• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in the Practice Setting: Part 2: Setting Up an Outcomes Assessment Program in Your Practice

by Maureen Hannley, PhD • April 1, 2008

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

In designing your question, make sure that you have selected one for which you have the adequate resources-access to an adequate number of the clinical patients of interest being paramount. Otherwise, you may find yourself a victim of Lasagna’s Law: The incidence of patient availability sharply decreases when a [clinical study] begins and returns to its original level as soon as the trial is completed.1 Define your patient population carefully, specifying inclusion and exclusion criteria for participating in the study-inclusion criteria that are too strict will make it very difficult to recruit sufficient numbers of subjects; criteria that are too broad will result in including subjects who have comorbidities or other factors that may confound the results of the study.

You Might Also Like

  • Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in the Practice Setting
  • Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes
  • Are Patient-Reported Voice Outcomes Better after Surgery or after Radiation for Treatment of T1 Glottic Carcinoma?
  • New Computer Program May Help Predict Outcomes of Cochlear Implants in Children
Explore This Issue
April 2008

Having defined your area of interest and narrowed that down to a specific, focused research question, you are ready to define the scope of the project. This will require making several decisions related to numbers, time, and complexity.

How many patients do you want to recruit for your study? It is important to specify a number at the beginning, and this number should not be selected randomly. The sample needs to be large enough to provide some assurance that if an effect is found, either between two groups or before and after treatment, they represent a real effect and not samples drawn at random from the same statistical population. If the sample is too small, you may fail to detect a clinically important difference; too large, and the study will be longer and more expensive than necessary. An excellent method for determining sample size can be found in Norman and Streiner’s PDQ Statistics.2 The gold standard, however, is to invest in several hours of consulting time with a biostatistician from a local university or medical school. Based on the question you want to investigate, the statistician will reinforce your choice of design (or suggest options); calculate the appropriate sample size needed based on the population variance, effect size, and desired power; and, if you have established a satisfactory working relationship, can assist with statistical analysis of the data at the conclusion of the study.

For the time parameters, decide for how long you will actively recruit patients into your study, and how long the follow-up period for each will be, if you have decided on a design other than a cross-sectional study. For the newcomer to clinical research, designing and undertaking a simple, straightforward study with a limited number of variables that can be quantified and measured objectively is always a better way to start.

Foundation and Framework for the Study

To be successful, any clinical research project needs a strong infrastructure; the heart of that infrastructure is a project coordinator. Although the physician conceptualizes the project and has ultimate responsibility for it, the project coordinator-usually a nurse or other health care professional in the office-brings together all the skills and resources to carry out the project. He or she serves as a task manager and liaison among clinicians, clinical staff, and patients, and must have superb interpersonal communication skills. Invite someone to serve in this role who has not only the skills, but also the willingness, enthusiasm, and dependability to see the project through.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Health Policy, Medical Education, Practice Management Tagged With: outcomes, patient communication, patient education, practice management, Quality, researchIssue: April 2008

You Might Also Like:

  • Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessment in the Practice Setting
  • Understanding the Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes
  • Are Patient-Reported Voice Outcomes Better after Surgery or after Radiation for Treatment of T1 Glottic Carcinoma?
  • New Computer Program May Help Predict Outcomes of Cochlear Implants in Children

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939