title: Benefits of and barriers to using patient-rated outcome measures in athletic training.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Patient-rated outcome measures (PROMs) are important for driving treatment decisions and determining treatment effectiveness. However, athletic trainers (ATs) rarely use them; understanding why may facilitate strategies for collection of these outcomes.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To identify the benefits of and barriers to using PROMs in athletic training.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Web-based survey.
  
  
  METHODS
  A total of 1469 randomly sampled ATs (age = 36.8 ± 9.8 years; 48% female) working in the college/university, 2-year institution, secondary school, clinic, hospital, or industrial/occupational setting.
  
  
  METHODS
  An e-mail was sent to ATs inviting them to complete a survey regarding the use, benefits, and barriers of PROMs. Athletic trainers who indicated they used PROMs (AT-PRs) completed 65 questions about the benefits of and barriers to their use. Athletic trainers who indicated no use of PROMs (AT-NONs) completed 21 questions about barriers of use.
  
  
  METHODS
  Dependent variables were the endorsements for the benefits of and barriers to the use of PROMs.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 458 ATs initiated the survey and 421 (AT-PR = 26%, AT-NON = 74%) completed it (response rate = 28.7%). The most frequently endorsed benefits by AT-PRs were enhancing communication with patients (90%) and other health care professionals (80%), directing patient care (87%), and increasing examination efficiency (80%). The most frequently endorsed barriers by AT-PRs were that PROMs are time consuming (44%), difficult (36%), and confusing (31%) for patients and time consuming for clinicians to score and interpret (29%). The most frequently endorsed problems by AT-NONs were that PROMs are time consuming for clinicians to score and interpret (31%), time consuming (46%) and irrelevant to patients (28%), and lacking a support structure for clinicians (29%).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  These results suggest that, although benefits to using PROMs exist, there are also barriers. Barriers are similar for AT-PRs and AT-NONs. Strategies to decrease barriers and facilitate the use of PROMs warrant investigation.
authors.affiliation: Arizona School of Health Sciences, AT Still University, Mesa;
authors.forename: Alison R Snyder
authors.initials: AR
authors.lastname: Valier
authors.forename: Amy L
authors.initials: AL
authors.lastname: Jennings
authors.forename: John T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Parsons
authors.forename: Luzita I
authors.initials: LI
authors.lastname: Vela
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D056352:Athletes / Q000193:education*; D001265:Athletic Injuries / Q000517:prevention & control*; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D005260:Female; D007722:Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011788:Quality of Life; D013178:Sports Medicine / Q000379:methods*; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
keywords: health-related quality of life; patient based; patient oriented; patient reported; standardized data collection
references.citation: J Sport Rehabil. 2011 Feb;20(1):37-45
references.pmid: 21411821
references.citation: Physiother Theory Pract. 2012 Feb;28(2):119-33
references.pmid: 21877943
references.citation: Phys Ther. 2010 Jun;90(6):953-61
references.pmid: 20413576
references.citation: Man Ther. 2006 Feb;11(1):46-53
references.pmid: 15886046
references.citation: BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011 May 22;12:106
references.pmid: 21600045
references.citation: J Clin Oncol. 2004 Feb 15;22(4):714-24
references.pmid: 14966096
references.citation: J Athl Train. 2008 Jul-Aug;43(4):437-45
references.pmid: 18668177
references.citation: Phys Ther. 2009 Feb;89(2):125-35
references.pmid: 19074618
references.citation: J Athl Train. 2009 Nov-Dec;44(6):603-10
references.pmid: 19911086
references.citation: Phys Ther. 2006 May;86(5):726-34
references.pmid: 16649895
references.citation: Adm Policy Ment Health. 2007 May;34(3):283-91
references.pmid: 17211715
references.citation: Phys Ther. 2008 Dec;88(12):1492-505
references.pmid: 18849478
references.citation: Clin J Sport Med. 2010 Mar;20(2):86-91
references.pmid: 27811489
references.citation: Clin J Sport Med. 2012 Jul;22(4):334-40
references.pmid: 22627649
references.citation: J Sport Rehabil. 2011 Feb;20(1):100-14
references.pmid: 21411826
references.citation: J Clin Psychiatry. 2008 Dec;69(12):1916-9
references.pmid: 19192467
references.citation: Am J Sports Med. 2009 Aug;37(8):1508-12
references.pmid: 19417122
references.citation: Phys Ther. 1997 Jul;77(7):714-29
references.pmid: 9225843
references.citation: J Behav Health Serv Res. 2003 Oct-Dec;30(4):393-405
references.pmid: 14593663
references.citation: BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 May 22;12:96
references.pmid: 22506982
references.citation: Phys Ther. 2008 Feb;88(2):270-85
references.pmid: 18042656
references.citation: JAMA. 2012 Apr 18;307(15):1583-4
references.pmid: 22511682
references.citation: J Athl Train. 2008 Jul-Aug;43(4):428-36
references.pmid: 18668176