Cargando…

Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Health care systems that succeed in preventing long term care and hospital admissions of frail older people may substantially save on their public spending. The key might be found in high-quality care in the community. Quality Indicators (QIs) of a sufficient methodological level are a p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Joling, Karlijn J., van Eenoo, Liza, Vetrano, Davide L., Smaardijk, Veerle R., Declercq, Anja, Onder, Graziano, van Hout, Hein P. J., van der Roest, Henriëtte G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5760020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29315325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190298
_version_ 1783291309829652480
author Joling, Karlijn J.
van Eenoo, Liza
Vetrano, Davide L.
Smaardijk, Veerle R.
Declercq, Anja
Onder, Graziano
van Hout, Hein P. J.
van der Roest, Henriëtte G.
author_facet Joling, Karlijn J.
van Eenoo, Liza
Vetrano, Davide L.
Smaardijk, Veerle R.
Declercq, Anja
Onder, Graziano
van Hout, Hein P. J.
van der Roest, Henriëtte G.
author_sort Joling, Karlijn J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Health care systems that succeed in preventing long term care and hospital admissions of frail older people may substantially save on their public spending. The key might be found in high-quality care in the community. Quality Indicators (QIs) of a sufficient methodological level are a prerequisite to monitor, compare, and improve care quality. This systematic review identified existing QIs for community care for older people and assessed their methodological quality. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searches in electronic reference databases and selected by two reviewers independently. Eligible publications described the development or application of QIs to assess the quality of community care for older people. Information about the QIs, the study sample, and specific setting was extracted. The methodological quality of the QI sets was assessed with the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. A score of 50% or higher on a domain was considered to indicate high methodological quality. RESULTS: Searches resulted in 25 included articles, describing 17 QI sets with 567 QIs. Most indicators referred to care processes (80%) and measured clinical issues (63%), mainly about follow-up, monitoring, examinations and treatment. About two-third of the QIs focussed on specific disease groups. The methodological quality of the indicator sets varied considerably. The highest overall level was achieved on the domain ‘Additional evidence, formulation and usage’ (51%), followed by ‘Scientific evidence’ (39%) and ‘Stakeholder involvement’ (28%). CONCLUSION: A substantial number of QIs is available to assess the quality of community care for older people. However, generic QIs, measuring care outcomes and non-clinical aspects are relatively scarce and most QI sets do not meet standards of high methodological quality. This study can support policy makers and clinicians to navigate through a large number of QIs and select QIs for their purposes. PROSPERO Registration: 2014:CRD42014007199
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5760020
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57600202018-01-22 Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review Joling, Karlijn J. van Eenoo, Liza Vetrano, Davide L. Smaardijk, Veerle R. Declercq, Anja Onder, Graziano van Hout, Hein P. J. van der Roest, Henriëtte G. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Health care systems that succeed in preventing long term care and hospital admissions of frail older people may substantially save on their public spending. The key might be found in high-quality care in the community. Quality Indicators (QIs) of a sufficient methodological level are a prerequisite to monitor, compare, and improve care quality. This systematic review identified existing QIs for community care for older people and assessed their methodological quality. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searches in electronic reference databases and selected by two reviewers independently. Eligible publications described the development or application of QIs to assess the quality of community care for older people. Information about the QIs, the study sample, and specific setting was extracted. The methodological quality of the QI sets was assessed with the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. A score of 50% or higher on a domain was considered to indicate high methodological quality. RESULTS: Searches resulted in 25 included articles, describing 17 QI sets with 567 QIs. Most indicators referred to care processes (80%) and measured clinical issues (63%), mainly about follow-up, monitoring, examinations and treatment. About two-third of the QIs focussed on specific disease groups. The methodological quality of the indicator sets varied considerably. The highest overall level was achieved on the domain ‘Additional evidence, formulation and usage’ (51%), followed by ‘Scientific evidence’ (39%) and ‘Stakeholder involvement’ (28%). CONCLUSION: A substantial number of QIs is available to assess the quality of community care for older people. However, generic QIs, measuring care outcomes and non-clinical aspects are relatively scarce and most QI sets do not meet standards of high methodological quality. This study can support policy makers and clinicians to navigate through a large number of QIs and select QIs for their purposes. PROSPERO Registration: 2014:CRD42014007199 Public Library of Science 2018-01-09 /pmc/articles/PMC5760020/ /pubmed/29315325 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190298 Text en © 2018 Joling et al http://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/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Joling, Karlijn J.
van Eenoo, Liza
Vetrano, Davide L.
Smaardijk, Veerle R.
Declercq, Anja
Onder, Graziano
van Hout, Hein P. J.
van der Roest, Henriëtte G.
Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title_full Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title_fullStr Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title_short Quality indicators for community care for older people: A systematic review
title_sort quality indicators for community care for older people: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5760020/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29315325
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190298
work_keys_str_mv AT jolingkarlijnj qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT vaneenooliza qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT vetranodavidel qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT smaardijkveerler qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT declercqanja qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT ondergraziano qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT vanhoutheinpj qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview
AT vanderroesthenrietteg qualityindicatorsforcommunitycareforolderpeopleasystematicreview