Jahir Soto-Mora, María-Camila Rangel-Piñeros, Martha-Rocío Torres-Narvaez, Laura Victoria Rivera-Amézquita
{"title":"[Identification of quality indicators for physiotherapy: a systematic review.]","authors":"Jahir Soto-Mora, María-Camila Rangel-Piñeros, Martha-Rocío Torres-Narvaez, Laura Victoria Rivera-Amézquita","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the emerging role that indicators have for the evaluation of quality in physiotherapy, these have been developed mainly for other areas of health and only some are relevant and applicable for physiotherapy. The objective of this review was to identify the quality indicators (QI) described or developed in the evidence that can be used to assess the quality of the provision of physiotherapy services.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was carried out, in the databases Embase, Web of science SciELO, LILACS and OPEN GREY, until March 2021, in search of studies published in Spanish, English and Portuguese that described the development of QI specifically for the practice of physiotherapy. The methodological quality of the indicators was evaluated using the AIRE instrument. The indicators were classified following the Donabedian model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8 studies were included that described 8 sets of QIs, with a total of 199 indicators. Six of the sets were published in the Netherlands. 62.5% of the total indicators were process, mostly related to the care of patients with musculoskeletal pathologies. Of the total of studies, 37.5% achieved high quality in three domains of the AIRE instrument.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The QI described in the evidence were designed for specific national contexts based on their own health system, have a methodological quality and are focused on evaluating the care processes of physiotherapy services mainly in patients with musculoskeletal diseases.</p>","PeriodicalId":47152,"journal":{"name":"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Espanola De Salud Publica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Despite the emerging role that indicators have for the evaluation of quality in physiotherapy, these have been developed mainly for other areas of health and only some are relevant and applicable for physiotherapy. The objective of this review was to identify the quality indicators (QI) described or developed in the evidence that can be used to assess the quality of the provision of physiotherapy services.
Methods: A systematic review was carried out, in the databases Embase, Web of science SciELO, LILACS and OPEN GREY, until March 2021, in search of studies published in Spanish, English and Portuguese that described the development of QI specifically for the practice of physiotherapy. The methodological quality of the indicators was evaluated using the AIRE instrument. The indicators were classified following the Donabedian model.
Results: 8 studies were included that described 8 sets of QIs, with a total of 199 indicators. Six of the sets were published in the Netherlands. 62.5% of the total indicators were process, mostly related to the care of patients with musculoskeletal pathologies. Of the total of studies, 37.5% achieved high quality in three domains of the AIRE instrument.
Conclusions: The QI described in the evidence were designed for specific national contexts based on their own health system, have a methodological quality and are focused on evaluating the care processes of physiotherapy services mainly in patients with musculoskeletal diseases.
背景:尽管指标在评价物理治疗质量方面发挥了新的作用,但这些指标主要是为其他健康领域制定的,只有一些与物理治疗相关并适用于物理治疗。本综述的目的是确定证据中描述或发展的质量指标(QI),可用于评估物理治疗服务提供的质量。方法:在Embase、Web of science SciELO、LILACS和OPEN GREY数据库中进行系统综述,直到2021年3月,寻找以西班牙语、英语和葡萄牙语发表的描述气的发展专门用于物理治疗实践的研究。使用AIRE仪器对指标的方法学质量进行评价。指标按照Donabedian模型进行分类。结果:共纳入8篇研究,描述8组质量指标,共199个指标。其中6组在荷兰发表,62.5%的总指标是过程,主要与肌肉骨骼病变患者的护理有关。在所有研究中,37.5%在AIRE仪器的三个领域达到高质量。结论:证据中描述的QI是根据本国的卫生系统为特定的国家环境设计的,具有方法学质量,并侧重于评估主要针对肌肉骨骼疾病患者的物理治疗服务的护理过程。