Use of Patient-Reported Experience Measures in Pediatric Care: A Systematic Review.
Use of Patient-Reported Experience Measures in Pediatric Care: A Systematic Review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fped.2021.753536
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Santana MJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bele S;Teela L;Zhang M;Rabi S;Ahmed S;van Oers HA;Gibbons E;Dunnewold N;Haverman L;Santana MJ
简介：患者报告的经验措施（PREM）是经过验证的问卷，收集患者和家属对他们接受护理的经验的看法，通常用于衡量护理质量，目的是使护理更加以患者和家庭为中心。PREM越来越多地被儿科人群采用，但在了解PREM在儿科的使用方面存在知识差距。目的：识别和综合有关PREM在儿科医疗机构中的使用及其特点的证据。证据审查：系统性综述和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目管理本综述的执行和报告。对MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、科克伦图书馆和CINAHL数据库应用了详尽的检索策略，以识别来自高收入国家的相关同行评审文章。此外，还检索了灰色文献，以获取PREM的真实实现。所有文献均由两名评审员分两步独立筛选。数据独立提取、合成并制成表格。综合灰色文献的结果并单独报告。通过科学数据库确定的研究的偏倚风险由两名评审员使用美国国立卫生研究院观察性队列和横断面研究质量评估工具进行独立评估。结果：初步检索识别出15，457篇文章。删除重复后，筛选了11，543篇文章的标题和摘要。710篇文章符合全文审查的条件。最后，83篇文章符合标准并被纳入分析。83项研究包括在14个国家进行的研究，其中48项在美国进行，25项在欧洲国家进行，10项在其他国家进行。这83项研究报告了39种不同PREM在儿科医疗环境中的使用。灰色文献检索到10个额外的PREM。这些PREM中的项目数量从7到89不等。23个PREM设计为由代理人完成，10个由儿科患者或家庭护理人员完成，6个由儿科患者自己完成。结论和相关性：这项综合性综述是第一次系统地检索PREM在儿科中使用的证据。本综述的研究结果可以指导卫生管理者和研究人员使用适当的PREM在儿科实施以患者和家庭为中心的护理。
Introduction: Patient-reported Experience Measures (PREMs) are validated questionnaires, that gather patients' and families' views of their experience receiving care and are commonly used to measure the quality of care, with the goal to make care more patient and family-centered. PREMs are increasingly being adopted in pediatric population, however knowledge gaps exist around understanding the use of PREMs in pediatrics. Objective: To identify and synthesize evidence on the use of PREMs in pediatric healthcare settings and their characteristics. Evidence Review: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines governed the conduct and reporting of this review. An exhaustive search strategy was applied to MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL databases to identify relevant peer-reviewed articles from high-income countries. Additionally, gray literature was searched to capture real-world implementation of PREMs. All the articles were screened independently by two reviewers in two steps. Data was extracted independently, synthesized, and tabulated. Findings from gray literature was synthesized and reported separately. Risk of bias for the studies identified through scientific databases was assessed independently by two reviewers using the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Results: The initial search identified 15,457 articles. After removing duplicates, the title and abstracts of 11,543 articles were screened. Seven hundred ten articles were eligible for full-text review. Finally, 83 articles met the criteria and were included in the analyses. Of the 83 includes studies conducted in 14 countries, 48 were conducted in USA, 25 in European countries and 10 in other countries. These 83 studies reported on the use of 39 different PREMs in pediatric healthcare settings. The gray literature retrieved 10 additional PREMs. The number of items in these PREMs ranged from 7 to 89. Twenty-three PREMs were designed to be completed by proxy, 10 by either pediatric patients or family caregivers, and 6 by pediatric patients themselves. Conclusion and Relevance: This comprehensive review is the first to systematically search evidence around the use of PREMs in pediatrics. The findings of this review can guide health administrators and researchers to use appropriate PREMs to implement patient and family-centered care in pediatrics.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2
作者：
Furness, Caroline L.;Smith, Lesley;Hough, Rachael E.
通讯作者：
Hough, Rachael E.
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Brousseau, David C.;Mukonje, Terence;Panepinto, Julie A.
通讯作者：
Panepinto, Julie A.
影响因子：
1.2
作者：
Janhunen, Katja;Kankkunen, Paeivi;Kvist, Tarja
通讯作者：
Kvist, Tarja
影响因子：
--
作者：
Kemp, Kyle A;Ahmed, Sadia;Santana, Maria J
通讯作者：
Santana, Maria J
影响因子：
2.3
作者：
Knapp, Caprice;Madden, Vanessa;Shenkman, Elizabeth
通讯作者：
Shenkman, Elizabeth