Suppr超能文献

在急性医疗环境中开发和实施共同生产的干预措施会带来哪些结果?一项快速证据综合分析。

What outcomes are associated with developing and implementing co-produced interventions in acute healthcare settings? A rapid evidence synthesis.

作者信息

Clarke David, Jones Fiona, Harris Ruth, Robert Glenn

机构信息

Academic Unit of Elderly Care and Rehabilitation, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, Bradford, UK.

Faculty of Health Social Care and Education, St George's University of London, London, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2017 Jul 11;7(7):e014650. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014650.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Co-production is defined as the voluntary or involuntary involvement of users in the design, management, delivery and/or evaluation of services. Interest in co-production as an intervention for improving healthcare quality is increasing. In the acute healthcare context, co-production is promoted as harnessing the knowledge of patients, carers and staff to make changes about which they care most. However, little is known regarding the impact of co-production on patient, staff or organisational outcomes in these settings.

AIMS

To identify and appraise reported outcomes of co-production as an intervention to improve quality of services in acute healthcare settings.

DESIGN

Rapid evidence synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Cinahl, Web of Science, Embase, HMIC, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, SCIE, Proquest Dissertation and Theses, EThOS, OpenGrey; ; ; .

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting patient, staff or organisational outcomes associated with using co-production in an acute healthcare setting.

FINDINGS

712 titles and abstracts were screened; 24 papers underwent full-text review, and 11 papers were included in the evidence synthesis. One study was a feasibility randomised controlled trial, three were process evaluations and seven used descriptive qualitative approaches. Reported outcomes related to (a) the value of patient and staff involvement in co-production processes; (b) the generation of ideas for changes to processes, practices and clinical environments; and (c) tangible service changes and impacts on patient experiences. Only one study included cost analysis; none reported an economic evaluation. No studies assessed the sustainability of any changes made.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing interest in and advocacy for co-production, there is a lack of rigorous evaluation in acute healthcare settings. Future studies should evaluate clinical and service outcomes as well as the cost-effectiveness of co-production relative to other forms of quality improvement. Potentially broader impacts on the values and behaviours of participants should also be considered.

摘要

背景

共同生产被定义为用户自愿或非自愿地参与服务的设计、管理、提供和/或评估。作为一种改善医疗质量的干预措施,人们对共同生产的兴趣与日俱增。在急性医疗环境中,共同生产被提倡为利用患者、护理人员和工作人员的知识来做出他们最关心的改变。然而,在这些环境中,共同生产对患者、工作人员或组织结果的影响却鲜为人知。

目的

识别并评估作为一种改善急性医疗环境中服务质量的干预措施,共同生产所报告的结果。

设计

快速证据综合。

数据来源

医学期刊数据库、护理学与健康领域数据库、科学引文索引数据库、荷兰医学文摘数据库、英国健康管理数据库、考克兰系统评价数据库、科学引文索引扩展版、普睿科特博硕士论文数据库、英国电子论文服务、开放灰色文献库。

研究选择

报告在急性医疗环境中使用共同生产相关的患者、工作人员或组织结果的研究。

结果

筛选了712篇标题和摘要;24篇论文进行了全文审查,11篇论文纳入了证据综合。一项研究是可行性随机对照试验,三项是过程评估,七项采用描述性定性方法。报告的结果涉及:(a)患者和工作人员参与共同生产过程的价值;(b)为流程、实践和临床环境的改变产生的想法;(c)切实的服务改变以及对患者体验的影响。只有一项研究包括成本分析;没有一项报告进行了经济评估。没有研究评估所做任何改变的可持续性。

结论

尽管对共同生产的兴趣和倡导不断增加,但在急性医疗环境中仍缺乏严格的评估。未来的研究应评估临床和服务结果以及共同生产相对于其他形式质量改进的成本效益。还应考虑对参与者的价值观和行为可能产生的更广泛影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a8d4/5734495/5c1be9a6f973/bmjopen-2016-014650f01.jpg

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