Measuring patient experience: a systematic review to evaluate psychometric properties of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for emergency care service provision.
Measuring patient experience: a systematic review to evaluate psychometric properties of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for emergency care service provision.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/intqhc/mzx027
复制
发表时间：
2017-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Marson T
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Male L;Noble A;Atkinson J;Marson T
了解急诊科（ED）内的患者体验，可以根据患者需求开发和改进服务。没有标准化的工具来衡量患者的体验。本研究的目的是确定患者报告的经验措施（PREM）ED，检查他们的严谨性和他们的心理测量属性时，判断标准。检索了Medline、Scopus、CINAHL、PsycINFO、PubMed和Web of Science，检索时间范围从开始到2015年5月。使用特定检索词和纳入标准识别研究。共纳入了8篇文章，报告了4种PREM。从文章中提取了关于四种PREM的开发和性能的数据。根据Pesudovs K，Burr JM，哈雷C等人先前描述的质量标准（问卷的开发、评估和选择。Optom维斯科学2007;84：663-74.）。有显着的变化，在质量的发展和报告的心理测量特性。对于所有四个PREM，最初的开发工作包括使用定性访谈确定患者的经验。然而，对仪器性能的评估很差。在一些研究中测量了有效性和可靠性;然而，在任何纳入的研究中，都没有测量调查开发的一个重要方面-反应性。目前可用于艾德的PREMS具有不确定的有效性、可靠性和反应性。需要进一步的验证工作，以评估其对患者的可接受性及其在临床实践中的有用性。
Knowledge about patient experience within emergency departments (EDs) allows services to develop and improve in line with patient needs. There is no standardized instrument to measure patient experience. The aim of this study is to identify patient reported experience measures (PREMs) for EDs, examine the rigour by which they were developed and their psychometric properties when judged against standard criteria. Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science were searched from inception to May 2015. Studies were identified using specific search terms and inclusion criteria. A total of eight articles, reporting on four PREMs, were included. Data on the development and performance of the four PREMs were extracted from the articles. The measures were critiqued according to quality criteria previously described by Pesudovs K, Burr JM, Harley C, et al. (The development, assessment, and selection of questionnaires. Optom Vis Sci 2007;84:663–74.). There was significant variation in the quality of development and reporting of psychometric properties. For all four PREMs, initial development work included the ascertainment of patient experiences using qualitative interviews. However, instrument performance was poorly assessed. Validity and reliability were measured in some studies; however responsiveness, an important aspect on survey development, was not measured in any of the included studies. PREMS currently available for use in the ED have uncertain validity, reliability and responsiveness. Further validation work is required to assess their acceptability to patients and their usefulness in clinical practice.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.2471/blt.07.050401
发表时间：
2009-04-01
期刊：
Bulletin of the World Health Organization: International Journal of Public Health
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bleich, Sara N;Özaltin, Emre;Murray, Christopher JL
通讯作者：
Murray, Christopher JL
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Bos, Nanne;Sizmur, Steve;van Stel, Henk F.
通讯作者：
van Stel, Henk F.
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Frank, Catharina;Asp, Margareta;Dahlberg, Karin
通讯作者：
Dahlberg, Karin
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Doyle C;Lennox L;Bell D
通讯作者：
Bell D
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Frank, Catharina;Asp, Margareta;Baigi, Amir
通讯作者：
Baigi, Amir