Ph.D Student in Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Associate Professor, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Associate Professor, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Patient Educ Couns. 2020 Jul;103(7):1272-1286. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.02.006. Epub 2020 Feb 6.
There are various definitions and tools for Information Need (IN), Learning Need (LN) and Educational Need (EN) which are used interchangeably in the patient education.
Clarifying the definitions of IN, LN and EN as well as comparing item generation methods and the dimensions of the available tools to be used appropriately.
We searched PubMed/Scopus/Embase/Science Direct databases from 1960 to 2019. Two reviewers selected studies and extracted data independently.
We identified 22 tools comprised of 14 IN, 5 LN and 3 EN tools. The Patient Learning Needs Scale (PLNS) was the only general tool. The content of tools includes anatomy, physiology, diagnostic tests, symptoms, treatments, medications, diet, activity and self-care. No difference was found between EN/LN/IN tools in terms of item generation and dimensions according to their concept definitions. Seven tools assessed all 7 domains of patient education components.
The EN, LN and IN are different concepts, but using these concepts in the tools is not based on their definitions and they have been used interchangeably. IN and LN tools were more complete and comprehensive.
The findings of this review can help researchers and clinicians to use EN, LN and IN tools more appropriately.
信息需求（IN）、学习需求（LN）和教育需求（EN）有多种定义和工具，在患者教育中可互换使用。
阐明 IN、LN 和 EN 的定义，并比较现有工具的项目生成方法和维度，以便正确使用。
我们从 1960 年至 2019 年在 PubMed/Scopus/Embase/Science Direct 数据库中进行检索。两名评审员独立选择研究并提取数据。
我们确定了 22 种工具，包括 14 种 IN、5 种 LN 和 3 种 EN 工具。患者学习需求量表（PLNS）是唯一的通用工具。工具的内容包括解剖学、生理学、诊断测试、症状、治疗、药物、饮食、活动和自我护理。根据其概念定义，EN/LN/IN 工具在项目生成和维度方面没有差异。有 7 种工具评估了患者教育的所有 7 个领域。
EN、LN 和 IN 是不同的概念，但这些概念在工具中的使用并不是基于其定义，而是可以互换使用。IN 和 LN 工具更加完整和全面。
本综述的结果可以帮助研究人员和临床医生更恰当地使用 EN、LN 和 IN 工具。
