+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Monitoring outcomes in routine practice: defining appropriate measurement criteria



Monitoring outcomes in routine practice: defining appropriate measurement criteria



Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2(1): 71-78



With the development of an internal market for health care, 'purchasing for outcomes' has become an important if somewhat rhetorical catchphrase. While there is emerging understanding about how it can be pursued, doubts are being expressed over an outcomes rather that a process emphasis. This debate has been confused by a failure to differentiate the role and importance of monitoring outcomes at an individual patient care level from those at an aggregate population/purchaser level. The clinical need to collect outcomes data on individual patient care within routine care settings places additional requirements on measurement development and selection. Traditional measurement criteria, stressing reliability, validity and responsiveness to change, must be supplemented by criteria of feasibility of use, clinical utility and acceptability. One option is to select domains or items of interest from longer instruments initially designed for research, carefully selected in relation to the purposes of measurement. Further measurement criteria must be addressed which stress the relevance of the proposed instrument to the condition and to the participants in the clinical interaction: in particular, patient-centredness and sensitivity to the setting. Monitoring the outcomes of individual patient care within routine clinical practice poses considerable challenges to researchers who are developing instruments and to clinicians who collect and use the data. A shift in emphasis is required towards more context-specific tests, addressing relevance to lay perceptions, to clinical use and to the condition and setting under review. The content validity, the responsiveness to patient-relevant and clinically relevant change and, of course, reliability must have greater primacy. In this way, outcome data which measure the quality of clinical practice and which provide appropriate criteria for research into effectiveness can be generated.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 046720468

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 9238577

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.1996.tb00029.x


Related references

Osteoarthritis Measurement in Routine Rheumatology Outpatient Practice (OMIRROP) in Australia: a survey of practice style, instrument use, responder criteria, and state-attainment criteria. Journal of Rheumatology 36(5): 1049-1055, 2009

Defining multiple criteria for meaningful outcome in routine outcome measurement using the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 49(2): 291-305, 2014

Demographic monitoring of wild muriqui populations: Criteria for defining priority areas and monitoring intensity. Plos One 12(12): E0188922-E0188922, 2017

Beyond outcomes monitoring: measurement feedback systems in child and adolescent clinical practice. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 22(4): 363-368, 2009

Research to routine monitoring; best practice water quality monitoring. Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy 5/2009: 43-44, 2009

Patient-reported outcomes in routine cancer clinical practice: a scoping review of use, impact on health outcomes, and implementation factors. Annals of Oncology 26(9): 1846-1858, 2016

Defining the scope of nursing practice: actors, criteria and economic implications. Nursing Law & Ethics 1(7): 3, 10-2, 1980

Defining clinically significant prostate cancer: pathologic criteria versus outcomes data. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 88(17): 1177-1178, 1996

Service profiling and outcomes benchmarking using the CORE-OM: toward practice-based evidence in the psychological therapies. Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 69(2): 184-196, 2001

Defining pediatric sepsis by different criteria: discrepancies in populations and implications for clinical practice. Pediatric Critical Care Medicine 13(4): E219-E226, 2012

Appropriate use criteria in clinical routine practice: implications in a nuclear cardiology lab. International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging 32(6): 1003-1009, 2016

Impact of an Automatically Generated Cancer Survivorship Care Plan on Patient-Reported Outcomes in Routine Clinical Practice: Longitudinal Outcomes of a Pragmatic, Cluster Randomized Trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 33(31): 3550-3559, 2016

Routine monitoring of outcomes is needed. Bmj 344: E2731-E2731, 2012

Evaluating different criteria for defining a complete ambulatory blood pressure monitoring recording: data from the Jackson Heart Study. Blood Pressure Monitoring, 2017

Using COPD multidimensional indices in routine clinical practice: DOSE meets all criteria. Primary Care Respiratory Journal 21(3): 245-246, 2013