Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Healthcare Engineering, Management and Architecture (HEMA), Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Nov;101(11):1184-1196. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14446. Epub 2022 Sep 5.
While there is growing interest in applying patient-reported measures (PRMs) in clinical routine, limited collective evidence of the impact of PRMs hinder their widespread use in specific contexts, such as maternity care. Our objective was to synthesize existing emperical evidence on the impact of implementing PRMs in routine maternity care.
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (version 2020). We electronically searched six databases for the literature on the implementation of PRMs in maternity care. A multi-level (woman, clinical, organizational, national and societal) analytic framework for analyzing and synthesizing emperically proven impacts of PRMs was developed. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. The GRADE-CERQual approach was used to assess the confidence in the review findings and arguments. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021234501).
Overall, 4971 articles were screened. The emperical evidence, collected from 11 relevant studies, showed that the use of PRMs in routine maternity care could produce positive effects on clinical process (assessment and detection of health problems, clinical visit preparation, resource use, woman-professional communication, decision-making, woman-professional relationship, and care quality), and health behavior and outcomes (women's health and wellbeing, quality of life, health behavior, experiences and satisfaction with healthcare services), awareness, engagement and self-management of own health, and disclosure of health issues. The confidence in the review findings was low to moderate due to a limited number of studies, inadequate data and methodological limitations of included studies.
The limited emperical evidence available suggested that the use of PRMs may have positive effects at the individual health level and clinical process level. However, the evidence was not strong enough to provide policy recommendations on the use of PRMs in routine maternity care. This review revealed limitations of currently available research, such as lack of generalizability and narrow scopes in investigating impact. Efforts are needed to improve the quality of research on the use of PRMs in routine maternity care by widening the study population, including different types of PRMs, and considering the effects of PRMs at different levels and domains of healthcare.
虽然将患者报告的测量指标(PRMs)应用于临床常规的兴趣日益浓厚,但由于 PRMs 在特定情况下(如产科护理)的影响的综合证据有限,阻碍了它们的广泛应用。我们的目的是综合现有关于 PRMs 在产科常规护理中的应用的实证证据。
我们遵循系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南(2020 年版)。我们通过电子搜索六个数据库,查找有关 PRMs 在产科护理中应用的文献。为了分析和综合 PRMs 的实证影响,我们开发了一个多层面(妇女、临床、组织、国家和社会)分析框架。使用混合方法评估工具评估质量。使用 GRADE-CERQual 方法评估审查结果和论点的可信度。该方案在 PROSPERO(CRD42021234501)中进行了注册。
总体而言,筛选了 4971 篇文章。从 11 项相关研究中收集的实证证据表明,在常规产科护理中使用 PRMs 可以对临床过程(健康问题的评估和检测、临床就诊准备、资源利用、妇女与专业人员的沟通、决策、妇女与专业人员的关系以及护理质量)产生积极影响,以及健康行为和结果(妇女的健康和幸福感、生活质量、健康行为、对医疗保健服务的体验和满意度)、意识、对自身健康的参与和自我管理,以及健康问题的披露。由于研究数量有限、数据不足以及纳入研究的方法学限制,审查结果的可信度较低至中等。
现有的有限实证证据表明,在个体健康水平和临床过程水平上使用 PRMs 可能会产生积极影响。然而,证据还不够强,无法就 PRMs 在常规产科护理中的应用提供政策建议。本综述揭示了当前研究的局限性,例如缺乏普遍性和在调查影响时的狭窄范围。需要努力通过扩大研究人群、纳入不同类型的 PRMs 以及考虑 PRMs 在医疗保健不同层面和领域的影响来提高 PRMs 在常规产科护理中的应用研究的质量。