Suppr超能文献

开发和比较测量心理健康服务中护理内容的方法。

Developing and comparing methods for measuring the content of care in mental health services.

机构信息

Department of Mental Health Sciences, University College London (Bloomsbury Campus), Charles Bell House, 67-73 Riding House Street, London W1W 7EJ, UK.

出版信息

Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2011 Mar;46(3):219-29. doi: 10.1007/s00127-010-0192-4. Epub 2010 Feb 14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Measurement of what happens in mental health services is needed to describe services, identify variation in care provision and understand service outcomes. However, there is no consensus about appropriate methods or measures for content of care. Previous research has primarily used a single information source and prioritised staff over patient perspectives on content of care. This study aims to enhance understanding of how to measure content of care by developing and evaluating four instruments, each using a different measurement method.

METHODS

Development is described by four instruments-CaSPAR, CaRICE, CCCQ-S and CCCQ-P-which use researcher observation, staff-report and patient-report to measure the intensity and nature of care at services. Inter-rater reliability of CaRICE and CCCQ-S was investigated. Concordance between staff and patient perspectives was explored through assessing inter-rater agreement of CCCQ-S and CCCQ-P questionnaires. The convergence of data from the measures collected in an inpatient multi-site study was investigated.

RESULTS

CaRICE demonstrated good inter-rater reliability (κ = 0.71). CCCQ-S inter-rater reliability was poor. Concordance between staff and patient reports was low: there was a trend for patients to report less care received than staff reported had been provided. Results from CaSPAR, CaRICE and CCCQ-P exhibited divergence, indicating possible differences in patient, staff and researcher perspectives.

DISCUSSION

Information about content of care should be sought as close as possible to the point of delivery. There may be differing, valid perspectives about care provided by services. Further development of methods to measure content of care is required. Meanwhile, a multi-methods approach should be adopted, which allows inclusion of different perspectives (specifically including the patient's perspective) and triangulation of results from different measurement methods. CaSPAR, CaRICE and CCCQ-P can provide multi-perspective content of care measurement in inpatient services.

摘要

背景

为了描述服务、识别护理提供的差异以及了解服务结果,需要对心理健康服务中的实际情况进行测量。然而,对于护理内容的适当方法或测量指标尚未达成共识。先前的研究主要使用单一信息来源,并优先考虑工作人员对护理内容的看法,而不是患者的看法。本研究旨在通过开发和评估四种工具来增强对如何测量护理内容的理解,这四种工具分别使用不同的测量方法。

方法

研究介绍了四种工具-CaSPAR、CaRICE、CCCQ-S 和 CCCQ-P-它们分别使用研究人员观察、工作人员报告和患者报告来测量服务的护理强度和性质。研究还调查了 CaRICE 和 CCCQ-S 的组内一致性。通过评估 CCCQ-S 和 CCCQ-P 问卷的组内一致性,探讨了工作人员和患者观点之间的一致性。还研究了多地点住院研究中收集的措施数据的收敛性。

结果

CaRICE 表现出良好的组内一致性(κ=0.71)。CCCQ-S 的组内一致性较差。工作人员和患者报告之间的一致性较低:患者报告的护理接受程度低于工作人员报告的护理提供程度。来自 CaSPAR、CaRICE 和 CCCQ-P 的结果表现出分歧,表明患者、工作人员和研究人员的观点可能存在差异。

讨论

应该尽可能接近服务提供点来获取有关护理内容的信息。服务提供的护理可能存在不同的、有效的观点。需要进一步开发衡量护理内容的方法。同时,应该采用多方法的方法,允许纳入不同的观点(特别是包括患者的观点),并对来自不同测量方法的结果进行三角测量。CaSPAR、CaRICE 和 CCCQ-P 可以为住院服务提供多视角的护理内容测量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验