Clinicians’ perspective on the implemented KLIK PROM portal in clinical practice

Autor: Hedy A. van Oers, Martha A. Grootenhuis, Lotte Haverman, Lieke H. Kooij, Maud M. van Muilekom, Anouk W. Gathier, Johannes B. van Goudoever, Lorynn Teela
Přispěvatelé: Pediatric surgery, ACS - Diabetes & metabolism, AGEM - Endocrinology, metabolism and nutrition, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development (AR&D), Graduate School, Child and Adolescent Psychiatry & Psychosocial Care, ARD - Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, APH - Mental Health, Adult Psychiatry, Neonatology, AGEM - Digestive immunity, AGEM - Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism, APH - Methodology, APH - Personalized Medicine
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2021
Předmět:
Zdroj: Quality of Life Research, 30(11), 3267-3277. Springer Netherlands
Quality of Life Research
Teela, L, van Muilekom, M M, Kooij, L H, Gathier, A W, van Goudoever, J B, Grootenhuis, M A, Haverman, L & van Oers, H A 2021, ' Clinicians’ perspective on the implemented KLIK PROM portal in clinical practice ', Quality of Life Research, vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 3267-3277 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02522-5
Quality of life research, 30(11), 3267-3277. Springer Netherlands
ISSN: 0962-9343
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-020-02522-5
Popis: Purpose Since 2011, the evidence-based KLIK Patient Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) portal has been implemented in clinical practice in > 20 Dutch hospitals. Patients and/or parents complete PROMs on Health Related Quality of Life, symptoms and psychosocial functioning before their outpatient consultation. Answers are converted into an ePROfile and discussed by clinicians during consultation to monitor well-being over time and detect problems early. This study aims to get insight into the KLIK implementation from the clinician’s perspective. Methods As part of the KLIK implementation process, annual meetings were held with multidisciplinary teams to evaluate the use of KLIK. An online questionnaire was sent regarding (1) overall satisfaction, (2) feeling competent to discuss PROMs, (3) use of KLIK during the consultation, (4) influence of KLIK on the consultation, (5) usability of the KLIK PROM portal, (6) satisfaction with PROMs and feedback, and (7) support of the KLIK expert team. Open questions about (dis)advantages were included. Descriptive analyses were used. Results One hundred and forty-eight clinicians (response-rate 61%) from 14 hospitals in the Netherlands participated. Results show that: (1) clinicians report an overall satisfaction of median = 69/100 (visual analogue scale), (2) 85.8% feel competent discussing the ePROfile, (3) 70.3% (almost) always discuss the ePROfile, (4) 70.3% think that KLIK improves consultation, (5) 71.6% think KLIK is easy to use, (6) 80.4% are satisfied with the feedback of the overall KLIK ePROfile, (7) 71.6% experience sufficient support of the KLIK team. Conclusion Participating clinicians are generally satisfied with KLIK. Improvements to the KLIK PROM portal are now realized based on the mentioned disadvantages (e.g., shorten PROM completion by use of PROMIS and integrating KLIK with Electronic Health Records).
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje