Results of adaptation of tools for standardizing value-based outcomes: analysis of ICHOM Standard Sets

Background. Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is a model of medical care that focuses on analyzing treatment outcomes and takes into account patient-relevant results (values), clinical effectiveness, and economic costs. Although standardized assessment systems exist, such as those developed by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), their practical application remains limited, slows the implementation of VBHC. The lack of unified methodologies reduces data comparability between healthcare organizations, hinders the identification of best practices, and ultimately impedes the practical realization of VBHC.

Objective: To analyze and adapt standardized approaches for assessing VBHC parameters and the methodologies for their collection based on ICHOM sets.

Material and methods. A comprehensive analysis was conducted on 49 ICHOM Standard Sets and 43 related publications in peer-reviewed journals. A structured study of the research objects was carried out, and potential barriers to the implementation of data collection methodologies by healthcare organizations were identified. Methods of qualitative content analysis and comparative data analysis were applied.

Results. The article presents a structure of indicators for the assessment of VBHC. Particular attention is given to three key components of outcomes assessment: patient-oriented outcomes – patient-reported outcomes, clinical outcomes, and indicators of healthcare resource utilization. Standardized approaches to data collection were identified, each of which has its own limitations. Optimal monitoring timelines were determined, varying depending on the type of nosology. The results demonstrate that ICHOM standards provide a comprehensive framework for assessing value-based healthcare; however, they require adaptation to specific organizational conditions. The developed data categorization and presented conclusions provide a foundation for healthcare institutions to initiate the implementation of a value-based approach, with a focus on outcomes that matter to patients.

Conclusion. The conducted analysis justifies the necessity of value-based healthcare research in accordance with the unified ICHOM Standard Sets. A unified methodology can provide a comprehensive and objective assessment of care effectiveness and foster a common understanding of the concept among all stakeholders. This approach will facilitate the transition from theory to global practice in value assessment in medicine. The next step in this direction should be the adaptation of data collection for specific sets, taking into account national characteristics and capabilities in Russia.

1. Benning L., Das-Gupta Z., Sousa Fialho L., et al. Balancing adaptability and standardisation: insights from 27 routinely implemented ICHOM standard sets. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022; 22 (1): 1424. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08694-9.

2. Omelyanovskiy V.V., Mikhailov I.А., Lukyantseva D.V., et al. Unified system and classification of indicators for integral assessment of the performance and effectiveness of medical care organization at the regional level in the Russian Federation. FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Sovremennaya farmakoekonomika i farmakoepidemiologiya / FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Modern Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmacoepidemiology. 2022; 15 (4): 442–51 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17749/2070-4909/farmakoekonomika.2022.151.

3. Kaplan R.S., Porter M.E. How to solve the cost crisis in health care. Harv Bus Rev. 2011; 89 (9): 46–52.

4. Porter M.E. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med. 2010; 363 (26): 2477–481. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1011024.

5. Kelley T.A. International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM). Trials. 2015; 16 (Suppl. 3): O4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-16-S3-O4.

6. Terwee C.B., Zuidgeest M., Vonkeman H.E., et al. Common patientreported outcomes across ICHOM Standard Sets: the potential contribution of PROMIS®. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2021; 21 (1): 259. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-021-01624-5.

7. Musina N.Z., Omelyanovskiy V.V., Gostischev R.V., et al. Concept of value-based healthcare. FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Sovremennaya farmakoekonomika i farmakoepidemiologiya / FARMAKOEKONOMIKA. Modern Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmacoepidemiology. 2020; 13 (4): 438–51 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17749/2070-4909/farmakoekonomika.2020.042.

8. Seligman W.H., Das-Gupta Z., Jobi-Odeneye A.O., et al. Development of an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) atrial fibrillation working group. Eur Heart J. 2020; 41 (10): 1132–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz871.

9. McNamara R.L., Spatz E.S., Kelley T.A., et al. Standardized outcome measurement for patients with coronary artery disease: consensus from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM). J Am Heart Assoc. 2015; 4 (5): e001767. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.115.001767.

10. Nano J., Carinci F., Okunade O., et al. A standard set of personcentred outcomes for diabetes mellitus: results of an international and unified approach. Diabet Med. 2020; 37 (12): 2009–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14286.

11. Burns D.J.P., Arora J., Okunade O., et al. International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM): standardized patient-centered outcomes measurement set for heart failure patients. JACC Heart Fail. 2020; 8 (3): 212–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchf.2019.09.007.

12. Zack R., Okunade O., Olson E., et al. Improving hypertension outcome measurement in low- and middle-income countries. Hypertension. 2019; 73 (5): 990–7. https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.11916.

13. Salinas J., Sprinkhuizen S.M., Ackerson T., et al. An international standard set of patient-centered outcome measures after stroke. Stroke. 2016; 47 (1): 180–6. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010898.

14. Philipp R., Lebherz L., Thomalla G., et al. Psychometric properties of a patient-reported outcome set in acute stroke patients. Brain Behav. 2021; 11 (8): e2249. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2249.

15. Gwozdz A.M., de Jong C.M.M., Sousa Fialho L., et al. Development of an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with venous thromboembolism: an International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement consensus recommendation. Lancet Haematol. 2022; 9 (9): e698–706. https://doi.org/10.1016/S23523026(22)00215-0.

16. Allori A.C., Kelley T., Meara J.G., et al. A standard set of outcome measures for the comprehensive appraisal of cleft care. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2017; 54 (5): 540–54. https://doi.org/10.1597/15-292.

17. Hummel K., Whittaker S., Sillett N., et al. Development of an international standard set of clinical and patient-reported outcomes for children and adults with congenital heart disease: a report from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Congenital Heart Disease Working Group. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2021; 7 (4): 354–65. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcab009.

18. Butler D.P., De la Torre A., Borschel G.H., et al. An international collaborative standardizing patient-centered outcome measures in pediatric facial palsy. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2019; 21 (5): 351–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2019.0224.

19. Kim A.H., Roberts C., Feagan B.G., et al. Developing a standard set of patient-centred outcomes for inflammatory bowel disease – an international, cross-disciplinary consensus. J Crohns Colitis. 2018; 12 (4): 408–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjx161.

20. Seligman W.H., Fialho L., Sillett N., et al. Which outcomes are most important to measure in patients with COVID-19 and how and when should these be measured? Development of an international standard set of outcomes measures for clinical use in patients with COVID-19: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) COVID-19 Working Group. BMJ Open. 2021; 11 (11): e051065. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051065.

21. Riordain R.N., Glick M., Mashhadani S.S.A.A., et al. Developing a standard set of patient-centred outcomes for adult oral health – an international, cross-disciplinary consensus. Int Dent J. 2021; 71 (1): 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/idj.12604.

22. Akpan A., Roberts C., Bandeen-Roche K., et al. Standard set of health outcome measures for older persons. BMC Geriatrics. 2018; 18 (1): 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-017-0701-3.

23. Gangannagaripalli J., Albagli A., Myers S.N., et al. A standard set of value-based patient-centered outcomes and measures of overall health in adults. Patient. 2022; 15 (3): 341–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-021-00554-8.

24. Algurén B., Ramirez J.P., Salt M., et al. Development of an international standard set of patient-centred outcome measures for overall paediatric health: a consensus process. Arch Dis Childhood. 2020; 106 (9): archdischild-2020-320345. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2020-320345.

25. Nijagal M.A., Wissig S., Stowell C., et al. Standardized outcome measures for pregnancy and childbirth, an ICHOM proposal. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018; 18 (1): 953. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913018-3732-3.

26. Schouten E., Haupt J., Ramirez J., et al. Standardized outcome measures for preterm and hospitalized neonates: an ICHOM standard set. Neonatology. 2022; 119 (4): 443–54. https://doi.org/10.1159/000522318.

27. Obbarius A., van Maasakkers L., Baer L., et al. Standardization of health outcomes assessment for depression and anxiety: recommendations from the ICHOM Depression and Anxiety Working Group. Qual Life Res. 2017; 26 (12): 3211–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136017-1659-5.

28. Krause K.R., Chung S., Adewuya A.O., et al. International consensus on a standard set of outcome measures for child and youth anxiety, depression, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021; 8 (1): 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30356-4.

29. Austin A., De Silva U., Ilesanmi C., et al. International consensus on patient-centred outcomes in eating disorders. Lancet Psychiatry. 2023; 10 (12): 966–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00265-1.

30. Mulraney M., de Silva U., Joseph A., et al. International consensus on standard outcome measures for neurodevelopmental disorders: a consensus statement. JAMA Netw Open. 2024; 7 (6): e2416760. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.16760.

31. Prevolnik Rupel V., Jagger B., Sousa Fialho L., et al. Standard set of patient-reported outcomes for personality disorder. Qual Life Res. 2021; 30 (12): 3485–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02870-w.

32. McKenzie E., Matkin L., Sousa Fialho L., et al. Developing an international standard set of patient-reported outcome measures for psychotic disorders. Psychiatr Serv. 2022; 73 (3): 249–58. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.202000888.

33. Wouters R.M., Jobi-Odeneye A.O., de la Torre A., et al. A standard set for outcome measurement in patients with hand and wrist conditions: consensus by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Hand and Wrist Working Group. J Hand Surg Am. 2021; 46 (10): 841–55.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2021.06.004.

34. Rolfson O., Wissig S., van Maasakkers L., et al. Defining an international standard set of outcome measures for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: consensus of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis Working Group. Arthritis Care Res. 2016; 68 (11): 1631–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22868.

35. Voshaar M.A.H.O., Das Gupta Z., Bijlsma J.W.J., et al. International Consortium for Health Outcome Measurement set of outcomes that matter to people living with inflammatory arthritis: consensus from an International Working Group. Arthritis Care Res. 2019; 71 (12): 1556–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.23799.

36. Clement R.C., Welander A., Stowell C., et al. A proposed set of metrics for standardized outcome reporting in the management of low back pain. Acta Orthop. 2015; 86 (5): 523–33. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1036696.

37. Reynish E., Burns A., Roberts C. Defining a standard set of patientcentered outcomes for older persons. Innov Aging. 2017; 1 (Suppl. 1): 290–1. https://doi.org/10.1093/geroni/igx004.1077.

38. de Roos P., Bloem B.R., Kelley T.A., et al. A consensus set of outcomes for parkinson’s disease from the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement. J Parkinsons Dis. 2017; 7 (3): 533–43. https://doi.org/10.3233/JPD-161055.

39. Mitchell J.W., Sossi F., Miller I., et al. Development of an international standard set of outcomes and measurement methods for routine practice for adults with epilepsy: the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement consensus recommendations. Epilepsia. 2024; 65 (7): 1916–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/epi.17971.

40. Mitchell J.W., Sossi F., Miller I., et al. Development of an international standard set of outcomes and measurement methods for routine practice for infants, children, and adolescents with epilepsy: the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement consensus recommendations. Epilepsia. 2024; 65 (7): 1938–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/epi.17976.

41. Morgans A.K., van Bommel A.C.M., Stowell C., et al. Development of a standardized set of patient-centered outcomes for advanced prostate cancer: an international effort for a unified approach. Eur Urol. 2015; 68 (5): 891–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.007.

42. Zerillo J.A., Schouwenburg M.G., van Bommel A.C.M., et al. An international collaborative standardizing a comprehensive patientcentered outcomes measurement set for colorectal cancer. JAMA Oncol. 2017; 3 (5): 686–94. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0417.

43. Martin N.E., Massey L., Stowell C., et al. Defining a standard set of patient-centered outcomes for men with localized prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2015; 67 (3): 460–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.08.075.

44. Mak K.S., van Bommel A.C.M., Stowell C., et al. Defining a standard set of patient-centred outcomes for lung cancer. Eur Respir J. 2016; 48 (3): 852–60. https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.02049-2015.

45. Ong W.L., Schouwenburg M.G., van Bommel A.C.M., et al. A standard set of value-based patient-centered outcomes for breast cancer: the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) initiative. JAMA Oncol. 2017; 3 (5): 677–85. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4851.

46. Mahmud I., Kelley T., Stowell C., et al. A proposed minimum standard set of outcome measures for cataract surgery. JAMA Ophthalmol. 2015; 133 (11): 1247–52. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2015.2810.

47. Rodrigues I.A., Sprinkhuizen S.M., Barthelmes D., et al. Defining a minimum set of standardized patient-centered outcome measures for macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2016; 168: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2016.04.012.

48. Verberne W.R., Das-Gupta Z., Allegretti A.S., et al. Development of an international standard set of value-based outcome measures for patients with chronic kidney disease: a report of the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) CKD Working Group. Am J Kidney Dis. 2019; 73 (3): 372–84. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2018.10.007.

49. Foust-Wright C., Wissig S., Stowell C., et al. Development of a core set of outcome measures for OAB treatment. Int Urogynecol J. 2017; 28 (12): 1785–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3481-6.

50. de Ligt K.M., de Rooij B.H., Hedayati E., et al. International development of a patient-centered core outcome set for assessing health-related quality of life in metastatic breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023; 198 (2): 265–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-022-06827-6.

51. Khalil H., Ameen M., Davies C., Liu C. Implementing value-based healthcare: a scoping review of key elements, outcomes, and challenges for sustainable healthcare systems. Front Public Health. 2025; 13: 1514098. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1514098.

52. Leusder M., Porte P., Ahaus K., van Elten H. Cost measurement in value-based healthcare: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2022; 12 (12): e066568. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-066568.

53. He W., Li M., Cao L., et al. Introducing value-based healthcare perspectives into hospital performance assessment: a scoping review. J Evid Based Med. 2023; 16 (2): 200–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.12534.

54. Fernández-Salido M., Alhambra-Borrás T., Casanova G., GarcésFerrer J. Value-based healthcare delivery: a scoping review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2024; 21 (2): 134. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21020134.

55. Blom M.C., Khalid M., Van-Lettow B., et al. Harmonization of the ICHOM quality measures to enable health outcomes measurement in multimorbid patients. Front Digit Health. 2020; 2: 606246. https://doi.org/10.3389/fdgth.2020.606246.

56. Nicolas-Boluda A., Simon S. Validation of the French version of the ICHOM adult oral health standard set. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2023; 9 (1): 142–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.682.

57. Oosterveer D.M., van Meijeren-Pont W., van Markus-Doornbosch F., et al. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the ICHOM standard set for stroke: the Dutch version. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023; 7 (1): 91. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-023-00630-7.