Close
Explore more Centres, Projects and Groups
Welcome
Welcome Banner
Woman using walking frame, Credit: istock

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Patients’ views are essential to achieving high-quality health care. Our PROMs research is helping to improve patient care by evaluating the performance of health care providers and guiding NHS reforms.

Bottom Content
About

Patients’ views are essential to achieving high-quality health care. Our PROMs research is helping to improve patient care by evaluating the performance of health care providers and guiding NHS reforms.

Who we are

Current staff conducting this important work are Nick Black, Sarah Smith, Joljin Hendriks, Min Hae Park, Esther Kwong, Jan van der Meulen, Andrew Hutchings, Belene Podmore and Eva Protopapa.

Resources and publications

Over 40 academic papers have stemmed from our PROMs research, some of which included the development of new PROM questionnaires.

About
About PROMs

Overview

Patients’ views are essential to achieving high-quality care. Their perspective complements that of clinicians, providing unique insights into perceptions of their health status and health-related quality of life. It is therefore important to find ways of involving patients to report on their own health outcomes.

PROMs, which measure a patient’s health status or health-related quality of life, are gathered through short, self-completed questionnaires. PROMs may be collected before and after a procedure or at regular intervals for those with long-term conditions. This information gives an indication of the outcomes or quality of care delivered to patients.

We have been at the forefront of PROMs research for over 25 years. Our work has been instrumental in the implementation of policies which allow patients to report on their own health outcomes. We have also made major contributions to developing and psychometrically testing PROMs for a wide range of conditions and interventions.

History of PROMs research

Work on PROMs at the School started in the 1980s with studies of prostate surgery in men and hysterectomy in women. In the 1990s, experts from medicine, sociology, psychology, epidemiology and statistics developed and tested new PROMs using rigorous qualitative and quantitative methods. PROMs were developed for stress incontinence, menorrhagia, plastic surgery, multiple sclerosis, day surgery, and coronary revascularisation.

This work was complemented by studies covering a range of methodological aspects on the routine use of PROMs in health care, including the influence of patients’ preoperative health, their expectations of outcomes, the impact of non-recruitment and non-response, and comparisons of patients’ and clinicians’ views of outcomes.

Psychometric expertise

The school has been contributing work in psychometric methods for over 30 years and has become one of the few well-known UK groups able to undertake robust psychometric evaluation and development.  Our early work was based in Classical Test Theory but has now broadened to include modern psychometric methods based on Rasch Measurement Theory.

We have used these methods to develop and evaluate questionnaire based measurement instruments across a wide range of clinical areas (including stroke, visual impairment, intensive care, dementia, heavy menstrual bleeding, diabetic neuropathy, childhood disability, carer well-being, diabetic neuropathy, and unplanned pregnancy, prostate cancer).

We host the “Outcomes Group” – a UK wide methodological forum which meets 3 times a year to share, discuss and debate issues arising in health related measurement.

PROMs in elective surgery

In 2005, a systematic review of ways to assess outcomes following hip and knee replacement, varicose vein surgery, hernia repair and cataract surgery was conducted. Pre and post-operative questionnaires for the four procedures were identified, and the feasibility of their routine use in the NHS tested. The findings highlighted that it was possible to recruit patients, follow them up and make risk-adjusted comparisons of providers, all at reasonable cost.

‘A major development in the history of surgery’

These findings were reported to the Department of Health in England in 2007 which announced that PROMs would be mandatory for all NHS patients undergoing groin hernia operations, hip replacements, knee replacements and varicose vein operations from April 2009. This continues and since 2011, these PROMs have been included in the NHS Outcomes Framework.

More than half a million patients participated in the programme in its first three years, representing 70% of eligible patients. Since April 2010, the outcomes for every hospital in the NHS in England have been published online.

In 2011 Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, Medical Director of the NHS, told the Financial Times newspaper that the advent of PROMs ‘would shift the focus among doctors [away] from technocratic results, where an operation was deemed a success regardless of whether the patient remained in pain.’ In 2012, Professor Sir Norman Williams, then president of the Royal College of Surgeons, described PROMs as a ‘major development in the history of surgery’.

Since 2010 we have studied many methodological aspects of using PROMs to compare providers, including:

  • The relationship with patients’ views of the humanity (experience) of their care
  • Impact of differences in surgery rates between districts
  • Impact of different ways of defining outlier providers, equity of use and of outcome
  • Impact of variations in outcomes of individual surgeons.

PROMs in dementia

Since 2013, we have been working on a programme of research to measure the health-related quality of life of people with dementia and their lay carers. Building on pioneering work a decade earlier that developed PROMs both for completion by people with dementia (DEMQOL) and by their lay carers (DEMQOL-Proxy), we have transformed those instruments using modern psychometric methods so that proxies’ views can reliably provide an indication of patients’ views.

These new PROMs have been used to assess the impact of memory clinics and have shown the improvements in quality of life that result. This has also allowed us to estimate the cost-utility of these services.

PROMs in emergency admissions to hospital

The inevitable lack of any knowledge of a person’s health status before an emergency admission to hospital has prevented the meaningful use of PROMs in assessing the quality of the care they receive. We are currently investigating the use of PROMs based on patients’ recall of their pre-admission health in a medical condition (heart attack) and surgical condition requiring emergency abdominal surgery.

Influence of comorbidity on PROMs

The impact of secondary conditions (comorbidity) that a patient has on their PROM is well recognised. Until now, fairly simple measures of comorbidity have been used, but we are investigating the use of more sophisticated measures that might improve the accuracy of taking comorbidity into account when comparing the performance of providers.

PROMs in prostate cancer

We are also conducting another study which is examining how patient reported outcomes vary for different ways of treating prostate cancer and between different providers.

Resources & publications
Resources
Publications
Factors associated with non-response in routine use of patient reported outcome measures after elective surgery in England
Hutchings A, Neuburger J, Gross Frie K, van der Meulen J, Black N
Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012;10:34
Single item on satisfaction with condition provided additional insight into impact of surgery
Grosse Frie K, van der Meulen J, Black N
J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65(6):619-26
Late response to patient reported outcome questionnaires was associated with worse outcome
Hutchings A, Grosse Frie K, Neuburger J, van der Meulen J, Black N
J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:218-225
Using patient reported outcomes (PROs) to compare the performance of providers: does the choice of measure matter?
Neuburger J, Hutchings A, van der Meulen J, Black N
Med Care 2013;51(6):517-523
Influence of surgical rate on patients' reported clinical need and outcomes in English NHS
Black N, Varagunam M, Hutchings A
J Public Health 2014;36(3):497-503
Impact on hospital performance of introducing routine patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in surgery
Varagunam M, Hutchings A, Neuburger J, Black N
J Health Serv Res Pol 2014;19:77-84
Estimating recruitment rates for routine use of patient reported outcome measures and the impact on provider comparisons
Hutchings A, Neuburger J, van der Meulen J, Black N
BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:66  doi:10.1186/1472-6963-14-66
Do patient reported outcomes offer a more sensitive method for comparing the outcomes of consultants than mortality?
Varagunam M, Hutchings A, Black N
A multi-level analysis of routine data. BMJ Qual Saf 2015;24:195-202
Conceptualising and measuring health-related quality of life in critical care
Lim WC, Black N, Lamping D, Rowan K, Mays N
J Critical Care 2016;31:183-193
Reliability and validity of a self-administration version of DEMQOL-Proxy
Hendriks AAJ, Smith SC, Chrysanthaki T, Black N
Int J Geriatric Psychiatry
Reliability and validity of a self-administration version of DEMQOL-Proxy
Hendriks AA, Smith SC, Chrysanthaki T, Black N. (2016)
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. Jun doi: 10.1002/gps.4515
Comparison of general population, patient and carer utility values for dementia
Rowen D, Mulhern B, Banerjee S, Tait R, Watchurst C, Smith S, Young T, Knapp M, Brazier J.
Medical Decision Making, 2015, 35:68-80
Development of the Carer Well-Being and Support Questionnaire
Quirk A, Smith SC, Hamilton S, Lamping DL, Lelliott P, Stahl D, Pinfold V, Aandippan M.
Mental Health Review Journal. 2012. 17;(3)
The Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) in clinical trials: cross-cultural validation in venous thromboembolism patients
Cano SJ, Lamping DL, Bamber L, Smith S. (2012)
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2012. 10(120)
Development of DEMQOL-U and DEMQOL-PROXY-U: generation of preference-based indices from DEMQOL and DEMQOL-PROXY for use in economic evaluation
Mulhern B, Rowen D, Brazier J, Smith S, Romeo R, Tait R, et al
Health Technol Assess 2013;17(5)
Measuring health-related quality of life in diabetic peripheral neuropathy: A systematic review
Smith SC, Lamping DL, Maclaine GDH
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012 Jun;96(3):261-70
Estimating preference-based single index measures for dementia using DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy
Rowen D, Mulhern B, Banerjee S, Van Hout B, Young TA, Knapp M, Smith SC, Lamping DL, Brazier JE
Value in Health. 2012. 15:346-356
Improving the Measurement of QALYs in Dementia: Developing Patient- and Carer-Reported Health State Classification Systems Using Rasch Analysis
Mulhern B, Smith SC, Rowen D, Brazier J, Knapp M, Lamping DL, Loftus V, Howard R, Banerjee S
Value in Health. 2012. 15:323-333
Indignity, Exclusion, Pain and Hunger: The impact of musculoskeletal impairments in the lives of children in Malawi
Alavi Y, Jumbe V, Hartley S, Smith S, Lamping D, Muhit M, Masiye F, Lavy C
Disabil Rehabil. 2012. 34(20):1736-46
Development of a new measure of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: DEMQOL
Smith SC, Lamping DL, Banerjee S, Harwood RH, Foley B, Smith P, Cook JC, Murray J, Prince M, Levin E, Mann A, Knapp M
Psychological Medicine. 2007., 37, 737-746
Quality of life in dementia – more than just cognition. An analysis of associations with quality of life in dementia
Banerjee S, Smith SC, Lamping DL, Harwood R, Foley B, Smith P, Murray J, Prince M, Levin E, Mann A, Knapp M
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry. 2006. 77, 146-148
What constitutes health-related quality of life in dementia? Development of a conceptual framework for people with dementia and their carers
Smith SC, Murray J, Banerjee S, Foley B, Cook JC, Lamping DL, Prince M, Harwood RH, Levin E, Mann A
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 2005 20, 889-895
Measurement of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: development of a new instrument (DEMQOL) and an evaluation of current methodology
Smith SC, Lamping DL, Banerjee S, Harwood R, Foley B, Smith P, Cook JC, Murray J, Prince M, Levin E, Mann A, Knapp M
Health Technology Assessment. 2005. 9 (10)
Who we are
Team Block

Nick
Black

Professor

MinHae
Park

Assistant Professor

Esther
Kwong

Research Fellow