Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Patient-reported outcome and experience measures in geriatric emergency medicine

Patientenberichtetes Outcome und Erfahrungswerte in der geriatrischen Notfallmedizin

  • Themenschwerpunkt
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Older people with frailty and health crises have complex physical and social needs. Modern emergency care systems are fast-flowing, using protocols optimised for single-problem presentations. Systems must incorporate individualised care to best serve people with multiple problems. Healthcare quality is typically appraised with service metrics, such as department length of stay and mortality. Worldwide, patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and patient-reported experience measures (PREM) are increasingly used in research, service development and performance evaluation, paving the ground for their use to support individual clinical decision-making. The PROMs and PREMs are person-centred metrics, which inform healthcare decisions at the individual level and which at the strategic level drive improvement through comparison of interprovider effectiveness. To date, there is no PROM or PREM specifically developed for older people with frailty and emergency care needs.

Zusammenfassung

Ältere Menschen mit Frailty und Gesundheitskrisen haben komplexe körperliche und soziale Bedürfnisse. Moderne Notfallversorgungssysteme verfügen über schnelle Abläufe und verwenden Protokolle, die für Einzelproblemdarstellungen optimiert sind. Die Systeme müssen eine individualisierte Versorgung umfassen, um Menschen mit multiplen Problemen bestmöglich zu versorgen. Die Qualität der Gesundheitsversorgung wird in der Regel anhand von Leistungskennzahlen wie die Dauer des Aufenthalts in der Abteilung und Mortalität bewertet. Weltweit werden in der Forschung, Leistungsentwicklung und Leistungsevaluierung zunehmend „patient-reported outcome measures“ (PROMs) sowie „patient-reportet experience measures“ (PREMs) verwendet und damit die Grundlage für deren Verwendung zur Unterstützung individueller klinischer Entscheidungen geschaffen. Bei den PROMs und PREMs handelt es sich um personenzentrierte Messgrößen, die auf individueller Ebene die Entscheidungen der Gesundheitsversorgung beeinflussen und auf strategischer Ebene durch den Vergleich der Wirksamkeit zwischen den Leistungserbringern Verbesserungen bewirken. Bis heute gibt es kein PROM oder PREM, das speziell für ältere Menschen mit Gebrechlichkeit und Notfallversorgungsbedarf entwickelt wurde.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akpan A, Roberts C, Bandeen-Roche K et al (2018) Standard set of health outcome measures for older persons. BMC Geriatr 18:36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Banerjee J, Conroy S, Cooke MW (2013) Quality care for older people with urgent and emergency care needs in UK emergency departments. Emerg Med J 30:699–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Black N (2013) Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ 346:f167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Black N, Varaganum M, Hutchings A (2014) Relationship between patient reported experience (PREMs) and patient reported outcomes (PROMs) in elective surgery. BMJ Qual Saf 23:534–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burkett E, Martin-Khan M, Gray L (2017) Quality indicators in the care of older persons in the emergency department: a systematic review of the literature. Australas J Ageing 36:286–298

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Butt Z, Reeve B (2012) Enhancing the patient’s voice: Standards in the design and selection of patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) for use in patient-centered outcomes research. Contracted report for the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). http://www.pcori.org/assets/Enhancing-the-Patients-Voice-Standards-in-the-Design-and-Selection-of-Patient-Reported-Outcomes-Measures-for-Use-in-Patient-Centered-Outcomes-Research.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2020

  7. Calvert M, Kyte D, Price G et al (2019) Maximising the impact of patient reported outcome assessment for patients and society. BMJ 364:k5267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cappelleri JC, Zou KH, Bushmakin AG et al (2014) Patient-reported outcomes: measurement, implementation and interpretation. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  9. Conroy S, Nickel CH, Jónsdóttir AB et al (2016) The development of a European curriculum in Geriatric Emergency Medicine. Eur Geriatr Med 7:315–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Curran J, Cassidy C, Chiasson D et al (2017) Patient and caregiver expectations of emergency department care: a scoping literature review. Int Emerg Nurs 32:62–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. EUSEM (2018) Section of geriatric emergency medicine. https://eusem.org/sections-and-committees/sections/geriatric-section. Accessed 1 July 2020

  12. Graham B, Endacott R, Smith JE et al (2019) ‘They do not care how much you know until they know how much you care’: a qualitative meta-synthesis of patient experience in the emergency department. Emerg Med J 36:355–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Greene J, Hibbard JH (2012) Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med 27:520–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Greenhalgh J, Gooding K, Gibbons E et al (2018) How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2:42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Keeble E, Roberts HC, Williams CD et al (2019) Outcomes of hospital admissions among frail older people: a 2-year cohort study. Br J Gen Pract 69:e555–e560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mannheim I, Schwartz E, Xi W et al (2019) Inclusion of plder adults in the research and design of digital technology. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16:3718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mason N, Sox H, Whitlock E (2019) A patient-centered approach to comparative effectiveness research focused on older adults: Lessons from the patient-centered outcomes research institute. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:21–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Naik AD, Dindo LN, Van Liew JR et al (2018) Development of a clinically feasible process for identifying individual health priorities. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:1872–1879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. NICE (2012) CG138: Patient experience in adult NHS services: improving the experience of care for people using adult NHS services. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg138/chapter/1-guidance. Accessed 25 Sept 2018

  20. Parke B, Hunter K, Schulz M et al (2016) Know me—A new person-centered approach for dementia-friendly emergency department care. Dementia 18:432–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Perry A, Tejada JM, Melady D (2018) An approach to the older patient in the emergency department. Clin Geriatr Med 34:299–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Porter I, Gonçalves-Bradley D, Ricci-Cabello I et al (2016) Framework and guidance for implementing patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: evidence, challenges and opportunities. J Comp Eff Res 5:507–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schick-Makaroff K, Karimi-Dehkordi M, Cuthbertson L et al (2020) Using patient- and family-reported outcome and experience measures across transitions of care for frail older adults living at home: a meta-narrative synthesis. Gerontologist. Published online ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz162

  24. Shankar KN, Bhatia BK, Schuur JD (2014) Toward patient-centered care: a systematic review of older adults’ views of quality emergency care. Ann Emerg Med 63:529–550.e1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Singh I, Aithal S (2018) Selecting best-suited “patient-related outcomes” in older people admitted to an acute geriatric or emergency frailty unit and applying quality improvement research to improve patient care. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 9:309–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Singler K, Christ M, Sieber C et al (2011) Geriatrische Patienten in Notaufnahme und Intensivmedizin. Internist 52:934–938

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Tang JA, Oh T, Scheer JK et al (2014) The current trend of administering a patient-generated index in the oncological setting: a systematic review. Oncol Rev 8:245

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Valderas J, Alonso J (2008) Patient reported outcome measures: a model-based classification system for research and clinical practice. Qual Life Res 17:1125–1135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Valderas JM, Kotzeva A, Espallargues M et al (2008) The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res 17:179–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Van Oppen JD, Keillor L, Mitchell Á et al (2019) What older people want from emergency care: a systematic review. Emerg Med J 36:754–761

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, LE1 7RH, Leicester, UK

    James D. van Oppen, Nicola J. Mackintosh & Simon P. Conroy

  2. Emergency and Specialist Medicine, University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust, LE1 5WW, Leicester, UK

    James D. van Oppen & Simon P. Conroy

  3. Health Services and Policy Research Group, University of Exeter, EX1 2LU, Exeter, UK

    Jose M. Valderas

Authors
  1. James D. van Oppen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jose M. Valderas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nicola J. Mackintosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  4. Simon P. Conroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James D. van Oppen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

J.D. van Oppen, J.M. Valderas, N.J. Mackintosh and S.P. Conroy declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

For this article no studies with human participants or animals were performed by any of the authors. All studies performed were in accordance with the ethical standards indicated in each case. Ethical approval was not required for this topic review.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van Oppen, J.D., Valderas, J.M., Mackintosh, N.J. et al. Patient-reported outcome and experience measures in geriatric emergency medicine. Z Gerontol Geriat 54, 122–124 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-020-01777-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-020-01777-4

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter