A cross sectional survey exploring the awareness and familiarity regarding patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) among joint reconstruction surgeons in India.
Arthroplasty
PROM
Patient reported outcome measure
Survey
Journal
Journal of orthopaedics
ISSN: 0972-978X
Titre abrégé: J Orthop
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101233220
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
21
12
2022
revised:
07
02
2023
accepted:
16
02
2023
pmc-release:
01
03
2024
medline:
29
3
2023
entrez:
28
3
2023
pubmed:
29
3
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The aim of this study is to describe the usage of PROM, its use or lack of use, barriers in using it and its future prospect among the arthroplasty surgeons from a developing country like India. An online survey was conducted by emailing an anonymous questionnaire to orthopaedic surgeons working in three tertiary care academic institutions and two tertiary care private hospitals. All orthopaedic surgeons or residents who have been performing or assisting in arthroplasty and arthroscopy were included in the study. The study was cross-sectional in design based on a single response from all surgeons. The mean age of the 87 surgeons participating in this study was 38.6 ± 4.7 years. 62.1% of surgeons had used PROMs for both clinical as well as research purposes at some point. 25.9% of surgeons had an adequate understanding of the function, benefits, and drawbacks of PROMs. Among the barriers against using PROMs, time constraint was agreed upon by most of the surgeons (59.5%). 64.3% of surgeons were willing to incorporate the PROMs into their daily practice if the barriers are overcome. The limitations of use of PROM should also be borne in mind before embarking on its widespread implementation. Involvement of regulatory and professional societies as well as substantial investment in manpower, money and time is required for making the use of PROMs regular.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
The aim of this study is to describe the usage of PROM, its use or lack of use, barriers in using it and its future prospect among the arthroplasty surgeons from a developing country like India.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
An online survey was conducted by emailing an anonymous questionnaire to orthopaedic surgeons working in three tertiary care academic institutions and two tertiary care private hospitals. All orthopaedic surgeons or residents who have been performing or assisting in arthroplasty and arthroscopy were included in the study. The study was cross-sectional in design based on a single response from all surgeons.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The mean age of the 87 surgeons participating in this study was 38.6 ± 4.7 years. 62.1% of surgeons had used PROMs for both clinical as well as research purposes at some point. 25.9% of surgeons had an adequate understanding of the function, benefits, and drawbacks of PROMs. Among the barriers against using PROMs, time constraint was agreed upon by most of the surgeons (59.5%). 64.3% of surgeons were willing to incorporate the PROMs into their daily practice if the barriers are overcome.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The limitations of use of PROM should also be borne in mind before embarking on its widespread implementation. Involvement of regulatory and professional societies as well as substantial investment in manpower, money and time is required for making the use of PROMs regular.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36974097
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.02.009
pii: S0972-978X(23)00041-7
pmc: PMC10039111
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
59-63Informations de copyright
© 2023 Professor P K Surendran Memorial Education Foundation. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None.
Références
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Jun;31(6):1151-1154
pubmed: 27215139
J Orthop Surg Res. 2020 Dec 10;15(1):598
pubmed: 33302994
BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Jun;23(6):508-18
pubmed: 24505110
Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013). 2021;79(3):176-185
pubmed: 34605755
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Apr 1;480(4):680-687
pubmed: 34846308
Qual Life Res. 2009 Feb;18(1):99-107
pubmed: 19034690
Foot Ankle Surg. 2018 Jun;24(3):246-251
pubmed: 29409251
JAMA Surg. 2014 Jun;149(6):505-6
pubmed: 24872165
East Mediterr Health J. 2012 Dec;18(12):1239-46
pubmed: 23301399
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2021 Jan 6;103(1):84-91
pubmed: 33079895
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Nov;33(11):3416-3421
pubmed: 30057269