患者调查最常用于评估医疗创新,严谨的方法则较少见。

Nabeel Qureshi, Denise D Quigley
{"title":"患者调查最常用于评估医疗创新,严谨的方法则较少见。","authors":"Nabeel Qureshi, Denise D Quigley","doi":"10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Innovations Exchange (IE) was developed to collect and report on innovative approaches to improving health care. The team reviewed 348 IE innovations including patient-reported satisfaction or experience measures. Innovations most often measured overall rating of care (61% of innovations), followed by access (52%) and provider-patient communication (12%). More than half used patient satisfaction surveys (n = 187) rather than patient experience surveys (n = 64). Innovations using patient experience surveys more often measured specific aspects of patient care, for example, access, versus a general overall rating of care. Most innovations using patient experience surveys administered nonvalidated, homegrown surveys, with few using the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality-endorsed, psychometrically-tested CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) survey. The most common study design was postimplementation-only (65%), highlighting that methodological rigor used to assess patient-centeredness in the IE is low. Broad use of patient experience surveys and more rigorous evaluation study designs has increased some over time but is still lacking.</p>","PeriodicalId":101338,"journal":{"name":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11269007/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient Surveys Are Used Most Often to Assess Health Care Innovations, Rigorous Methods Are Less Common.\",\"authors\":\"Nabeel Qureshi, Denise D Quigley\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Innovations Exchange (IE) was developed to collect and report on innovative approaches to improving health care. The team reviewed 348 IE innovations including patient-reported satisfaction or experience measures. Innovations most often measured overall rating of care (61% of innovations), followed by access (52%) and provider-patient communication (12%). More than half used patient satisfaction surveys (n = 187) rather than patient experience surveys (n = 64). Innovations using patient experience surveys more often measured specific aspects of patient care, for example, access, versus a general overall rating of care. Most innovations using patient experience surveys administered nonvalidated, homegrown surveys, with few using the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality-endorsed, psychometrically-tested CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) survey. The most common study design was postimplementation-only (65%), highlighting that methodological rigor used to assess patient-centeredness in the IE is low. Broad use of patient experience surveys and more rigorous evaluation study designs has increased some over time but is still lacking.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11269007/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医疗保健研究与质量机构医疗保健创新交流(IE)旨在收集和报告改善医疗保健的创新方法。研究小组审查了 348 项 IE 创新,其中包括患者报告的满意度或体验措施。创新最常衡量的是医疗服务的总体评价(61% 的创新),其次是就医途径(52%)和医疗服务提供者与患者之间的沟通(12%)。半数以上采用患者满意度调查(187 人),而非患者体验调查(64 人)。使用患者体验调查的创新项目更多是衡量患者护理的具体方面,例如就医机会,而不是对护理的总体评价。大多数使用患者体验调查的创新项目都采用了未经验证的自制调查表,只有少数项目采用了医疗保健研究与质量机构认可的、经过心理测试的 CAHPS(医疗保健提供者与系统消费者评估)调查表。最常见的研究设计是仅在实施后进行的(65%),这凸显出用于评估 IE 中以患者为中心的方法的严谨性较低。随着时间的推移,广泛使用患者体验调查和更严格的评估研究设计的情况有所增多,但仍然缺乏。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Patient Surveys Are Used Most Often to Assess Health Care Innovations, Rigorous Methods Are Less Common.

The Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality Healthcare Innovations Exchange (IE) was developed to collect and report on innovative approaches to improving health care. The team reviewed 348 IE innovations including patient-reported satisfaction or experience measures. Innovations most often measured overall rating of care (61% of innovations), followed by access (52%) and provider-patient communication (12%). More than half used patient satisfaction surveys (n = 187) rather than patient experience surveys (n = 64). Innovations using patient experience surveys more often measured specific aspects of patient care, for example, access, versus a general overall rating of care. Most innovations using patient experience surveys administered nonvalidated, homegrown surveys, with few using the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality-endorsed, psychometrically-tested CAHPS (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) survey. The most common study design was postimplementation-only (65%), highlighting that methodological rigor used to assess patient-centeredness in the IE is low. Broad use of patient experience surveys and more rigorous evaluation study designs has increased some over time but is still lacking.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Leapfrog Safety Grades in California Hospitals: A Data Analysis. Tips From the Iceberg: Effecting Culture Change in Health Care Teams. Improving Inpatient Colonoscopy Bowel Preparation: A Successful Quality Improvement Project. The Healthcare Improvement and Innovation in Quality (THINQ) Collaborative: A Novel Quality Improvement Training Program for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students. Integrating Social Drivers of Health into Hospital Ratings with Application to the 100 Top Hospitals Study.
×
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