771 - Feasibility and Acceptability of Patient Reported Outcome Administration in the Inpatient Setting

Poster Number: 771
Publication Number: 771.416

Candace Gildner, Golisano Children's Hospital at The University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States; Eileen R.. Taillie, Golisano Children's Hospital at The University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States; Adam Dziorny, Golisano Children's Hospital at The University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, United States

Background: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) provide information regarding patient experiences with chronic diseases. PRO scores have been used in outpatient pediatric care and can differentiate health states of patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D). However, PRO implementation in inpatient pediatrics has lagged.

Objective: Determine feasibility and acceptability of administering PROs to hospitalized children.

Design/Methods: Twenty patients (or their proxies) with T1D admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit with diabetic ketoacidosis were recruited to complete electronic Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaires. Subjects completed an acceptability survey assessing their feelings toward PROMIS completion as well as their willingness to complete future PROMIS domains. We defined feasibility as the percentage of completed PROMIS domains, as well as ease of iPad use and understandability of PROMIS questions using 5-point Likert scales.

PROMIS results were viewable in the electronic health record (EHR). We notified care team providers of PROMIS report availability and location within the EHR. Providers also completed an acceptability survey assessing report accessibility, interpretability, and usefulness as well as provider knowledge enhancement and desire to receive future reports using a 5-point Likert scale. At study completion, we queried EHR access logs to determine the number of distinct PROMIS report views.

Results: All recruited subjects (71% of approached) completed the PROMIS domains and acceptability surveys. PROMIS questions were understandable and iPads were easy to use. Most patients or proxies (65%) felt answering PROMIS questions impacted their healthcare. Additionally, 90% of patients would answer PROMIS questions in the future. PROMIS domains were viewed 24 times for 17 different patient subjects. More outpatient (67%) than inpatient (40%) providers viewed PROMIS reports. The provider acceptability survey completion rate was 38% (n=12). Completed survey responses indicated reports were easy to access, understandable, considered useful and provided additional patient information (see Figure 1).

Conclusion(s): The administration of PROMIS domains in the PICU was feasible and acceptable to pediatric patients with T1D. Both inpatient and outpatient providers viewed results in the EHR. Outpatient providers found PROMIS data useful to their clinical practice while inpatient providers struggled with the usefulness of these data