Clinical indicators to monitor health care in low back pain: a scoping review.

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES International Journal for Quality in Health Care Pub Date : 2024-06-13 DOI:10.1093/intqhc/mzae044
Vanessa L Dos Santos, Karen S Sato, Chris G Maher, Rubens V C Vidal, Guilherme H D Grande, Leonardo O P Costa, Gustavo C Machado, Giovanni E Ferreira, Rachelle Buchbinder, Crystian B Oliveira
{"title":"Clinical indicators to monitor health care in low back pain: a scoping review.","authors":"Vanessa L Dos Santos, Karen S Sato, Chris G Maher, Rubens V C Vidal, Guilherme H D Grande, Leonardo O P Costa, Gustavo C Machado, Giovanni E Ferreira, Rachelle Buchbinder, Crystian B Oliveira","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae044","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Clinical care indicators for low back pain can be used to monitor healthcare practices and consequently be used to evaluate success of strategies to improve care quality. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical care indicators that have been used to measure appropriateness of health care for patients with low back pain. We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases and Google to identify clinical care indicators that have been used to measure any aspect of care for people with low back pain. Care indicators were narratively described according to their type (i.e. structure, process, or outcomes) and categorized by their purpose (e.g. to measure aspects related to assessment, imaging requests, treatment/prevention, and outcomes). A total of 3562 and 2180 records were retrieved from electronic databases and Google searches, respectively. We identified 280 indicators related to low back pain care from 40 documents and publications. Most quality indicators were process indicators (n = 213, 76%), followed by structure (n = 41, 15%) and outcome indicators (n = 26, 9%). The most common indicators were related to imaging requests (n = 41, 15%), referral to healthcare providers (n = 30, 11%), and shared decision-making (n = 21, 7%). Our review identified a range of clinical care indicators that have been used to measure the quality of health care for people with low back pain. Our findings will support a Delphi study to reach international consensus on what would be the most important and feasible indicators for a minimum dataset to be collected globally.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
监测腰背痛医疗保健的临床指标:范围综述。
背景:腰背痛的临床护理指标可用于监测医疗实践,从而评估提高护理质量的策略是否成功。本研究旨在确定用于衡量腰背痛患者医疗护理适当性的临床护理指标:我们对五个电子数据库和谷歌进行了系统性搜索,以确定用于衡量腰背痛患者护理任何方面的临床护理指标。我们根据护理指标的类型(即结构、过程或结果)对其进行了叙述性描述,并根据其目的(如衡量与评估、成像要求、治疗/预防、结果相关的方面)对其进行了分类:从电子数据库和谷歌搜索中分别检索到 3,562 条和 2,180 条记录。我们从 40 份文件和出版物中确定了 280 项与腰背痛护理相关的指标。大多数质量指标是过程指标(n=213,76%),其次是结构指标(n=41,15%)和结果指标(n=26,9%)。最常见的指标与成像要求(n=41,15%)、转诊至医疗服务提供者(n=30,11%)和共同决策(n=21,7%)有关:我们的研究发现了一系列用于衡量腰背痛患者医疗质量的临床护理指标。我们的研究结果将为德尔菲研究提供支持,该研究旨在就全球收集的最低数据集的最重要、最可行指标达成国际共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing warfarin and dual oral anticoagulation practices in an academic clinic during a merger amid the COVID-19 pandemic in a marginalized population. International research priorities for integrated care and cross-boundary working: an electronic Delphi study. Intravenous iron staining. Real-world incidence, preventability, and mitigation tools from a long-term quality improvement project. The Future of Global Graduate Training in Quality Improvement and Patient Safety. How can we measure psychological safety in mental healthcare staff? Developing questionnaire items using a nominal groups technique.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1