Elizabeth Bream

Publications (2)3.41 Total impact

• Article: Relationship between patients' and clinicians' assessments of health status before and after knee arthroplasty.

  Elizabeth Bream, Susan C Charman, Ben Clift, David Murray, Nick Black
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: The use of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for four elective operations is mandatory in the English NHS from April 2009. In view of some scepticism by some clinicians as to the validity of PROMs, our aim was to explore the relationship between patients' and clinicians' reports of health status before and after knee arthroplasty. A secondary analysis of linked data from the Knee Arthroplasty Trial (patients' reports using the Oxford Knee Score) and the Tayside Arthroplasty Audit (clinicians' reports using the American Knee Society Score--Knee Score and Functional Score) was carried out. Correlations of scores were obtained for 284 patients before and 226 patients after surgery. There was a moderately strong correlation between patients' and clinicians' views 1 year after surgery: Oxford Knee Score (OKS) versus American Knee Society Scores (AKSS) Knee Score r = -0.64; OKS versus AKSS Functional Score r = -0.44. Before surgery, the correlation between the OKS and the AKSS Functional Score was also moderate (r = -0.55) but was weak with the Knee Score (r = -0.23). There was no systematic direction to the differences between patients' and clinicians' assessments; patients were just as likely to report better health than their clinician as to report worse health. Patients' postoperative assessments following knee arthroplasty, as regards their symptoms and disability, are practical to collect and can make a meaningful and useful contribution in routine use. In view of the advantages of collecting data on symptoms and disability directly from patients-lower cost, higher response rates, avoidance of systematic biases-confirmation of a moderately strong association with clinicians' views offers further reassurance for the routine use of PROMs, at least with knee arthroplasty.
  Quality and Safety in Health Care 12/2010; 19(6):e6. · 1.68 Impact Factor
• Article: What is the relationship between patients' and clinicians' reports of the outcomes of elective surgery?

  Elizabeth Bream, Nick Black
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: To identify studies in which patients' and clinicians' reports of health status and complications of one of four elective operations - hip and knee replacement, varicose vein surgery and groin hernia repair - are reported, and to describe the associations that have been reported between clinicians' and patients' reports. Systematic search of several bibliographic databases and review of citations of articles meeting inclusion criteria. A narrative summary of the findings was conducted. Most of the 62 studies of health status identified were for hip (23) or knee (33) disease. The literature on complications was even more limited with 12 studies of surgical site infection, one for urinary tract infection and none for lower respiratory tract infections. Procedure-specific complications were restricted to one for arthroplasties and three for hernia repair. Despite considerable variation in the findings of studies, some clear patterns emerge, albeit they are largely based on arthroplasty. Patients' and clinicians' views of health status generally correlate moderately (0.5-0.6) when both are reporting on the same dimension of health status. Inevitably this is confined to disability, though patients' and clinicians' reports of symptoms are also moderately correlated. In contrast, comparisons of different dimensions, such as patients' reports of disability and clinicians' reports of impairment, result in poor correlation (0.3). There is huge variation in the way postoperative complications are measured which limits the extent to which an overview can be undertaken. Despite that, moderate to strong correlations have been reported between patients' and clinicians' views of complications. Patients' views of their level of disability reflect clinicians' views and can be relied upon to assess this dimension of health status. In addition, patients are the 'gold standard' judges of symptoms and quality of life. Given these findings, clinicians, provider managers, commissioners and politicians can be confident that patients' reports provide an accurate indication of the outcome of elective surgery.
  Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 08/2009; 14(3):174-82. · 1.73 Impact Factor