Cargando…

Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics. METHODS: We follo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schwenker, Rosemarie, Deutsch, Tobias, Unverzagt, Susanne, Frese, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9945547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36844957
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1010001
_version_ 1784892163011641344
author Schwenker, Rosemarie
Deutsch, Tobias
Unverzagt, Susanne
Frese, Thomas
author_facet Schwenker, Rosemarie
Deutsch, Tobias
Unverzagt, Susanne
Frese, Thomas
author_sort Schwenker, Rosemarie
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual on scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) for quantitative and qualitative studies in English, Spanish, French, and German with no time limit. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open. RESULTS: Of the 839 articles identified, 66 met the criteria for study eligibility, from which 61 instruments were identified. The publications were from 18 different countries, with most studies employing an observational design and including mostly adult patients. Among all instruments, 22 were reported as validated, which we present in this paper. Overall, quality criteria were reported differently, with studies generally providing little detail. Most of the instruments were used as paper and pencil questionnaires. We found considerable heterogeneity in the theoretical conceptualisation, definition, and measurement of PSPs, ranging from psychiatric case findings to specific social problems. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This review presents a number of tools and methods that have been studied and used in general practice research. Adapted and tailored to local circumstances, practice populations, and needs, they could be useful for identifying patients with PSPs in daily GP practice; however, this requires further research. Given the heterogeneity of studies and instruments, future research efforts should include both a more structured evaluation of instruments and the incorporation of consensus methods to move forward from instrument research to actual use in daily practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9945547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99455472023-02-23 Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review Schwenker, Rosemarie Deutsch, Tobias Unverzagt, Susanne Frese, Thomas Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine OBJECTIVE: We conducted a scoping review with the aim of comprehensively investigating what tools or methods have been examined in general practice research that capture a wide range of psychosocial problems (PSPs) and serve to identify patients and highlight their characteristics. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews and the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual on scoping reviews. A systematic search was conducted in four electronic databases (Medline [Ovid], Web of Science Core Collection, PsycInfo, Cochrane Library) for quantitative and qualitative studies in English, Spanish, French, and German with no time limit. The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework and published in BMJ Open. RESULTS: Of the 839 articles identified, 66 met the criteria for study eligibility, from which 61 instruments were identified. The publications were from 18 different countries, with most studies employing an observational design and including mostly adult patients. Among all instruments, 22 were reported as validated, which we present in this paper. Overall, quality criteria were reported differently, with studies generally providing little detail. Most of the instruments were used as paper and pencil questionnaires. We found considerable heterogeneity in the theoretical conceptualisation, definition, and measurement of PSPs, ranging from psychiatric case findings to specific social problems. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This review presents a number of tools and methods that have been studied and used in general practice research. Adapted and tailored to local circumstances, practice populations, and needs, they could be useful for identifying patients with PSPs in daily GP practice; however, this requires further research. Given the heterogeneity of studies and instruments, future research efforts should include both a more structured evaluation of instruments and the incorporation of consensus methods to move forward from instrument research to actual use in daily practice. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9945547/ /pubmed/36844957 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1010001 Text en Copyright © 2023 Schwenker, Deutsch, Unverzagt and Frese. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Medicine
Schwenker, Rosemarie
Deutsch, Tobias
Unverzagt, Susanne
Frese, Thomas
Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title_full Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title_fullStr Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title_short Identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: A scoping review
title_sort identifying patients with psychosocial problems in general practice: a scoping review
topic Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9945547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36844957
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.1010001
work_keys_str_mv AT schwenkerrosemarie identifyingpatientswithpsychosocialproblemsingeneralpracticeascopingreview
AT deutschtobias identifyingpatientswithpsychosocialproblemsingeneralpracticeascopingreview
AT unverzagtsusanne identifyingpatientswithpsychosocialproblemsingeneralpracticeascopingreview
AT fresethomas identifyingpatientswithpsychosocialproblemsingeneralpracticeascopingreview