Effectiveness and perceptions of using templates in long-term condition reviews: a systematic synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies

Abstract

BackgroundReview templates are commonly used in long-term condition (LTC) consultations to standardise care for patients and promote consistent data recording. However, templates may affect interactions during the review and, potentially, inhibit patient-centred care.AimTo systematically review the literature about the impact that LTC review templates have on process and health outcomes, and the views of health professionals and patients on using review templates in consultations.Design and settingParallel qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews.MethodFollowing Cochrane methodology, nine databases were searched (1995–2019; updated July 2020) for clinical trials and qualitative studies of LTC templates in healthcare settings. Duplicate selection, risk-of-bias assessment, and data extraction were performed. The quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted in parallel, and findings synthesised narratively.ResultsIn total, 12 qualitative and 14 quantitative studies were included (two studies reported both qualitative and quantitative data, and were included in both analyses). Review templates were well used, but the only study to assess health outcomes showed no effect. Templates can improve documentation of key measures and act as a reminder tool; however, they can restrict the review process, and risk health professionals’ agendas being prioritised over those of patients. Templates may also limit opportunities to discuss individuals’ concerns about living with their condition and act as a barrier to providing patient-centred care.ConclusionFuture research should evaluate health, as well as process, outcomes. The potential benefits of templates in improving documentation should be balanced against concerns that ‘tick boxes’ may override patient agendas, unless templates are designed to promote patient-centred care.