Teilhabe von Patienten an Lebensbereichen als Gegenstand der Versorgungsforschung: Beziehung zu verwandten Konstrukten und Übersicht über vorhandene Messverfahren
Teilhabe von Patienten an Lebensbereichen als Gegenstand der Versorgungsforschung: Beziehung zu verwandten Konstrukten und Übersicht über vorhandene Messverfahren
复制标题
Teilhabe von Patienten and Lebensbereichen also Gegenstand der Versorgungsforschung: Beziehung zu verwandten Konstrukten und Übersicht über vorhandene Messverfahren
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
E. Farin
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Farin
参与保健政策概念的重大意义与参与结构（德语“Teilhabe”）在科学界的相对较低的共鸣形成鲜明对比。可以说，这部分是由于《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》（“国际功能、残疾和健康分类”）对这一术语的具体说明不够，而且缺乏适当的衡量工具。本文讨论的问题，目前存在什么样的方法来定义参与和什么样的方法是可以想象的，以促进整合的结构在卫生服务研究。基于对德国和国际参与文献的回顾，该结构与“社会资本”、“社会网络”、“社会支持”和“社区整合”等相关概念不同。建议将参与理解为“社会角色参与”。这可能需要参考现有的研究传统和现有的研究导致的必要性，一个全面的参与测量应包括五个方面的这一结构：性能，能力，重要性，背景因素和满意度。对衡量参与情况的现有工具的审查表明，其中大多数工具都在一定程度上涵盖了在这方面十分重要的国际功能、残疾和健康分类领域。但是，有以下方面需要改进：（a）没有一个衡量工具包括参与的所有五个相关方面，（B）没有一个工具考虑与健康无关的参与障碍c）很少使用具有平行内容的版本进行代理评估的可能性，（d）向德语用户提供的已公布方法仅涵盖全球参与，或较旧，不包括使用《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》的经验。鉴于参与结构在德国卫生保健系统中的重要性，欢迎对满足这些挑战的评估工具的新的或正在进行的开发进行研究。
The great significance of the concept of participation in health care policy is in contrast with the comparatively low resonance that the participation construct ("Teilhabe" in German) has found in scientific circles. It can be argued that this is due in part to the insufficient specification of the term in the ICF ("International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health") and the lack of suitable measuring instruments. This article deals with the question of what approaches to defining participation currently exist and what methods are conceivable for facilitating the integration of the construct in health services research. Based on a review of German and international literature on participation, the construct is differentiated from related concepts such as "social capital," "social network," "social support," and "community integration". It is recommended that participation should be understood as "social role participation". The possibility this entails of referring to existing research traditions and available studies leads to the necessity that a comprehensive measurement of participation should include five dimensions of this construct: performance, capability, importance, context factors, and satisfaction. A review of the available instruments for measuring participation shows that most of them cover the ICF domains that are important in this context to a sufficient extent. However, there are the following areas for improvement: a) No measuring instrument includes all five relevant dimensions of participation, b) None of the instruments take non-health-related obstacles to participation (context factors) into consideration, c) The possibility of a version with parallel content for proxy assessment is rarely used, d) The published methods available to German-speaking users cover participation only globally or are older and do not incorporate experience with the ICF. In view of the significance of the participation construct in the German health care system, studies on new or ongoing developments of assessment instruments that meet these challenges would be welcomed.