Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Comment
  • Published:

Electronic patient-reported outcomes in chronic kidney disease

Nature Reviews Nephrology volume 18, pages 739–740 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Considerable research and investment have focused on the use of electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) in nephrology. However, systematic collection of ePROs to inform the care of patients with chronic kidney disease remains sporadic. A change in culture is needed to encourage their wider adoption in clinical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Fletcher, B. R. et al. Symptom burden and health-related quality of life in chronic kidney disease: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 19, e1003954 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Schick-Makaroff, K. et al. An evidence-based theory about PRO use in kidney care: a realist synthesis. Patient 15, 21–38 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Basch, E. et al. Overall survival results of a trial assessing patient-reported outcomes for symptom monitoring during routine cancer treatment. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 318, 197–198 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lizée, T. et al. Cost-effectiveness of web-based patient-reported outcome surveillance in patients with lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 14, 1012–1020 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schougaard, L. M. V. et al. AmbuFlex: tele-patient-reported outcomes (telePRO) as the basis for follow-up in chronic and malignant diseases. Qual. Life Res. 25, 525–534 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Anderson, N. E. et al. Using patient-reported outcome measures during the management of patients with end-stage kidney disease requiring treatment with haemodialysis (PROM-HD): a qualitative study. BMJ Open 11, e052629 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Greenham, L. et al. The Symptom Monitoring with Feedback Trial (SWIFT): protocol for a registry-based cluster randomised controlled trial in haemodialysis. Trials 23, 419 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson, J. A. et al. A cluster randomized controlled trial for the Evaluation of routinely Measured PATient reported outcomes in HemodialYsis care (EMPATHY): a study protocol. BMC Health Serv. Res. 20, 731 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Van Der Veer, S. N. et al. Developing an intervention to implement electronic patient-reported outcomes in renal services in the UK. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 270, 936–940 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kyte, D. et al. Results of a pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial exploring the use of an electronic patient-reported outcome measure in the management of UK patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. BMJ Open 12, e050610 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Nicola Anderson, Christel McMullan, Olalekan L. Aiyegbusi & Melanie J. Calvert

  2. School of Allied Health and Community, University of Worcester, Worcester, UK

    Derek Kyte

  3. Department of Nephrology, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

    Paul Cockwell

  4. Patient Partner, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Ravinder Verdi

Authors
  1. Nicola Anderson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Derek Kyte
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christel McMullan
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul Cockwell
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Olalekan L. Aiyegbusi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ravinder Verdi
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Melanie J. Calvert
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicola Anderson.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

N.A. receives funding from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) outside the submitted work. M.J.C. is director of the Birmingham Health Partners Centre for Regulatory Science and Innovation, director of the Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research and a NIHR senior investigator. M.J.C. receives funding from the NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (BRC), NIHR Surgical Reconstruction and Microbiology Research Centre (SRMRC), NIHR Birmingham-Oxford Blood and Transplant Research Unit (BTRU) in Precision Transplant and Cellular Therapeutics, and NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West Midlands, Health Data Research UK, Innovate UK (part of UK Research and Innovation), Macmillan Cancer Support, SPINE UK, UKRI, UCB Pharma, Janssen, GSK and Gilead. M.J.C. has received personal fees from Astellas, Aparito Ltd, CIS Oncology, Takeda, Merck, Daiichi Sankyo, Glaukos, GSK and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) outside the submitted work. D.K. reports grants from Macmillan Cancer Support, Innovate UK, the NIHR, NIHR Birmingham BRC, and NIHR SRMRC, and personal fees from Merck and GSK outside the submitted work. C.M. receives funding from the NIHR SRMRC, the NIHR Birmingham-Oxford BTRU in Precision Transplant and Cellular Therapeutics, and Innovate UK, and has received personal fees from Aparito Ltd outside the submitted work. O.L.A. receives funding from the NIHR BRC, NIHR ARC, West Midlands, NIHR Birmingham-Oxford BTRU in Precision Transplant and Cellular Therapeutics, Innovate UK, Gilead Sciences Ltd, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Sarcoma UK. O.L.A. declares personal fees from Gilead Sciences Ltd, GSK and Merck outside the submitted work. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

Additional information

Related links

Proteus Consortium: https://theproteusconsortium.org/

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, N., Kyte, D., McMullan, C. et al. Electronic patient-reported outcomes in chronic kidney disease. Nat Rev Nephrol 18, 739–740 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41581-022-00619-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41581-022-00619-3

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing