↓ Skip to main content

Study protocol of an equivalence randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of three different approaches to collecting Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) data using the…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Study protocol of an equivalence randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of three different approaches to collecting Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) data using the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Victoria (PCOR-VIC)
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-1981-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dewan Md Emdadul Hoque, Fanny Sampurno, Rasa Ruseckaite, Paula Lorgelly, Sue M. Evans

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used by clinical quality registries to assess patients' perspectives of care outcomes and quality of life. PROMs can be assessed through a self-administered survey or by a third party. Use of mixed mode approaches where PROMs are completed using a single or combination of administration method is emerging. The aim of this study is to identify the most cost-effective efficient approach to collecting PROMs among three modes (telephone, postal service/mail and email) in a population-based clinical quality registry monitoring survivorship after a diagnosis of prostate cancer. This is important to assist the registry in achieving representative PROMs capture using the most cost-effective technique and in developing cost projections for national scale-up. This study will adopt an equivalence randomised controlled design. Participants are men diagnosed with and/or treated for prostate cancer (PCa) participating in PCOR-VIC and meet the criteria for 12-month follow-up. Participants will be individually randomized to three independent groups: telephone, mail/postal, or email to complete the 26-item Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) survey. It is estimated each group will have 229 respondents. We will compare the proportion of completed surveys across the three groups. The economic evaluation will be undertaken from the perspective of the data collection centre and consider all operating costs (personnel, supplies, training, operation and maintenance). Cost data will be captured using an Activity Based Costs method. To estimate the most cost-effective approach, we will calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. A cost projection model will be developed based on most cost-effective approach for nationwide scale-up of the PROMs tool for follow-up of PCa patients in Australia. This study will identify the most cost-effective approach for collecting PROMs from men with PCa, and enable estimation of costs for national implementation of the PCa PROMs survey. The findings will be of interest to other registries embarking on PROMs data collection. ACTRN12615001369516 (Registered on December 16, 2015).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Master 11 11%
Other 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 32 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Computer Science 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Other 17 17%
Unknown 39 39%