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

Authors

Claudia Bull, School of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3141, AUSTRALIA; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, 43-51 Kanooka Grove, Clayton, VIC, 3168, AUSTRALIAFollow
Emily J. Callander, School of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3141, AUSTRALIA; Monash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, 43-51 Kanooka Grove, Clayton, VIC, 3168, AUSTRALIAFollow

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.

Experience Framework

This article is associated with the Policy & Measurement lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework. (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework).

• Access other PXJ articles related to this lens.
• Access other resources related to this lens.

Recommended Citation

Bull C, Callander EJ. Current PROM and PREM use in health system performance measurement: Still a way to go. Patient Experience Journal. 2022; 9(1):12-18. doi: 10.35680/2372-0247.1664.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.