103 Clinicians’ perspective on PROM implementation Analysis The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25.0 was used for descriptive statistics (percentages) to provide insight into the opinion of clinicians regarding KLIK and to study barriers and facilitators for the implementation process. Open questions of the evaluation questionnaire were analyzed qualitatively, by clustering the answers of all clinicians into main themes. This was done by two researchers (LT & HAvO) following the method for thematic analysis in Psychology [18]. Themes are ranked based on the number of times they have been mentioned by the clinicians (most often to fewest times). Results Participants The online evaluation questionnaire was completed by 148 clinicians (61%), who were part of 36 different multidisciplinary teams from the following 14 different hospitals (Supplement 1): Emma Children’s Hospital (N = 57 participating clinicians), Amsterdam UMC locations VU Medical Center (N = 24) and Academic Medical Center (N = 4), Kidz & Ko – diabetes collaboration centers (N = 18), Reade (N = 8), University Medical Center Groningen (N = 7), Spaarne Hospital (N = 6), VieCuri Medical Center (N = 6), Zuyderland Medical Center (N = 5), Maasstad Hospital (N = 5), Kempenhaeghe epilepsy center (N = 3), Sophia Children’s Hospital (N = 2), Radboud University Medical Center (N = 2), and Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital (N = 1). Discipline and disease group of participating clinicians are shown in Table 1. On average, participating clinicians used KLIK for 3.3 years (range 0.2-8.8 years). Most participating clinicians were employed as medical doctor (N = 57), psychologist (N = 39) or nurse (N = 36), and multidisciplinary teams were divided into pediatrics (32 teams) and adult health care (4 teams). 1. Overall satisfaction Clinicians (N = 147) reported an overall satisfaction with the KLIK PROM portal of median = 69, range 13-100, on a VAS ranging from 0 (not satisfied) to 100 (very satisfied). One clinician could not fill in the VAS due to technical problems. 2. Feeling competent to discuss PROMs Almost all clinicians (89.9%) indicated that the KLIK training had prepared them sufficiently to use KLIK in daily clinical practice (8.1% neutral, 2% disagree). In addition, 85.8% of the clinicians felt competent to discuss the KLIK ePROfile with patients and/or parents in the consultation room (7.4% neutral, 6.8% disagree). 4
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw