Skip to main content

Table 3 Overall impact by determinants at the micro-level

From: The use of patient-reported outcome measures to improve patient-related outcomes – a systematic review

  

Number of studies

Improvement (%)

Quality of studies (average)

Mechanism

Feedback to patient

5

1 (20)

1.8

 

Feedback to provider

18

9 (50)

1.9

 

Screening

14

10 (71)*

2.0

 

Monitoring

25

18 (72)

1.9

 

No feedback

3

3 (100)

2.3

 

Decision-aid

3

3 (100)

1.7

Medical domain

Cardiology

4

2 (50)

2.0

 

Community care

2

1 (50)

1.0

 

Dermatology

1

1 (100)

2.0

 

Gastroenterology

5

4 (80)

2.2

 

General public

1

1 (100)

2.0

 

General surgery

2

2 (100)

3.0

 

Gyneacology

1

0 (0)

2.0

 

Midwife care

1

1 (100)

2.0

 

Oncology

19

13 (68)

1.9

 

Orthopedics/trauma surgery

6

6 (100)

2.2

 

Pediatrics

2

1 (50)

2.0

 

Primary care

17

10 (59)*

1.7

 

Psychiatry

1

0 (0)

2.0

 

Pulmonary medicine

1

0 (0)

2.0

 

Rehabilitation

1

0 (0)

2.0

 

Rheumatology

4

2 (50)

2.0

Type of PROM

Disease-specific

55

39 (71)*

2.0

 

Generic

4

1 (25)

1.5

 

Combination

9

4 (44)

1.9

  1. * One study showed a deterioration
  2. PROM Patient-Reported Outcome Measure