Department of Dentistry - Quality and Safety of Oral Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2019 Feb;47(1):12-23. doi: 10.1111/cdoe.12429. Epub 2018 Oct 30.
This systematic review aimed to (a) provide an overview of existing quality measures in the field of oral health care, and to (b) evaluate the scientific soundness and applicability of these quality measures.
A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE (via OVID) and LILACS (via BIREME). The search was restricted to articles published between 2002 and 2018. Publications reporting on the development process or clinimetric properties of oral health care quality measures for outpatient oral health care in dental practices were included. The identified publications reporting on oral health care quality measures were critically appraised with the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation 2.0 (AIRE 2.0) instrument to evaluate the soundness and applicability of the measures.
The search strategy resulted in 2541 unique and potentially relevant articles. In total, 24 publications were included yielding 215 quality measures. The critical appraisal showed a large variation in the quality of the included publications (AIRE scores ranging from 38 to 78 out of 80 possible points). The majority of measures (n = 71) referred to treatment and preventive services. Comparably, few measures referred to the domain patient safety (n = 3). The development process of measures often exhibited a lack of involvement of patients and dental professionals. Few projects reported on the validity (n = 2) and reliability (n = 3) of the measures. Four projects piloted the measures for implementation in practice.
This systematic review provides an overview of the status quo with respect to existing quality measures in oral health care. Potential opportunities include the piloting and testing of quality measures and the establishment of suitable information systems that allow the provision of transparent routine feedback on the quality of oral health care.
本系统评价旨在：(a) 概述口腔保健领域现有的质量指标；(b) 评估这些质量指标的科学性和适用性。
在三个电子数据库（MEDLINE[通过 PubMed]、EMBASE[通过 OVID]和 LILACS[通过 BIREME]）中进行了系统检索。检索限制在 2002 年至 2018 年期间发表的文章。纳入报告在牙科实践中针对门诊口腔保健开发过程或临床计量学特性的口腔保健质量指标的出版物。使用评估指标通过研究和评价 2.0（AIRE 2.0）工具对报告口腔保健质量指标的已识别出版物进行批判性评价，以评估这些指标的科学性和适用性。
搜索策略产生了 2541 个独特的潜在相关文章。共纳入 24 篇出版物，产生了 215 个质量指标。批判性评价显示，纳入出版物的质量差异很大（AIRE 评分范围为 80 分中的 38 至 78 分）。大多数指标（n=71）涉及治疗和预防服务。相比之下，很少有指标涉及患者安全领域（n=3）。这些措施的开发过程往往缺乏患者和牙科专业人员的参与。很少有项目报告这些措施的有效性（n=2）和可靠性（n=3）。有 4 个项目对这些措施进行了实施试点。
本系统评价概述了口腔保健中现有质量指标的现状。潜在的机会包括对质量指标进行试点和测试，并建立合适的信息系统，允许对口腔保健质量提供透明的常规反馈。
