Involving patients in quality indicator development - a systematic review

Standard

Involving patients in quality indicator development - a systematic review. / Kötter, Thomas; Schäfer, Friederike Anna; Scherer, Martin; Blozik, Eva.

In: PATIENT PREFER ADHER, Vol. 7, 01.01.2013, p. 259-68.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{e2f4a8b3c4b9401e960c4e1eeb491baf,
title = "Involving patients in quality indicator development - a systematic review",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QI) are used in many health care areas to measure, compare, and improve the quality of care. Ideas of quality differ between health care providers and patients, yet patients are not regularly involved in QI development nor does a methodological standard for patient involvement in QI development exist. In this study we systematically reviewed the medical journal articles and gray literature for published approaches for involving patients in QI development.METHODS: We searched medical literature databases (Medline, Excerpta Medica database, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), screened websites, and contacted experts in the field of QI development for publications on approaches to patient involvement in QI development.RESULTS: Eleven relevant journal articles and four web-published documents were included. Four major approaches to patient involvement were extracted from the literature: (1) focus group interviews, (2) self-administered questionnaires, (3) individual interviews, and (4) participation in panels during systematic consensus processes. Patients' views were collected by involving patients, patient representatives, or family members.CONCLUSION: Although there is a large body of literature on QI, publications that describe approaches to patient involvement in QI development are scarce. In principle, indirect and direct methods of patient involvement can be distinguished, and it seems most promising to combine different approaches. However, the limited number of publications identified clearly shows that further research in this field is overdue and that the quality of reporting found in studies within this field needs to be improved.",
author = "Thomas K{\"o}tter and Sch{\"a}fer, {Friederike Anna} and Martin Scherer and Eva Blozik",
year = "2013",
month = jan,
day = "1",
doi = "10.2147/PPA.S39803",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "259--68",
journal = "PATIENT PREFER ADHER",
issn = "1177-889X",
publisher = "DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Involving patients in quality indicator development - a systematic review

AU - Kötter, Thomas

AU - Schäfer, Friederike Anna

AU - Scherer, Martin

AU - Blozik, Eva

PY - 2013/1/1

Y1 - 2013/1/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QI) are used in many health care areas to measure, compare, and improve the quality of care. Ideas of quality differ between health care providers and patients, yet patients are not regularly involved in QI development nor does a methodological standard for patient involvement in QI development exist. In this study we systematically reviewed the medical journal articles and gray literature for published approaches for involving patients in QI development.METHODS: We searched medical literature databases (Medline, Excerpta Medica database, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), screened websites, and contacted experts in the field of QI development for publications on approaches to patient involvement in QI development.RESULTS: Eleven relevant journal articles and four web-published documents were included. Four major approaches to patient involvement were extracted from the literature: (1) focus group interviews, (2) self-administered questionnaires, (3) individual interviews, and (4) participation in panels during systematic consensus processes. Patients' views were collected by involving patients, patient representatives, or family members.CONCLUSION: Although there is a large body of literature on QI, publications that describe approaches to patient involvement in QI development are scarce. In principle, indirect and direct methods of patient involvement can be distinguished, and it seems most promising to combine different approaches. However, the limited number of publications identified clearly shows that further research in this field is overdue and that the quality of reporting found in studies within this field needs to be improved.

AB - BACKGROUND: Quality indicators (QI) are used in many health care areas to measure, compare, and improve the quality of care. Ideas of quality differ between health care providers and patients, yet patients are not regularly involved in QI development nor does a methodological standard for patient involvement in QI development exist. In this study we systematically reviewed the medical journal articles and gray literature for published approaches for involving patients in QI development.METHODS: We searched medical literature databases (Medline, Excerpta Medica database, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), screened websites, and contacted experts in the field of QI development for publications on approaches to patient involvement in QI development.RESULTS: Eleven relevant journal articles and four web-published documents were included. Four major approaches to patient involvement were extracted from the literature: (1) focus group interviews, (2) self-administered questionnaires, (3) individual interviews, and (4) participation in panels during systematic consensus processes. Patients' views were collected by involving patients, patient representatives, or family members.CONCLUSION: Although there is a large body of literature on QI, publications that describe approaches to patient involvement in QI development are scarce. In principle, indirect and direct methods of patient involvement can be distinguished, and it seems most promising to combine different approaches. However, the limited number of publications identified clearly shows that further research in this field is overdue and that the quality of reporting found in studies within this field needs to be improved.

U2 - 10.2147/PPA.S39803

DO - 10.2147/PPA.S39803

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 23569365

VL - 7

SP - 259

EP - 268

JO - PATIENT PREFER ADHER

JF - PATIENT PREFER ADHER

SN - 1177-889X

ER -