Integration between Healthcare Performance Evaluation Systems and Patient-Reported Measures (PROM and PREM): a Scoping Review protocol.

Autori

Donati Perla [Department of Technical Health Professions in Rehabilitation and Prevention – Unit of Health Professions in Functional Rehabilitation, Lucca (LU)]

Borghi Sara [ Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DIBINEM), Alma Mater Studiorum – University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy] [Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Azienda USL Bologna, Ospedale di San Giovanni in Persiceto, Bologna, Italy]

Miccini Rebecca [Assistant Professor of Accounting, Department of Economics and Management, University of Florence, Florence, Italy]

Background and aims

Performance Evaluation Systems (PES) in healthcare are recognized as effective tools for improving care quality and optimizing resources(1-3).

Numerous countries have implemented advanced performance evaluation systems that integrate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). PROMs assess health outcomes from the patient’s perspective. PREMs evaluate the patient’s experience with healthcare(1-2). 

To the best of our knowledge, no studies have highlighted the importance of investigating the relationship between healthcare performance indicators and PROMs and PREMs data within selected healthcare systems. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to understand how these tools can be integrated into performance evaluation systems to optimize resources, enhance care quality and improve patient experience(4)

Methods

This scoping review will be performed and reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Business Source Complete, Econlit with Full Text and CINAHL were searched from 2015 up to February 4th 2025. To be included, studies must meet the following inclusion criteria: published in journals only; they must investigate at least one performance evaluation measure; the performance measure must be quantitative; the measured outcomes must have an economic or managerial relevance; hospital or healthcare-related context. Exclusion criteria: exclusively clinical relevance of the measured outcome; languages other than Italian or English; “proceedings” or “book reviews” articles.

Data extraction will be performed using RAYYAN QCRI online software by two blinded reviewers (PD and SB); a third one (RM) will be involved in case of disagreements.

Results

A total of 5719 records were retrieved by the bibliographic search, of which 1419 were duplicates. The remaining 4300 citations will be sceened by two blinded reviewers. Data extracted from the included studies will be presented in tabular forms and will include: authors, year of publication, country/state, study design, context characteristics, PROMs or PREMs, performance evaluation systems. Then, a word cloud diagram will be produced. The expected results will be to identify the existing research streams in the literature and the related gaps.

Conclusion

A narrative summary of the tabulated results will be provided, identifying the relationship between healthcare organizations’ performance evaluation systems and PROM and PREM and analyzing the reference context and analyizing gaps in existing literature. Finally, this study aims to contribute by providing an overview of what has been studied on the topic and what still needs to be explored, offering insights for future research.

REFERENCES

1 Bevan G, Evans A, Nuti S. Reputations count: why benchmarking performance is improving health care across the world. Health Econ Policy Law. 2019;14(2):141-161.

2 Nuti, S., Noto, G., Vola, F., Vainieri, M. Let’s play the patients music: A new generation of performance measurement systems in healthcare. Management Decision. 2018;56(10), 2252-2272.

3 Willmington, C., Belardi, P., Murante, A. M., Vainieri, M. The contribution of benchmarking to quality improvement in healthcare. A systematic literature review. BMC health services research. 2022;22(1):1-20.

4 Bull C. and Callander E.J. Current PROM and PREM use in health system performance measurement: still a way to go. Patient Experience Journal. 2022;9(1):12-18.