Suppr超能文献

评估成年接受治疗者药物知识的工具:测量特性的系统评价。

Instruments assessing medication literacy in adult recipients of care: A systematic review of measurement properties.

机构信息

Institute of Higher Education and Research in Healthcare, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Switzerland; Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland.

International Graduate Academy, Institute for Health and Nursing Science, Medical Faculty, Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Germany; Institute for Applied Nursing Sciences, Department of Health, FHS St. Gallen, Switzerland.

出版信息

Int J Nurs Stud. 2021 Jan;113:103785. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103785. Epub 2020 Oct 2.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The assessment of medication literacy in patients is an important step in assisting clinicians to plan for education, prescription simplification, assistance and/or medication aids. There have been several attempts to develop a standardised, objective measure of medication literacy. The objectives of this systematic review were to critically appraise, compare and summarise the measurement properties of existing instruments that assess medication literacy in adult recipients of care.

DESIGN

A systematic review was performed.

SEARCH METHODS

Structured searches were conducted in Embase, MEDLINE PubMed, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO and Web of Science Core Collection in March 2020. Additional searches were performed in ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, DART Europe, and Google Scholar, followed by citation tracking of included studies.

REVIEW METHODS

Two researchers independently identified eligible studies. Two researchers then assessed the methodological quality of the studies and quality of measurement properties, using the Consensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. A best-evidence synthesis for each instrument was performed.

RESULTS

From the 5035 citations, 17 studies were included that concerned 13 instruments using different administration methods (i.e., performancebased or self-report), medication type (i.e., prescribed or nonprescribed) and context of use (i.e., clinical or community settings). Very low- to moderate-quality evidence supported satisfactory content validity regarding relevance and comprehensibility, while comprehensiveness remained inconsistent. Other measurement properties were less frequently examined and were supported by moderate-quality evidence (i.e., structural validity) to low- or very low-quality evidence (i.e., internal consistency, reliability, construct validity). The bestvalidated instrument is the unidimensional 14-item Medication Literacy in Spanish and English assessment tool (MedLitRxSE), based on direct testing of participant performance regarding four hypothetical scenarios on medication use. Nine instruments have the potential to be recommended but require additional research, while for others, their psychometric soundness is too limited and they require content revisions.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review to identify instruments for medication literacy. None of the identified instruments had all measurement properties properly assessed and none reported measurement invariance, measurement error and responsiveness of the instrument. Further research is necessary for a better theoretical understanding of medication literacy in order to assist health professionals in identifying patient needs for education, regimen simplification, assistance and/or medication aids. Such research will help conceptualise new instruments that not only cover relevant domains dedicated to specific populations (e.g., polymorbid and/or older individuals), but also exhibit satisfactory measurement properties.

摘要

目的

评估患者的用药素养是协助临床医生规划教育、简化处方、提供帮助和/或用药辅助的重要步骤。已经有几项尝试开发标准化、客观的用药素养衡量标准。本系统评价的目的是批判性地评估、比较和总结评估成人患者用药素养的现有工具的测量特性。

设计

系统评价。

检索方法

2020 年 3 月,在 Embase、MEDLINE PubMed、CINAHL、APA PsycINFO 和 Web of Science Core Collection 中进行了结构化检索。此外,还在 ProQuest Dissertations and Theses、DART Europe 和 Google Scholar 中进行了检索,并对纳入研究进行了引文追踪。

评价方法

两名研究人员独立确定合格的研究。然后,两名研究人员使用共识基础的健康测量仪器选择标准(COSMIN)指南评估研究的方法学质量和测量特性的质量。对每个仪器进行最佳证据综合。

结果

从 5035 条引文中,纳入了 17 项研究,这些研究涉及 13 种不同的给药方法(即基于表现或自我报告)、药物类型(即处方或非处方)和使用情境(即临床或社区环境)的 13 种工具。非常低到中等质量的证据支持关于相关性和理解性的内容有效性,而全面性仍然不一致。其他测量特性的评估较少,仅得到中等质量证据(即结构有效性)至低或非常低质量证据(即内部一致性、可靠性、结构有效性)的支持。验证最充分的工具是基于四个关于药物使用的假设情景的西班牙语和英语用药素养评估工具(MedLitRxSE),该工具直接测试参与者的表现。有 9 种工具具有被推荐的潜力,但需要进一步研究,而其他工具的心理测量学稳健性有限,需要进行内容修订。

结论

这是首次系统评价确定用药素养的工具。没有一种确定的工具具有适当评估的所有测量特性,也没有一种工具报告了仪器的测量不变性、测量误差和反应性。需要进一步研究,以便更好地理解用药素养的理论基础,从而帮助卫生专业人员确定患者对教育、方案简化、帮助和/或用药辅助的需求。此类研究将有助于构思不仅涵盖专门针对特定人群(如多病症和/或老年人)的相关领域,而且还具有令人满意的测量特性的新工具。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验