The effectiveness of providing peer benchmarked feedback to hip replacement surgeons based on patient-reported outcome measures—results from the PROFILE (Patient-Reported Outcomes: Feedback Interpretation and Learning Experiment) trial: a cluster randomised controlled study

نویسندگان

  • Maria B Boyce
  • John P Browne
چکیده

OBJECTIVE To test whether providing surgeons with peer benchmarked feedback about patient-reported outcomes is effective in improving patient outcomes. DESIGN Cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING Secondary care--Ireland. PARTICIPANTS Surgeons were recruited through the Irish Institute of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, and patients were recruited in hospitals prior to surgery. We randomly allocated 21 surgeons and 550 patients. INTERVENTION Surgeons in the intervention group received peer benchmarked patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) feedback and education. MAIN OUTCOME VARIABLE Postoperative Oxford Hip Score (OHS). RESULTS Primary outcome data were available for 11 intervention surgeons with responsibility for 230 patients and 10 control surgeons with responsibility for 228 patients. The mean postoperative OHS for the intervention group was 40.8 (95% CI 39.8 to 41.7) and for the control group was 41.9 (95% CI 41.1 to 42.7). The adjusted effect estimate was -1.1 (95% CI -2.4 to 0.2, p=0.09). Secondary outcomes were the Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), EQ-5D and the proportion of patients reporting a problem after surgery. The mean postoperative HOOS for the intervention group was 36.2 and for the control group was 37.1. The adjusted effect estimate was -1.1 (95% CI -2.4 to 0.3, p=0.1). The mean postoperative EQ-5D for the intervention group was 0.85 and for the control group was 0.87. The adjusted effect estimate was -0.02 (95% CI -0.05 to 0.008, p=0.2). 27% of intervention patients and 24% of control patients reported at least one complication after surgery (adjusted OR=1.2, 95% CI 0.6 to 2.3, p=0.6). CONCLUSIONS Outcomes for patients operated on by surgeons who had received peer benchmarked PROMs data were not statistically different from the outcomes of patients operated on by surgeons who did not receive feedback. PROMs information alone seems to be insufficient to identify opportunities for quality improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ISRCTN 69032522.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Iranian EFL Learners’ Reactions to Different Feedbacks in Writing Classrooms: Teacher Written Comments (TWC) vs. Peer Written Comments (PWC)

The teaching of writing has recently begun to move away from a concentration on the written product to an emphasis on the process of writing. Feedback is a fundamental element of the process approach to writing. It can be defined as input from a reader to a writer with the effect of providing information to the writer for a revision. This study reports on the effectiveness of two types of feedb...

متن کامل

The effect of posterior and lateral approach on patient-reported outcome measures and physical function in patients with osteoarthritis, undergoing total hip replacement: a randomised controlled trial protocol

BACKGROUND Total hip replacement provides pain relief and improves physical function and quality of life in patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. The incidence of hip replacement operations is expected to increase due to the growing elderly population. Overall, the posterior approach and lateral approach are the two most commonly used approaches for hip replacement operations. The posteri...

متن کامل

Surgeon’s experiences of receiving peer benchmarked feedback using patient-reported outcome measures: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to provide healthcare professionals with peer benchmarked feedback is growing. However, there is little evidence on the opinions of professionals on the value of this information in practice. The purpose of this research is to explore surgeon's experiences of receiving peer benchmarked PROMs feedback and to examine whether this inf...

متن کامل

The Effect of Multi-step Oral-revision Processes on Iranian EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing Achievement

The purpose of this study was to explore the role of two multi-step oral-revision processes as feedback providing tools on Iranian EFL learners’ argumentative writing achievement. The participants taking part in this study were 45 Iranian EFL students who were randomly assigned into three groups. The participants of the groups were given three argumentative writing assignments, each assignment ...

متن کامل

Web-based Comparative Patient-reported Outcome Feedback to Support Quality Improvement and Comparative Effectiveness Research in Total Joint Replacement

INTRODUCTION Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are rarely included in quality monitoring systems, surgeon comparative feedback reports, or registries. We present the design and implementation of a secure website in a federally funded research program-Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement (FORCE-TJR)-to return comparative PRO reports to participat...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 5  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2015