Cargando…
Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research
OBJECTIVES: To synthesise the published literature on the patient experience of the medical primary–secondary care interface and to determine priorities for future work in this field aimed at improving clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and metaethnographic synthesis of primary studies tha...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4611413/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474939 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008708 |
_version_ | 1782396076734545920 |
---|---|
author | Sampson, Rod Cooper, Jamie Barbour, Rosaline Polson, Rob Wilson, Philip |
author_facet | Sampson, Rod Cooper, Jamie Barbour, Rosaline Polson, Rob Wilson, Philip |
author_sort | Sampson, Rod |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To synthesise the published literature on the patient experience of the medical primary–secondary care interface and to determine priorities for future work in this field aimed at improving clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and metaethnographic synthesis of primary studies that used qualitative methods to explore patients’ perspectives of the medical primary–secondary care interface. SETTING: International primary–secondary care interface. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus with Full text, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, Health Business Elite, Biomedica Reference Collection: Comprehensive Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts, eBook Collection, Web of Science Core Collection: Citation Indexes and Social Sciences Citation Index, and grey literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were full research papers employing qualitative methodology to explore patients’ perspectives of the medical primary–secondary care interface. REVIEW METHODS: The 7-step metaethnographic approach described by Noblit and Hare, which involves cross-interpretation between studies while preserving the context of the primary data. RESULTS: The search identified 690 articles, of which 39 were selected for full-text review. 20 articles were included in the systematic review that encompassed a total of 689 patients from 10 countries. 4 important areas specific to the primary–secondary care interface from the patients’ perspective emerged: barriers to care, communication, coordination, and ‘relationships and personal value’. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Patients should be the focus of any transfer of care between primary and secondary systems. From their perspective, areas for improvement may be classified into four domains that should usefully guide future work aimed at improving quality at this important interface. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42014009486. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4611413 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46114132015-10-23 Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research Sampson, Rod Cooper, Jamie Barbour, Rosaline Polson, Rob Wilson, Philip BMJ Open Qualitative Research OBJECTIVES: To synthesise the published literature on the patient experience of the medical primary–secondary care interface and to determine priorities for future work in this field aimed at improving clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and metaethnographic synthesis of primary studies that used qualitative methods to explore patients’ perspectives of the medical primary–secondary care interface. SETTING: International primary–secondary care interface. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus with Full text, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, Health Business Elite, Biomedica Reference Collection: Comprehensive Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts, eBook Collection, Web of Science Core Collection: Citation Indexes and Social Sciences Citation Index, and grey literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were full research papers employing qualitative methodology to explore patients’ perspectives of the medical primary–secondary care interface. REVIEW METHODS: The 7-step metaethnographic approach described by Noblit and Hare, which involves cross-interpretation between studies while preserving the context of the primary data. RESULTS: The search identified 690 articles, of which 39 were selected for full-text review. 20 articles were included in the systematic review that encompassed a total of 689 patients from 10 countries. 4 important areas specific to the primary–secondary care interface from the patients’ perspective emerged: barriers to care, communication, coordination, and ‘relationships and personal value’. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Patients should be the focus of any transfer of care between primary and secondary systems. From their perspective, areas for improvement may be classified into four domains that should usefully guide future work aimed at improving quality at this important interface. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42014009486. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4611413/ /pubmed/26474939 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008708 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Qualitative Research Sampson, Rod Cooper, Jamie Barbour, Rosaline Polson, Rob Wilson, Philip Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title | Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title_full | Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title_fullStr | Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title_full_unstemmed | Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title_short | Patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
title_sort | patients’ perspectives on the medical primary–secondary care interface: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research |
topic | Qualitative Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4611413/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474939 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008708 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sampsonrod patientsperspectivesonthemedicalprimarysecondarycareinterfacesystematicreviewandsynthesisofqualitativeresearch AT cooperjamie patientsperspectivesonthemedicalprimarysecondarycareinterfacesystematicreviewandsynthesisofqualitativeresearch AT barbourrosaline patientsperspectivesonthemedicalprimarysecondarycareinterfacesystematicreviewandsynthesisofqualitativeresearch AT polsonrob patientsperspectivesonthemedicalprimarysecondarycareinterfacesystematicreviewandsynthesisofqualitativeresearch AT wilsonphilip patientsperspectivesonthemedicalprimarysecondarycareinterfacesystematicreviewandsynthesisofqualitativeresearch |