Download PDF
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2509-0430
Original Cardiovascular

Introduction of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in a Cardiac Surgery Center

Selina Bilger   *
1   Department of Quality Management and Value-based Healthcare, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Luca Koechlin   *
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Brigitta Gahl
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
3   Surgical Outcome Research Center Basel, University Hospital Basel, University Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Jules Miazza
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Luise Vöhringer
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Denis Berdajs
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Florian Rüter
1   Department of Quality Management and Value-based Healthcare, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
,
Oliver Reuthebuch 
2   Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints All articles of this category


Abstract

Background Although patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as an integral part of value-based healthcare have important potential for clinical issues, e.g., for shared decision-making, data are limited. Thus, the aim of this study was to report initial results when introducing PROMs in the setting of cardiac surgery.

Methods Patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were included. Three questionnaires (Seattle Angina Questionnaire 7 [SAQ-7], Rose Dyspnea Scale [RDS], and Patient Health Questionnaire 2 [PHQ-2]) were either administered via iPad (in-hospital) or via a web-based tool (at home). Baseline PROMs were completed at admission. Follow-ups were conducted at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. We investigated the probability of improvement using multilevel, mixed-effects, ordered logistic regression.

Results Overall, 99 patients answered the questionnaires preoperatively, 84 of whom answered at least one questionnaire postoperatively. No patient died within the hospitalization. Median (IQR) length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) was 1.0 (1.0 to 2.0) days. In all dimensions of any PROMs questionnaire, OR was above 1, indicating that most patients reported improvement 1 to 2 years after surgery by at least 1 grade. In the exploratory analysis we found age ≥75 years positively associated with a significantly greater improvement of the SAQ-7 angina frequency and SAQ-7 quality of life score. Length of stay in the ICU showed no significant association with any PROMs at midterm follow-up.

Conclusion In patients undergoing CABG, after a decline within 30 days postoperatively, quality of life–related outcomes improved markedly in a midterm follow-up compared with the preoperative state.

Keywords

quality management - cardiac surgery - PROMs

Ethical Approval Statement

The local ethical committee (EKNZ BASEC Req 2021–02198) approved the study protocol, which is in accordance with the principles of the declaration of Helsinki. The authors designed the study, gathered and analyzed the data, vouched for the data and analysis, wrote the paper, and decided to submit for publication.


* Both the authors contributed equally and should be considered first authors.


Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 22 October 2024

Accepted: 30 December 2024

Article published online:
27 January 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Black N. Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare. BMJ 2013; 346 (7896) f167
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Rotenstein LS, Huckman RS, Wagle NW. Making patients and doctors happier—the potential of patient-reported outcomes. N Engl J Med 2017; 377 (14) 1309-1312
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kornowski R. Patient-reported outcome measures in cardiovascular disease. Eur Hear J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2023; 9 (02) 119-127
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Basch E. Patient-reported outcomes—harnessing patients' voices to improve clinical care. N Engl J Med 2017; 376 (02) 105-108
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 McNamara RL, Spatz ES, Kelley TA. et al. Standardized outcome measurement for patients with coronary artery disease: consensus from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM). J Am Heart Assoc 2015; 4 (05) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Flynn CR, Orkaby AR, Valsdottir LR. et al. Relation of the number of cardiovascular conditions and short-term symptom improvement after percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 2021; 155: 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Yang JX, Stevenson MJ, Valsdottir L. et al. Association between procedure appropriateness and patient-reported outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart 2020; 106 (06) 441-446
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Blumenthal DM, Strom JB, Valsdottir LR. et al. Patient-reported outcomes in cardiology. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2018; 11 (11) e004794
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Lappalainen L, Stenvall H, Lavikainen P. et al. Patient-reported outcomes in coronary artery disease: the relationship between the standard, disease-specific set by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) and the generic health-related quality of life instrument 15D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2021; 19 (01) 206
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Chan PS, Jones PG, Arnold SA, Spertus JA. Development and validation of a short version of the Seattle angina questionnaire. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2014; 7 (05) 640-647
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Arnold SV, Spertus JA, Jones PG, Xiao L, Cohen DJ. The impact of dyspnea on health-related quality of life in patients with coronary artery disease: results from the PREMIER registry. Am Heart J 2009; 157 (06) 1042-9.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JBW. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: validity of a two-item depression screener. Med Care 2003; 41 (11) 1284-1292
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Thomas M, Jones PG, Arnold SV, Spertus JA. Interpretation of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire as an outcome measure in clinical trials and clinical care: a review. JAMA Cardiol 2021; 6 (05) 593-599
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Levis B, Sun Y, He C. et al; Depression Screening Data (DEPRESSD) PHQ Collaboration. Accuracy of the PHQ-2 alone and in combination with the PHQ-9 for screening to detect major depression: systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2020; 323 (22) 2290-2300
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F. et al; ESC/EACTS Scientific Document Group. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2021; 60 (04) 727-800
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Holmes C, Briffa N. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) in patients undergoing heart valve surgery: why should we measure them and which instruments should we use?. Open Heart 2016; 3 (01) e000315
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Robinson A, Pituskin E, Norris CM. Patient-reported cognitive outcomes following cardiac surgery: a descriptive review. J Patient Exp 2021; 8: 2374373521989250
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kim H, Bae SH, Lim SH, Park JH. Predictors of health-related quality of life after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Sci Rep 2022; 12 (01) 16119
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Kirov H, Caldonazo T, Riedel LL. et al. Comparing outcomes between coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians with left main or multivessel disease. Sci Rep 2023; 13 (01) 22323
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Peric V, Jovanovic-Markovic S, Peric D. et al. Quality of life in patients of different age groups before and after coronary artery by-pass surgery. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015; 21 (05) 474-480
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Assmann AK, Assmann A, Waßenberg S. et al. The impact of socio-demographic factors on health-related quality of life after coronary artery bypass surgery. Interdiscip Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2023; 36 (02) ivad014
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Stricker KH, Cavegn R, Takala J, Rothen HU. Does ICU length of stay influence quality of life?. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49 (07) 975-983
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar