Hughes Sarah E, Aiyegbusi Olalekan L, McMullan Christel, Turner Grace M, Anderson Nicola, Cruz Rivera Samantha, Collis Philip, Glasby Jon, Lasserson Daniel, Calvert Melanie
Centre for Patient Reported Outcomes Research, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration West Midlands, Birmingham, UK.
JRSM Open. 2024 Mar 24;15(3):20542704241232866. doi: 10.1177/20542704241232866. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) have potential to support integrated health and social care research and practice; however, evidence of their utilisation has not been synthesised.
To identify PRO measures utilised in integrated care and adult social care research and practice and to chart the evidence of implementation factors influencing their uptake.
Scoping review of peer-reviewed literature.
Six databases (01 January 2010 to 19 May 2023).
Articles reporting PRO use with adults (18+ years) in integrated care or social care settings.
We screened articles against pre-specified eligibility criteria; 36 studies (23%) were extracted in duplicate for verification. We summarised the data using thematic analysis and descriptive statistics.
We identified 159 articles reporting on 216 PRO measures deployed in a social care or integrated care setting. Most articles used PRO measures as research tools. Eight (5.0%) articles used PRO measures as an intervention. Articles focused on community-dwelling participants (35.8%) or long-term care home residents (23.9%), with three articles (1.9%) focussing on integrated care settings. Stakeholders viewed PROs as feasible and acceptable, with benefits for care planning, health and wellbeing monitoring as well as quality assurance. Patient-reported outcome measure selection, administration and PRO data management were perceived implementation barriers.
This scoping review showed increasing utilisation of PROs in adult social care and integrated care. Further research is needed to optimise PROs for care planning, design effective training resources and develop policies and service delivery models that prioritise secure, ethical management of PRO data.
患者报告结局(PROs)有潜力支持综合健康与社会护理研究及实践;然而,其使用证据尚未得到综合分析。
识别综合护理和成人社会护理研究及实践中使用的PRO测量方法,并梳理影响其采用的实施因素证据。
对同行评审文献的范围综述。
六个数据库(2010年1月1日至2023年5月19日)。
报告在综合护理或社会护理环境中对成年人(18岁及以上)使用PRO的文章。
我们根据预先设定的纳入标准筛选文章;36项研究(23%)进行了重复提取以核实。我们使用主题分析和描述性统计对数据进行了总结。
我们识别出159篇报道在社会护理或综合护理环境中采用的216种PRO测量方法的文章。大多数文章将PRO测量方法用作研究工具。八篇(5.0%)文章将PRO测量方法用作一种干预措施。文章关注社区居住参与者(35.8%)或长期护理机构居民(23.9%),有三篇文章(1.9%)关注综合护理环境。利益相关者认为PRO是可行且可接受的,对护理计划、健康和福祉监测以及质量保证有益。患者报告结局测量方法的选择、管理和PRO数据管理被视为实施障碍。
这项范围综述表明PRO在成人社会护理和综合护理中的使用日益增加。需要进一步研究以优化用于护理计划的PRO,设计有效的培训资源,并制定优先考虑对PRO数据进行安全、符合伦理管理政策和服务提供模式。