Aims: The adoption of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) may be beneficial in oncology care but little is known about the evidence concerning the implementation of PROMs into practice. Qualitative research helps to capture the perspectives of healthcare professionals as end-users of PROMs and can inform implementation efforts. This paper presents results of a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research conducted to address the question: What are the attitudes of healthcare professionals towards PROMs in oncology, including any barriers and facilitators to the adoption of PROMS, reported in qualitative evidence?
Methods: Systematic searches of qualitative evidence were undertaken in four databases and reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies published in English between 1998 and 2018, which reported qualitative findings about the attitudes of professionals working in oncology towards PROMs were included. Studies were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, Qualitative Research Checklist. Qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted using a constant comparative analysis in addition to a sentiment analysis.
Results: 34 studies met the inclusion criteria. On average studies were rated as being of good quality. Meta-synthesis showed professionals’ attitudes in four domains: identifying patient issues and needs via PROMs, managing and addressing patient issues, the care experience, and the integration of PROMs into clinical practice. Sentiment analysis on primary text showed an overall positive polarity from the expressed opinions of healthcare professionals.
Conclusions: From the accounts of professionals, the fit of PROMs with existing practice, how PROMs are valued, capacity to respond to PROMs and the supports in place, formed the key factors which may impede or promote adoption of PROMS in routine practice. To inform policy-makers and services involved in these initiatives, further evidence is required concerning patients’ experiences and the relationship between PROMs data collection and corresponding clinical actions.