Despite the potential for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and experience measures (PREMs) to enhance understanding of patient experiences and outcomes they have not, to date, been widely incorporated into renal registry datasets. This report summarizes the main points learned from an ERA-EDTA QUEST-funded consensus meeting on how to routinely collect PROMs and PREMs in renal registries in Europe. In preparation for the meeting, we surveyed all European renal registries to establish current or planned efforts to collect PROMs/PREMs. A systematic review of the literature was performed. Publications reporting barriers and/or facilitators to PROMs/PREMs collection by registries were identified and a narrative synthesis undertaken. A group of renal registry representatives, PROMs/PREMs experts and patient representatives then met to (i) share any experience renal registries in Europe have in this area; (ii) establish how patient-reported data might be collected by understanding how registries currently collect routine data and how patient-reported data is collected in other settings; (iii) harmonize the future collection of patient-reported data by renal registries in Europe by agreeing upon preferred instruments and (iv) to identify the barriers to routine collection of patient-reported data in renal registries in Europe. In total, 23 of the 45 European renal registries responded to the survey. Two reported experience in collecting PROMs and three stated that they were actively exploring ways to do so. The systematic review identified 157 potentially relevant articles of which 9 met the inclusion criteria and were analysed for barriers and facilitators to routine PROM/PREM collection. Thirteen themes were identified and mapped to a three-stage framework around establishing the need, setting up and maintaining the routine collection of PROMs/PREMs. At the consensus meeting some PROMs instruments were agreed for routine renal registry collection (the generic SF-12, the disease-specific KDQOL™-36 and EQ-5D-5L to be able to derive quality-adjusted life years), but further work was felt to be needed before recommending PREMs. Routinely collecting PROMs and PREMs in renal registries is important if we are to better understand what matters to patients but it is likely to be challenging; close international collaboration will be beneficial.

'Dr Carol Davila' Teaching Hospital of Nephrology Bucharest Romania

2nd Department of Medicine 3rd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Arbor Research Collaborative for Health Ann Arbor MI USA

CHU de Nancy Epidémiologie et évaluation cliniques Inserm CIC 1433 Nancy France

CHU Nancy Pôle QSP2 Epidémiologie et Evaluation Cliniques Nancy France Université de Lorraine Université Paris Descartes Nancy France

Department of Palliative Care Policy and Rehabilitation King's College London Cicely Saunders Institute London UK

Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary Dumfries UK

European Renal Association European Dialysis and Transplant Association Registry Department of Medical Informatics Academic Medical Center University of Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands

European Renal Best Practice Methods Support Team University Hospital Ghent Ghent Belgium Health eResearch Centre Farr Institute for Health Informatics Research University of Manchester Manchester UK

Health Services Research Unit Nuffield Department of Population Health University of Oxford Oxford UK

Leeds Institute of Health Sciences School of Medicine University of Leeds Leeds UK

National Cancer Registry Ireland Cork Ireland

Renal Unit Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK The Scottish Renal Registry Glasgow UK

School of Public Health The University of Sydney Sydney Australia Health Economics Research Centre Nuffield Department of Population Health University of Oxford Headington UK

Section of Nephrology Department of Organ Transplantation Oslo University Hospital Rikshospitalet Oslo Norway

Swedish Renal Registry Jönköping Sweden Department of Internal Medicine Hospital of Helsingborg Helsingborg Sweden

Swedish Renal Registry Jönköping Sweden Diaverum Renal Services Group Lund Sweden

The National Kidney Federation Shireoaks Worksop UK

UK Renal Registry Southmead Hospital Bristol UK

UK Renal Registry Southmead Hospital Bristol UK School of Social and Community Medicine University of Bristol Bristol UK

Zobrazit více v PubMed

ERA-EDTA Registry. ERA-EDTA Registry 2014 Annual Report. Amsterdam: Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Centre, 2014

Mittal SK, Ahern L, Flaster E et al. . Self-assessed physical and mental function of haemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001; 16: 1387–1394 PubMed

Murtagh FE, Addington-Hall J, Higginson IJ. The prevalence of symptoms in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2007; 14: 82–99 PubMed

Greenhalgh J. The applications of PROs in clinical practice: what are they, do they work, and why? Qual Life Res 2009; 18: 115–123 PubMed

Etkind SN, Daveson BA, Kwok W et al. . Capture, transfer, and feedback of patient-centered outcomes data in palliative care populations: does it make a difference? a systematic review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2015; 49: 611–624 PubMed

Appleby J. Patient reported outcome measures: how are we feeling today? BMJ 2012; 344: d8191. PubMed

Black N. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ 2013; 346: f167. PubMed

Calvert M, Blazeby J, Altman DG et al. . Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in randomized trials: the CONSORT PRO extension. JAMA 2013; 309: 814–822 PubMed

Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S et al. . The measurement of satisfaction with healthcare: implications for practice from a systematic review of the literature. Health Technol Assess 2002; 6: 1–244 PubMed

Haugum M, Danielsen K, Iversen HH et al. . The use of data from national and other large-scale user experience surveys in local quality work: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care 2014; 26: 592–605 PubMed

Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER et al. . Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Ser Res 2004; 39(4 Pt 1): 1005–1026 PubMed PMC

Bekker H, Thornton JG, Airey CM et al. . Informed Decision Making: an Annotated Bibliography and Systematic Review. Basingstoke, UK: Health Technology Assessment Number 3: NHS R&D, 1999 PubMed

Group FHNT, Chertow GM, Levin NW et al. . In-center hemodialysis six times per week versus three times per week. New Engl J Med 2010; 363: 2287–2300 PubMed PMC

Daly BJ, Douglas SL, Foley H et al. . Psychosocial registry for persons with cancer: a method of facilitating quality of life and symptom research. Psychooncology 2007; 16: 358–364 PubMed

Pugliatti M, Eskic D, Mikolcic T et al. . Assess, compare and enhance the status of Persons with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) in Europe: a European Register for MS. Acta Neurol Scand 2012; 195: 24–30 PubMed

Ghatnekar O, Eriksson M, Glader EL. Mapping health outcome measures from a stroke registry to EQ-5D weights. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2013; 11: 34. PubMed PMC

Norlin JM, Steen CK, Persson U et al. . Analysis of three outcome measures in moderate to severe psoriasis: a registry-based study of 2450 patients. Br J Dermatol 2012; 166: 797–802 PubMed

Paulsen A, Pedersen AB, Overgaard S et al. . Feasibility of 4 patient-reported outcome measures in a registry setting. Acta Orthop 2012; 83: 321–327 PubMed PMC

van de Poll-Franse LV, Horevoorts N, van Eenbergen M et al. . The Patient Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long term Evaluation of Survivorship registry: scope, rationale and design of an infrastructure for the study of physical and psychosocial outcomes in cancer survivorship cohorts. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47: 2188–2194 PubMed

Thong MS, Mols F, Stein KD et al. . Population-based cancer registries for quality-of-life research: a work-in-progress resource for survivorship studies? Cancer 2013; 119(Suppl 11): 2109–2123 PubMed

Kennedy L, Craig AM. Global registries for measuring pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life outcomes: focus on design and data collection, analysis and interpretation. Review 128 refs. PharmacoEconomics 2004; 22: 551–568 PubMed

Boyce MB, Browne JP, Greenhalgh J. The experiences of professionals with using information from patient-reported outcome measures to improve the quality of healthcare: a systematic review of qualitative research. BMJ Qual Saf 2014; 23: 508–518 PubMed

Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A et al. . Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme Lancaster: Lancaster University, 2006

Gentile S, Beauger D, Speyer E et al. . Factors associated with health-related quality of life in renal transplant recipients: results of a national survey in France. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2013; 11: 88. PubMed PMC

Gibbons E, Fitzpatrick R. A Structured Review of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for People with Chronic Kidney Disease. Oxford: Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, 2009

The Short Form-36 version 2 Health Survey. https://www.optum.com/optum-outcomes/what-we-do/health-surveys/sf-36v2-health-survey.html (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

The EQ-5D-5L. http://www.euroqol.org/eq-5d-products/eq-5d-5l.html (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

The Kidney Disease Quality of Life-36. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/health/surveys_tools/kdqol/kdqol36.pdf (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q 1966; 44(Suppl): 166–206 PubMed

Sitzia J, Wood N. Patient satisfaction: a review of issues and concepts. Soc Sci Med 1997; 45: 1829–1843 PubMed

Rubin HR, Jenckes MW, Fink NE et al. . Patient's view of dialysis care: development of a taxonomy and rating of importance of different aspects of care. CHOICE study. Choices for Healthy Outcomes in Caring for ESRD. Am J Kidney Dis 1997; 30: 793–801 PubMed

US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). CAHPS In-Center Hemodialysis Survey English version. Available from https://www.cahps.ahrq.gov/surveys-guidance/ich/, 2006. (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Barendse SM, Speight J, Bradley C. The Renal Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (RTSQ): a measure of satisfaction with treatment for chronic kidney failure. Am J Kidney Dis 2005; 45: 572–579 PubMed

Kirchgessner J, Perera-Chang M, Klinkner G et al. . Satisfaction with care in peritoneal dialysis patients. Kidney Int 2006; 70: 1325–1331 PubMed

Wasserfallen J-B, Moinat M, Halabi G et al. . Satisfaction of patients on chronic haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Swiss Med Wkly 2006; 136: 210–217 PubMed

NHS Quality Improvement Scotland. Scottish Renal Patient Experience Survey. Dialysis report. Your service—your views, 2010

Fadem SZ, Walker DR, Abbott G et al. . Satisfaction with renal replacement therapy and education: the American Association of Kidney Patients survey. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2011; 6: 605–612 PubMed PMC

Van der Veer SN, Jager KJ, Visserman E et al. . Development and validation of the consumer quality index instrument to measure the experience and priority of chronic dialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2012; 27: 3284–3291 PubMed

Wood R, Paoli CJ, Hays RD et al. . Evaluation of the consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems in-center hemodialysis survey. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2014; 9: 1099–1108 PubMed PMC

Palmer SC, de Berardis G, Craig JC et al. . Patient satisfaction with in-centre haemodialysis care: an international survey. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e005020 PubMed PMC

Paddison CM, Elliott MN, Haviland AM et al. . Experiences of care among Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD: Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey results. Am J Kidney Dis 2013; 61: 440–449 PubMed

Sepucha KR, Borkhoff CM, Lally J et al. . Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids: key constructs and measurement instruments. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013; 13(Suppl 2): S12. PubMed PMC

Scholl I, Koelewijn-van Loon M, Sepucha K et al. . Measurement of shared decision making—a review of instruments. Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen 2011; 105: 313–324 PubMed

Patel D, on behalf of The Evidence Centre. Helping People Share Decision Making. Helping People Share Decision Making, 2012

Stacey D, Bennett CL, Barry MJ et al. . Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions, 2011

Legare F, Kearing S, Clay K et al. . Are you SURE?: assessing patient decisional conflict with a 4-item screening test. Can Fam Physician 2010; 56: e308–e314 PubMed PMC

Ferron Parayre A, Labrecque M, Rousseau M et al. . Validation of SURE, a four-item clinical checklist for detecting decisional conflict in patients. Med Decis Making 2014; 34: 54–62 PubMed

Bekker HL, Nye A, Walker E et al. . SHARED: Patient Experience of Shared Decision Making Measure. 2012. https://www.gem-measures.org/public/MeasureDetail.aspx?mid=1517&cat=2 (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Nye A, on behalf of the NHS Advancing Quality Alliance. Your Health, Your Decision. A report from the creating a receptive culture shared decision making project. Right Care, NHS, 2013. http://arma.uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Your-Health-Your-Decision-Evaluation-Report.pdf (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Durand M-A, Bekker HL, Casula A et al. . Measuring Shared Decision-Making in Chronic Kidney Care. Service Evaluation Report The UK Renal Registry in collaboration with the NHS Institute, 2013

King E, Taylor J, Williams R et al. . The MAGIC Programme: Evaluation. An Independent Evaluation of the MAGIC (Making Good Decisions in Collaboration) Improvement Programme. London, UK: The Health Foundation, 2013

Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S et al. . Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2008; 337: a1655. PubMed PMC

Bekker HL. The loss of reason in patient decision aid research: do checklists damage the quality of informed choice interventions? Patient Educ Couns 2010; 78: 357–364 PubMed

Bekker HL, Winterbottom AE, Butow P et al. . Do personal stories make patient decision aids more effective? A critical review of theory and evidence. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2013; 13(Suppl 2): S9. PubMed PMC

Brehaut JC, O'Connor AM, Wood TJ et al. . Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 281–292 PubMed

O'Connor AM. Validation of a Decisional Conflict Scale. Med Decis Making 2010; 15: 25–30 PubMed

Graham I, O'Connor AM. Preparation for Decision Making Scale—User manual, 2010 PubMed

Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N et al. . Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making 1996; 16: 58–64 PubMed

O'Connor AM. User Manual—Stage of Decision Making, 2003. http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/User_Manuals/UM_Stage_Decision_making.pdf (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Bekker HL, Legare F, Stacey D et al. . Is anxiety a suitable measure of decision aid effectiveness: a systematic review? Patient Educ Couns 2003; 50: 255–262 PubMed

Mavis B, Holmes Rovner M, Jorgenson S et al. . Patient participation in clinical encounters: a systematic review to identify self-report measures. Health Expect 2014; doi:10.1111/hex.12186. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed DOI PMC

Sepucha KR, Scholl I. Measuring shared decision making: a review of constructs, measures, and opportunities for cardiovascular care. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2014; 7: 620–626 PubMed

Hunink M, Glasziou P, Siegel J et al. . Decision Making in Health and Medicine: Integrating Evidence and Values. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001

Gray JAM. Evidence-based Healthcare: How to Make Health Policy and Management Decisions. London, UK: London; 1997

Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Soc Sc Med 1997; 44: 681–692 PubMed

Coulter A. Partnerships with patients: the pros and cons of shared clinical decision-making. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997; 2: 112–121 PubMed

Stacey D, Legare F, Pouliot S et al. . Shared decision making models to inform an interprofessional perspective on decision making: a theory analysis. Patient Educ Couns 2010; 80: 164–172 PubMed

Makoul G, Clayman ML. An integrative model of shared decision making in medical encounters. Patient Educ Couns 2006; 60: 301–312 PubMed

Lerman CE, Brody DS, Caputo GC et al. . Patients’ perceived involvement in care scale: relationship to attitudes about illness and medical care. J Gen Intern Med 1990; 5: 29–33 PubMed

Clayman ML, Makoul G, Harper MM et al. . Development of a shared decision making coding system for analysis of patient-healthcare provider encounters. Patient Educ Couns 2012; 88: 367–372 PubMed PMC

Elwyn G, Barr PJ, Grande SW et al. . Developing CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of shared decision making in clinical encounters. Patient Educ Couns 2013; 93: 102–107 PubMed

Elwyn G, Hutchings H, Edwards A et al. . The OPTION scale: measuring the extent that clinicians involve patients in decision-making tasks. Health Expect 2005; 8: 34–42 PubMed PMC

Kriston L, Scholl I, Holzel L et al. . The 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). Development and psychometric properties in a primary care sample. Patient Educ Couns 2010; 80: 94–99 PubMed

De Silva D, on behalf of The Evidence Centre. Helping Measure Person-Centred Care. London, UK: The Health Foundation, 2014

Graham C, MacCormick S. Overarching questions for patient surveys: development report for the Care Quality Commission (CQC). National Patient Survey Co-ordination Centre Picker Institute Europe, 2012

Hibbard J, Gilburt H. Supporting People to Manage Their Health: An Introduction to Patient Activation. London, UK: The Kings Fund, 2014

Fish M, Coyne E, Ferraro A. The utility of the decisional conflict tool in a predialysis clinical (Abstract). In: British Renal Conference Manchester, 2013

Kasper J, Heesen C, Kopke S et al. . Patients’ and observers’ perceptions of involvement differ. Validation study on inter-relating measures for shared decision making. PloS one 2011; 6: e26255. PubMed PMC

Legare F, Leblanc A, Robitaille H et al. . The decisional conflict scale: moving from the individual to the dyad level. Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen 2012; 106: 247–252 PubMed

Winterbottom AE, Gavaruzzi T, Mooney A et al. . Patient Acceptability of the Yorkshire Dialysis Decision Aid (YoDDA) disseminated within predialysis services: a non-randomised controlled study. 2014; (submitted for publication) PubMed PMC

The Short Form-12 version 2 Health Survey. https://www.optum.com/optum-outcomes/what-we-do/health-surveys/sf-12v2-health-survey.html (3 May 2015, date last accessed)

Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21: 271–292 PubMed

Brazier JE, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care 2004; 42: 851–859 PubMed

Capacity for the management of kidney failure in the International Society of Nephrology Eastern and Central Europe region: report from the 2023 ISN Global Kidney Health Atlas (ISN-GKHA)