Suppr超能文献

如何衡量以人为本的实践——对文献综述的分析

How to measure person-centred practice - An analysis of reviews of the literature.

作者信息

Louw Jakobus M, Marcus Tessa S, Hugo Jannie

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.

出版信息

Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2020 Mar 4;12(1):e1-e8. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v12i1.2170.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Facilitation and collaboration differentiates person-centred practice (PcP) from biomedical practice. In PcP, a person-centred consultation requires clinicians to juggle three processes: facilitation, clinical reasoning and collaboration. How best to measure PcP in these processes remains a challenge.

AIM

To assess the measurement of facilitation and collaboration in selected reviews of PcP instruments.

METHODS

Ovid Medline and Google Scholar were searched for review articles evaluating measurement instruments of patient-centredness or person-centredness in the medical consultation.

RESULTS

Six of the nine review articles were selected for analysis. Those articles considered the psychometric properties and rigour of evaluation of reviewed instruments. Mostly, the articles did not find instruments with good evidence of reliability and validity. Evaluations in South Africa rendered poor psychometric properties. Tools were often not transferable to other socio-cultural-linguistic contexts, both with and without adaptation.

CONCLUSION

The multiplicity of measurement tools is a product of many dimensions of person-centredness, which can be approached from many perspectives and in many service scenarios inside and outside the medical consultation. Extensive research into the myriad instruments found no single valid and reliable measurement tool that can be recommended for general use. The best hope for developing one is to focus on a specific scenario, conduct a systematic literature review, combine the best items from existing tools, involve multiple disciplines and test the tool in real-life situations.

摘要

背景

促进与协作将以患者为中心的实践(PcP)与生物医学实践区分开来。在以患者为中心的实践中,以患者为中心的咨询要求临床医生兼顾三个过程:促进、临床推理和协作。如何在这些过程中最好地衡量以患者为中心的实践仍然是一个挑战。

目的

评估在选定的以患者为中心的实践工具综述中对促进和协作的衡量。

方法

在Ovid Medline和谷歌学术上搜索评估医疗咨询中以患者为中心或以人为本的测量工具的综述文章。

结果

九篇综述文章中有六篇被选作分析。这些文章考虑了所审查工具的心理测量特性和评估的严谨性。大多数情况下,文章没有发现具有良好信效度证据的工具。在南非进行的评估得出的心理测量特性较差。工具通常无法转移到其他社会文化语言背景中,无论是否经过改编。

结论

测量工具的多样性是以人为本多维度的产物,这可以从医疗咨询内外的许多角度和许多服务场景中进行探讨。对众多工具进行的广泛研究没有发现可以推荐普遍使用的单一有效且可靠的测量工具。开发这样一种工具的最大希望是专注于特定场景,进行系统的文献综述,结合现有工具中最好的条目,涉及多个学科,并在实际情况中测试该工具。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4d1f/7136800/f8bb16369372/PHCFM-12-2170-g001.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