Cargando…

Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review

Background: Health system performance indicators are widely used to assess primary healthcare (PHC) performance. Despite the numerous tools and some convergence on indicator criteria, there is not a clear understanding of the common features of indicator selection processes. We aimed to review the l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rendell, Nicole, Rosewell, Alexander, Lokuge, Kamalini, Field, Emma
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10105193/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35368205
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6239
_version_ 1785026168744837120
author Rendell, Nicole
Rosewell, Alexander
Lokuge, Kamalini
Field, Emma
author_facet Rendell, Nicole
Rosewell, Alexander
Lokuge, Kamalini
Field, Emma
author_sort Rendell, Nicole
collection PubMed
description Background: Health system performance indicators are widely used to assess primary healthcare (PHC) performance. Despite the numerous tools and some convergence on indicator criteria, there is not a clear understanding of the common features of indicator selection processes. We aimed to review the literature to identify papers that document indicator selection processes for health system performance indicators in PHC. Methods: We searched the online databases Scopus, Medline, and CINAHL, as well as the grey literature, without time restrictions, initially on July 31, 2019 followed by an update November 13, 2020. Empirical studies or reports were included if they described the selection of health system performance indicators or frameworks, that included PHC indicators. A combination of the process focussed research question and qualitative analysis meant a quality appraisal tool or assessment of bias could not meaningfully be applied to assess individual studies. We undertook an inductive analysis based on potential indicator selection processes criteria, drawn from health system performance indicator appraisal tools reported in the literature. Results: We identified 16 503 records of which 28 were included in the review. Most studies used a descriptive case study design. We found no consistent variations between indicator selection processes of health systems of high income and low- or lower-middle income countries. Identified common features of selection processes for indicators in PHC include literature review or adaption of an existing framework as an initial step; a consensus building process with stakeholders; structuring indicators into categories; and indicator criteria focusing on validity and feasibility. The evidence around field testing with utility and consideration of reporting burden was less clear. Conclusion: Our findings highlight several characteristics of health system indicator selection processes. These features provide the groundwork to better understand how to value indicator selection processes in PHC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10105193
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101051932023-04-16 Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review Rendell, Nicole Rosewell, Alexander Lokuge, Kamalini Field, Emma Int J Health Policy Manag Systematic Review Background: Health system performance indicators are widely used to assess primary healthcare (PHC) performance. Despite the numerous tools and some convergence on indicator criteria, there is not a clear understanding of the common features of indicator selection processes. We aimed to review the literature to identify papers that document indicator selection processes for health system performance indicators in PHC. Methods: We searched the online databases Scopus, Medline, and CINAHL, as well as the grey literature, without time restrictions, initially on July 31, 2019 followed by an update November 13, 2020. Empirical studies or reports were included if they described the selection of health system performance indicators or frameworks, that included PHC indicators. A combination of the process focussed research question and qualitative analysis meant a quality appraisal tool or assessment of bias could not meaningfully be applied to assess individual studies. We undertook an inductive analysis based on potential indicator selection processes criteria, drawn from health system performance indicator appraisal tools reported in the literature. Results: We identified 16 503 records of which 28 were included in the review. Most studies used a descriptive case study design. We found no consistent variations between indicator selection processes of health systems of high income and low- or lower-middle income countries. Identified common features of selection processes for indicators in PHC include literature review or adaption of an existing framework as an initial step; a consensus building process with stakeholders; structuring indicators into categories; and indicator criteria focusing on validity and feasibility. The evidence around field testing with utility and consideration of reporting burden was less clear. Conclusion: Our findings highlight several characteristics of health system indicator selection processes. These features provide the groundwork to better understand how to value indicator selection processes in PHC. Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2022-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC10105193/ /pubmed/35368205 http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6239 Text en © 2022 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Rendell, Nicole
Rosewell, Alexander
Lokuge, Kamalini
Field, Emma
Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title_full Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title_fullStr Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title_short Common Features of Selection Processes of Health System Performance Indicators in Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review
title_sort common features of selection processes of health system performance indicators in primary healthcare: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10105193/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35368205
http://dx.doi.org/10.34172/ijhpm.2022.6239
work_keys_str_mv AT rendellnicole commonfeaturesofselectionprocessesofhealthsystemperformanceindicatorsinprimaryhealthcareasystematicreview
AT rosewellalexander commonfeaturesofselectionprocessesofhealthsystemperformanceindicatorsinprimaryhealthcareasystematicreview
AT lokugekamalini commonfeaturesofselectionprocessesofhealthsystemperformanceindicatorsinprimaryhealthcareasystematicreview
AT fieldemma commonfeaturesofselectionprocessesofhealthsystemperformanceindicatorsinprimaryhealthcareasystematicreview