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

Author:

Derriennic Jérémy12ORCID,Nabbe Patrice12ORCID,Barais Marie12ORCID,Le Goff Delphine12ORCID,Pourtau Thomas1,Penpennic Benjamin1,Le Reste Jean-Yves12ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of General Practice, University of Western Brittany , 22, av. Camille Desmoulins, Brest, FR , France

2. ER 7479 SPURBO, University of Western Brittany , 22, av. Camille Desmoulins, Brest, FR , France

Abstract

Abstract 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.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Family Practice

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3