Current PROM and PREM use in health system performance measurement: Still a way to go

Bull, C; Callander, EJ

Current PROM and PREM use in health system performance measurement: Still a way to go

Bull, C Callander, EJ

Permalink

Publisher:: The Beryl Institute
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Patient Experience Journal, 2022, 9, (1), pp. 12-18
Issue Date:: 2022-01-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download full textAdobe PDF (244.09 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Bull, C
dc.contributor.author	Callander, EJ
dc.date.accessioned	2023-02-10T02:12:37Z
dc.date.available	2023-02-10T02:12:37Z
dc.date.issued	2022-01-01
dc.identifier.citation	Patient Experience Journal, 2022, 9, (1), pp. 12-18
dc.identifier.issn	2372-0247
dc.identifier.issn	2372-0247
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/166038
dc.description.abstract	There is a growing impetus to “measure what matters” to enable health systems to optimise value-based, person-centred healthcare. This paper describes the critical importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) in this pursuit and provides an in-depth overview of how PROM and PREM programs differ between England, the United States, and Australia. A comprehensive timeline of PROM, PREM, legislation/policy, and value-based purchasing (pay-for-performance) program implementation accompanies this discussion. Importantly, this paper highlights disparities between these nations’ PROMs and PREMs programs, evidencing that we still have a way to go towards equal health system performance measurement globally.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	The Beryl Institute
dc.relation.ispartof	Patient Experience Journal
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.35680/2372-0247.1664
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.title	Current PROM and PREM use in health system performance measurement: Still a way to go
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	9
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2023-02-10T02:12:35Z
pubs.issue	1
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	9
utslib.citation.issue	1

Abstract:

There is a growing impetus to “measure what matters” to enable health systems to optimise value-based, person-centred healthcare. This paper describes the critical importance of patient-reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs) in this pursuit and provides an in-depth overview of how PROM and PREM programs differ between England, the United States, and Australia. A comprehensive timeline of PROM, PREM, legislation/policy, and value-based purchasing (pay-for-performance) program implementation accompanies this discussion. Importantly, this paper highlights disparities between these nations’ PROMs and PREMs programs, evidencing that we still have a way to go towards equal health system performance measurement globally.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/166038