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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |