Cargando…
A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape
BACKGROUND: Care coordination has increasingly been recognized as an important aspect of high-quality health care delivery. Robust measures of coordination processes will be essential tools to evaluate, guide and support efforts to understand and improve coordination, yet little agreement exists amo...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3651252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23537350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-119 |
_version_ | 1782269190842875904 |
---|---|
author | Schultz, Ellen M Pineda, Noelle Lonhart, Julia Davies, Sheryl M McDonald, Kathryn M |
author_facet | Schultz, Ellen M Pineda, Noelle Lonhart, Julia Davies, Sheryl M McDonald, Kathryn M |
author_sort | Schultz, Ellen M |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Care coordination has increasingly been recognized as an important aspect of high-quality health care delivery. Robust measures of coordination processes will be essential tools to evaluate, guide and support efforts to understand and improve coordination, yet little agreement exists among stakeholders about how to best measure care coordination. We aimed to review and characterize existing measures of care coordination processes and identify areas of high and low density to guide future measure development. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of measures published in MEDLINE through April 2012 and identified from additional key sources and informants. We characterized included measures with respect to the aspects of coordination measured (domain), measurement perspective (patient/family, health care professional, system representative), applicable settings and patient populations (by age and condition), and data used (survey, chart review, administrative claims). RESULTS: Among the 96 included measure instruments, most relied on survey methods (88%) and measured aspects of communication (93%), in particular the transfer of information (81%). Few measured changing coordination needs (11%). Nearly half (49%) of instruments mapped to the patient/family perspective; 29% to the system representative and 27% to the health care professionals perspective. Few instruments were applicable to settings other than primary care (58%), inpatient facilities (25%), and outpatient specialty care (22%). CONCLUSIONS: New measures are needed that evaluate changing coordination needs, coordination as perceived by health care professionals, coordination in the home health setting, and for patients at the end of life. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3651252 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36512522013-05-11 A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape Schultz, Ellen M Pineda, Noelle Lonhart, Julia Davies, Sheryl M McDonald, Kathryn M BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Care coordination has increasingly been recognized as an important aspect of high-quality health care delivery. Robust measures of coordination processes will be essential tools to evaluate, guide and support efforts to understand and improve coordination, yet little agreement exists among stakeholders about how to best measure care coordination. We aimed to review and characterize existing measures of care coordination processes and identify areas of high and low density to guide future measure development. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of measures published in MEDLINE through April 2012 and identified from additional key sources and informants. We characterized included measures with respect to the aspects of coordination measured (domain), measurement perspective (patient/family, health care professional, system representative), applicable settings and patient populations (by age and condition), and data used (survey, chart review, administrative claims). RESULTS: Among the 96 included measure instruments, most relied on survey methods (88%) and measured aspects of communication (93%), in particular the transfer of information (81%). Few measured changing coordination needs (11%). Nearly half (49%) of instruments mapped to the patient/family perspective; 29% to the system representative and 27% to the health care professionals perspective. Few instruments were applicable to settings other than primary care (58%), inpatient facilities (25%), and outpatient specialty care (22%). CONCLUSIONS: New measures are needed that evaluate changing coordination needs, coordination as perceived by health care professionals, coordination in the home health setting, and for patients at the end of life. BioMed Central 2013-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3651252/ /pubmed/23537350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-119 Text en Copyright © 2013 Schultz et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Schultz, Ellen M Pineda, Noelle Lonhart, Julia Davies, Sheryl M McDonald, Kathryn M A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title | A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title_full | A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title_fullStr | A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title_short | A systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
title_sort | systematic review of the care coordination measurement landscape |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3651252/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23537350 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-119 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schultzellenm asystematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT pinedanoelle asystematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT lonhartjulia asystematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT daviessherylm asystematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT mcdonaldkathrynm asystematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT schultzellenm systematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT pinedanoelle systematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT lonhartjulia systematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT daviessherylm systematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape AT mcdonaldkathrynm systematicreviewofthecarecoordinationmeasurementlandscape |