Cargando…

A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics

BACKGROUND: Quality of care remains a priority issue and is correlated with patient experience. Measuring multidimensional patient primary care experiences in multiprofessional clinics requires a robust instrument. Although many exist, little is known about their quality. OBJECTIVE: To identify pati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Derriennic, Jérémy, Nabbe, Patrice, Barais, Marie, Le Goff, Delphine, Pourtau, Thomas, Penpennic, Benjamin, Le Reste, Jean-Yves
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9508876/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35230419
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmac007
_version_ 1784797114412302336
author Derriennic, Jérémy
Nabbe, Patrice
Barais, Marie
Le Goff, Delphine
Pourtau, Thomas
Penpennic, Benjamin
Le Reste, Jean-Yves
author_facet Derriennic, Jérémy
Nabbe, Patrice
Barais, Marie
Le Goff, Delphine
Pourtau, Thomas
Penpennic, Benjamin
Le Reste, Jean-Yves
author_sort Derriennic, Jérémy
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Quality of care remains a priority issue and is correlated with patient experience. Measuring multidimensional patient primary care experiences in multiprofessional clinics requires a robust instrument. Although many exist, little is known about their quality. OBJECTIVE: To identify patient perception instruments in multiprofessional primary care and evaluate their quality. METHODS: Systematic review using Medline, Pascal, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Scopus, and CAIRN. Eligible articles developed, evaluated, or validated 1 or more self-assessment instruments. The instruments had to measure primary care delivery, patient primary care experiences and assess at least 3 quality-of-care dimensions. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to assess methodological quality of included studies. Instrument measurement properties were appraised using 3 possible quality scores. Data were combined to provide best-evidence synthesis based on the number of studies, their methodological quality, measurement property appraisal, and result consistency. Subscales used to capture patient primary care experiences were extracted and grouped into the 9 Institute of Medicine dimensions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were found. The included instruments captured many subscales illustrating the diverse conceptualization of patient primary care experiences. No included instrument demonstrated adequate validity and the lack of scientific methodology for assessing reliability made interpreting validity questionable. No study evaluated instrument responsiveness. CONCLUSION: Numerous patient self-assessment instruments were identified capturing a wide range of patient experiences, but their measurement properties were weak. Research is required to develop and validate a generic instrument for assessing quality of multiprofessional primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9508876
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95088762022-09-26 A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics Derriennic, Jérémy Nabbe, Patrice Barais, Marie Le Goff, Delphine Pourtau, Thomas Penpennic, Benjamin Le Reste, Jean-Yves Fam Pract Systematic Reviews BACKGROUND: Quality of care remains a priority issue and is correlated with patient experience. Measuring multidimensional patient primary care experiences in multiprofessional clinics requires a robust instrument. Although many exist, little is known about their quality. OBJECTIVE: To identify patient perception instruments in multiprofessional primary care and evaluate their quality. METHODS: Systematic review using Medline, Pascal, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Scopus, and CAIRN. Eligible articles developed, evaluated, or validated 1 or more self-assessment instruments. The instruments had to measure primary care delivery, patient primary care experiences and assess at least 3 quality-of-care dimensions. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to assess methodological quality of included studies. Instrument measurement properties were appraised using 3 possible quality scores. Data were combined to provide best-evidence synthesis based on the number of studies, their methodological quality, measurement property appraisal, and result consistency. Subscales used to capture patient primary care experiences were extracted and grouped into the 9 Institute of Medicine dimensions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were found. The included instruments captured many subscales illustrating the diverse conceptualization of patient primary care experiences. No included instrument demonstrated adequate validity and the lack of scientific methodology for assessing reliability made interpreting validity questionable. No study evaluated instrument responsiveness. CONCLUSION: Numerous patient self-assessment instruments were identified capturing a wide range of patient experiences, but their measurement properties were weak. Research is required to develop and validate a generic instrument for assessing quality of multiprofessional primary care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable. Oxford University Press 2022-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9508876/ /pubmed/35230419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmac007 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews
Derriennic, Jérémy
Nabbe, Patrice
Barais, Marie
Le Goff, Delphine
Pourtau, Thomas
Penpennic, Benjamin
Le Reste, Jean-Yves
A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title_full A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title_fullStr A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title_full_unstemmed A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title_short A systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
title_sort systematic literature review of patient self-assessment instruments concerning quality of primary care in multiprofessional clinics
topic Systematic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9508876/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35230419
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmac007
work_keys_str_mv AT derriennicjeremy asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT nabbepatrice asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT baraismarie asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT legoffdelphine asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT pourtauthomas asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT penpennicbenjamin asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT lerestejeanyves asystematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT derriennicjeremy systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT nabbepatrice systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT baraismarie systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT legoffdelphine systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT pourtauthomas systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT penpennicbenjamin systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics
AT lerestejeanyves systematicliteraturereviewofpatientselfassessmentinstrumentsconcerningqualityofprimarycareinmultiprofessionalclinics