Abstract
ObjectivesTo identify and evaluate clinical approaches to whole person assessment (WPA) that are translatable to family medicine regarding feasibility, quality and alignment with theoretical models of whole person care (WPC).DesignSystematic literature review.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and ATLA Religion databases were searched through 9 March 2020, with additional handsearches.Eligibility criteriaEnglish language clinical assessments of multiple domains; which involve patient–clinician interaction and are translatable to general practice (GP); from the fields of medicine, allied health, nursing, mental health and pastoral care. Tools designed for single diseases or symptoms, for outcome rather than clinical assessment or with outdated classification systems were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisWe appraised the quality of included papers using Johanna Briggs’ Institute Checklists and Terwee’s criteria for validation studies. Clinical assessments’ alignment with theoretical WPC, feasibility for adaptation to GP and quality were examined. We analysed extracted data using framework synthesis.ResultsSearches retrieved 7535 non-duplicate items. Fifty-nine were included after screening, describing 42 WPA methods and representing multiple disciplines, purposes and formats. All included assessments aligned partially with models of WPC, but most did not adequately encompass all aspects of WPC. Robustness varied significantly and was often inadequately described. We judged none of the identified assessments to be ideal as a multipurpose WPA in GP. Some could be used for specific purposes, such as elicitation of patient perspectives or complexity assessment.ConclusionsWhile no WPAs were found that were sufficient for broad implementation in GP, some approaches may be suitable with adaptation and evaluation. Strengths of existing approaches could inform WPA development in future.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020164417.