Mieke Rijken
Publicatie
Datum
24-07-2025
Advancing person-centred care for people living with chronic conditions through patient-reported quality information in primary care.
Rijken, M., Groene, O., Suñol, R., Valderas, J.M. Advancing person-centred care for people living with chronic conditions through patient-reported quality information in primary care. The Lancet Primary Care: 2025. 1(1), art. nr. 100020.
Lees online
In this article five key lessons are outlined to support the use of patient-reported quality information in developing patient-informed policies and practices (panel).
Panel
Advancing person-centred care through patient-reported quality information in primary care
1. PROMs and PREMs should be co-designed to be fit for purpose. PROMs and PREMs should be carefully selected to ensure they are fit for purpose, meet scientific standards, and capture the aspects of care most valued by people with chronic conditions while imposing minimal burden on patients. Engaging people with chronic conditions and their caregivers in the conceptualisation and development of the indicator set is essential. The set should include generic (ie, non-disease-specific) PROMs and PREMs that measure key elements of chronic care, including comprehensiveness, person-centredness, continuity, and coordination of care.
2. Harmonisation across the health system maximises impact. Harmonising patient-reported indicators at local, national, and international levels increases their capacity to drive synergistic change throughout the health system. Integrated patient-reported information systems, responsive to the needs of various actors and stakeholders, can support clinical management at the individual level and guide health-system performance at higher levels.
3. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis models. For example, the PaRIS indicators have been used for cross-country comparisons through multilevel regression modelling on a predefined, standard OECD patient population, enabling countries to benchmark their performance. Additionally, country-specific results have been generated by estimating the same models for each country’s own reference population. Applying the same reference population to subsequent years of data will enable progress tracking over time. Finally, PaRIS indicators have been used to provide performance feedback to primary care providers in 19 countries, showing their performance relative to national averages.
4. Linking patient-reported data with health-care provider and system data identifies actionable improvement factors. The potential of patient-reported indicators to support quality improvement and reform in primary care can be substantially improved by linking collected patient information with characteristics of care providers (eg, staffing, chronic care infrastructure, and delivery processes) and health system characteristics (eg, payment models). This linkage enables identification of actionable factors and mechanisms at both provider and system levels that influence patient experience and outcomes.
5. Collaborative ecosystems can translate insights into action. Patient-reported quality information, based on carefully selected and analysed indicators, can support various actors in advancing person-centred care within primary care. However, information alone is insufficient. Established ecosystems that enable ongoing dialogue with actors and stakeholders across all levels are required to ensure that patient-reported quality information is transformed into actionable guidance for health authorities, providers, and professionals. Achieving this needs a concerted effort among policy makers, patient experts, primary care organisations, and researchers.
PaRIS=Patient-Reported Indicator Survey. PREMs=patient-reported experience measures. PROMs=patient-reported outcome measures.
Panel
Advancing person-centred care through patient-reported quality information in primary care
1. PROMs and PREMs should be co-designed to be fit for purpose. PROMs and PREMs should be carefully selected to ensure they are fit for purpose, meet scientific standards, and capture the aspects of care most valued by people with chronic conditions while imposing minimal burden on patients. Engaging people with chronic conditions and their caregivers in the conceptualisation and development of the indicator set is essential. The set should include generic (ie, non-disease-specific) PROMs and PREMs that measure key elements of chronic care, including comprehensiveness, person-centredness, continuity, and coordination of care.
2. Harmonisation across the health system maximises impact. Harmonising patient-reported indicators at local, national, and international levels increases their capacity to drive synergistic change throughout the health system. Integrated patient-reported information systems, responsive to the needs of various actors and stakeholders, can support clinical management at the individual level and guide health-system performance at higher levels.
3. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis models. For example, the PaRIS indicators have been used for cross-country comparisons through multilevel regression modelling on a predefined, standard OECD patient population, enabling countries to benchmark their performance. Additionally, country-specific results have been generated by estimating the same models for each country’s own reference population. Applying the same reference population to subsequent years of data will enable progress tracking over time. Finally, PaRIS indicators have been used to provide performance feedback to primary care providers in 19 countries, showing their performance relative to national averages.
4. Linking patient-reported data with health-care provider and system data identifies actionable improvement factors. The potential of patient-reported indicators to support quality improvement and reform in primary care can be substantially improved by linking collected patient information with characteristics of care providers (eg, staffing, chronic care infrastructure, and delivery processes) and health system characteristics (eg, payment models). This linkage enables identification of actionable factors and mechanisms at both provider and system levels that influence patient experience and outcomes.
5. Collaborative ecosystems can translate insights into action. Patient-reported quality information, based on carefully selected and analysed indicators, can support various actors in advancing person-centred care within primary care. However, information alone is insufficient. Established ecosystems that enable ongoing dialogue with actors and stakeholders across all levels are required to ensure that patient-reported quality information is transformed into actionable guidance for health authorities, providers, and professionals. Achieving this needs a concerted effort among policy makers, patient experts, primary care organisations, and researchers.
PaRIS=Patient-Reported Indicator Survey. PREMs=patient-reported experience measures. PROMs=patient-reported outcome measures.
In this article five key lessons are outlined to support the use of patient-reported quality information in developing patient-informed policies and practices (panel).
Panel
Advancing person-centred care through patient-reported quality information in primary care
1. PROMs and PREMs should be co-designed to be fit for purpose. PROMs and PREMs should be carefully selected to ensure they are fit for purpose, meet scientific standards, and capture the aspects of care most valued by people with chronic conditions while imposing minimal burden on patients. Engaging people with chronic conditions and their caregivers in the conceptualisation and development of the indicator set is essential. The set should include generic (ie, non-disease-specific) PROMs and PREMs that measure key elements of chronic care, including comprehensiveness, person-centredness, continuity, and coordination of care.
2. Harmonisation across the health system maximises impact. Harmonising patient-reported indicators at local, national, and international levels increases their capacity to drive synergistic change throughout the health system. Integrated patient-reported information systems, responsive to the needs of various actors and stakeholders, can support clinical management at the individual level and guide health-system performance at higher levels.
3. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis models. For example, the PaRIS indicators have been used for cross-country comparisons through multilevel regression modelling on a predefined, standard OECD patient population, enabling countries to benchmark their performance. Additionally, country-specific results have been generated by estimating the same models for each country’s own reference population. Applying the same reference population to subsequent years of data will enable progress tracking over time. Finally, PaRIS indicators have been used to provide performance feedback to primary care providers in 19 countries, showing their performance relative to national averages.
4. Linking patient-reported data with health-care provider and system data identifies actionable improvement factors. The potential of patient-reported indicators to support quality improvement and reform in primary care can be substantially improved by linking collected patient information with characteristics of care providers (eg, staffing, chronic care infrastructure, and delivery processes) and health system characteristics (eg, payment models). This linkage enables identification of actionable factors and mechanisms at both provider and system levels that influence patient experience and outcomes.
5. Collaborative ecosystems can translate insights into action. Patient-reported quality information, based on carefully selected and analysed indicators, can support various actors in advancing person-centred care within primary care. However, information alone is insufficient. Established ecosystems that enable ongoing dialogue with actors and stakeholders across all levels are required to ensure that patient-reported quality information is transformed into actionable guidance for health authorities, providers, and professionals. Achieving this needs a concerted effort among policy makers, patient experts, primary care organisations, and researchers.
PaRIS=Patient-Reported Indicator Survey. PREMs=patient-reported experience measures. PROMs=patient-reported outcome measures.
Panel
Advancing person-centred care through patient-reported quality information in primary care
1. PROMs and PREMs should be co-designed to be fit for purpose. PROMs and PREMs should be carefully selected to ensure they are fit for purpose, meet scientific standards, and capture the aspects of care most valued by people with chronic conditions while imposing minimal burden on patients. Engaging people with chronic conditions and their caregivers in the conceptualisation and development of the indicator set is essential. The set should include generic (ie, non-disease-specific) PROMs and PREMs that measure key elements of chronic care, including comprehensiveness, person-centredness, continuity, and coordination of care.
2. Harmonisation across the health system maximises impact. Harmonising patient-reported indicators at local, national, and international levels increases their capacity to drive synergistic change throughout the health system. Integrated patient-reported information systems, responsive to the needs of various actors and stakeholders, can support clinical management at the individual level and guide health-system performance at higher levels.
3. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis. Multiple applications of a single indicator set can be achieved through suitable data analysis models. For example, the PaRIS indicators have been used for cross-country comparisons through multilevel regression modelling on a predefined, standard OECD patient population, enabling countries to benchmark their performance. Additionally, country-specific results have been generated by estimating the same models for each country’s own reference population. Applying the same reference population to subsequent years of data will enable progress tracking over time. Finally, PaRIS indicators have been used to provide performance feedback to primary care providers in 19 countries, showing their performance relative to national averages.
4. Linking patient-reported data with health-care provider and system data identifies actionable improvement factors. The potential of patient-reported indicators to support quality improvement and reform in primary care can be substantially improved by linking collected patient information with characteristics of care providers (eg, staffing, chronic care infrastructure, and delivery processes) and health system characteristics (eg, payment models). This linkage enables identification of actionable factors and mechanisms at both provider and system levels that influence patient experience and outcomes.
5. Collaborative ecosystems can translate insights into action. Patient-reported quality information, based on carefully selected and analysed indicators, can support various actors in advancing person-centred care within primary care. However, information alone is insufficient. Established ecosystems that enable ongoing dialogue with actors and stakeholders across all levels are required to ensure that patient-reported quality information is transformed into actionable guidance for health authorities, providers, and professionals. Achieving this needs a concerted effort among policy makers, patient experts, primary care organisations, and researchers.
PaRIS=Patient-Reported Indicator Survey. PREMs=patient-reported experience measures. PROMs=patient-reported outcome measures.