Patient Reported Outcome Measures for HIV: Difference between revisions

(Added content)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
  <div class="editorbox">
  <div class="editorbox">
'''Original Editor '''- [[User:User Name|User Name]]
'''Original Editor '''- [[User:Melissa Coetsee|Melissa Coetsee]]


'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  &nbsp;   
'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  &nbsp;   

Revision as of 15:56, 26 May 2023

Original Editor - Melissa Coetsee

Top Contributors - Melissa Coetsee, Carina Therese Magtibay and Kim Jackson  

This article or area is currently under construction and may only be partially complete. Please come back soon to see the finished work! (26/05/2023)

Introduction[edit | edit source]

Since the introduction of antiretroviral treatment (ART), HIV related mortality has reduced significantly, and more people are now living with this condition. Morbidity measures have therefore become more important in order to fully understand and measure the impact of HIV on the well-being of those affected by it.

Patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) are increasingly being used to measure and monitor quality of life and quality of care, with the aim of promoting patient-centred care [1]. PROMs rely on patient reporting and has been shown to improve patient care by highlighting individual health priorities and by promoting patient engagement - this is of particular importance for patients living with chronic conditions like HIV[1].

PROMs can help facilitate the transition from disease-focused HIV care programmes, to programmes that look beyond disease parameters to focus on well-being and personalised care[1].

PROMs are very useful to assess the various interconnected dimensions that affect the well-being of people living with HIV (PLWH). These dimensions include[1]:

  • Physical factors - including frailty, loss of function and pain
  • Psychological factors - including mental health concerns often associate with HIV (anxiety and depression)
  • Social factors - including stigma and social support
  • Spiritual factors
  • Socio-economic factors - including access to care

In order to account for HIV-specific factors, such as stigma and ART related symptoms, HIV specific PROMs have been developed.

Overview of PROMs[edit | edit source]

Benefits of PROMs in HIV[edit | edit source]

Benefits for patients[2]:

  • Improved communication
  • Improved assessment
  • Patient empowerment
  • Improved decision-making

Benefits for clinicians[2]:

  • Improved identification of concerns that are often missed
  • Better referral
  • Improved informed decision-making
  • Improved monitoring of change over time
  • Justification for spending and informing service design

Domains Assessed[edit | edit source]

Various PROMs have been developed for use in PLWH and there is currently no 'gold standard'[2]. However, below are some of the domains that are commonly included in these assessment tools are:

  1. Understanding viral load
  2. Psychological well-being
  3. Physical health
  4. Socioeconomic well-being
  5. Interpersonal and sexual well-being
  6. Uptake of ART
  7. Stigma
  8. Aging with HIV

Some PROMs measure only one specific domain, while others incorporate 3 or more.

Validated PROMs[edit | edit source]

Positive Outcomes HIV PROM[edit | edit source]

A brief, comprehensive tool developed for use in routine HIV care. It was designed to cover the physical, mental and social domains of HIV, while being brief enough to be used in routine care. This enables rapid identification of the most burdensome concerns of PLWH while enabling holistic measurement of the impact of HIV[2].

Validity, reliability and responsiveness have been established for use in adults in the context of European cities [2]

PROQOL-HIV[edit | edit source]

dsfd[3]

PozQol[edit | edit source]
HOQOL/HIV-brief[edit | edit source]
HDQ[edit | edit source]
Other[edit | edit source]
  • HIV Stigma Index
  • HIV symptom index

Evidence[edit | edit source]

Positive Outcomes:Validated for use in European cities;

Reliability[edit | edit source]

Validity[edit | edit source]

Context plays an important role in determining which factors need to be considered with PROMs. It is therefore important for these tools to be tested for context-specific validity in PLWH[1].

Responsiveness[edit | edit source]

Role of the MDT team[edit | edit source]

PLWH have multidimensional needs and PROMs can be a useful tool for all MDT team members to identify and measure patient-specific needs - especially when short consultation times limit the ability of patients to share their concerns[1].

Nurses and Doctors often focus their attention on viral suppression, and PROMs can assist the medical team in identifying patient concerns that might require referral or more attention

Physiotherapists can use PROMs to identify patient concerns in domains relating to physical health, as well as other domains that may influence adherence to rehabilitation

Links[edit | edit source]

Resources[edit | edit source]

or

  1. numbered list
  2. x

References[edit | edit source]

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Lohiniva AL, Isosomppi S, Pasanen S, Sutinen J. A qualitative study to identify thematic areas for HIV related patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and patient-reported experience measures (PREM). Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes. 2023 Dec;7(1):1-0.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Harding R, Jones CI, Bremner S, Bristowe K, West B, Siegert RJ, O’Brien KK, Whetham J, EMERGE Consortium, Horizon 2020, Whetham J, Fatz D. Positive Outcomes: Validity, reliability and responsiveness of a novel person‐centred outcome measure for people with HIV. HIV medicine. 2022 Jul;23(6):673-83.
  3. Kall M, Marcellin F, Harding R, Lazarus JV, Carrieri P. Patient-reported outcomes to enhance person-centred HIV care. The lancet HIV. 2020 Jan 1;7(1):e59-68.