PROM that focused on identifying and extracting components of the instrument essentials (ie, instrument development, reliability, validity, responsiveness and interpretability, and precision) and clinical utility (ie, acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness). Through independent review and group consensus, we also classified each PROM question by International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health domain and health-related quality-of-life dimensions. Key Findings The PROMs contained in this report generally possessed appropriate instrument essentials and clinical utility. Moreover, the PROMs generally emphasized body structure and function as well as the physical functioning of the patient. Athletic trainers aiming to assess patients via a whole-person approach may benefit from combining different PROMs for use in patient care to ensure broader attention to disablement health domains and health-related quality-of-life dimensions. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|