766 resultados para patient health questionnaire
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Outcome assessment can support the therapeutic process by providing a way to track symptoms and functionality over time, providing insights to clinicians and patients, as well as offering a common language to discuss patient behavior/functioning. OBJECTIVES: In this article, we examine the patient-based outcome assessment (PBOA) instruments that have been used to determine outcomes in acupuncture clinical research and highlight measures that are feasible, practical, economical, reliable, valid, and responsive to clinical change. The aims of this review were to assess and identify the commonly available PBOA measures, describe a framework for identifying appropriate sets of measures, and address the challenges associated with these measures and acupuncture. Instruments were evaluated in terms of feasibility, practicality, economy, reliability, validity, and responsiveness to clinical change. METHODS: This study was a systematic review. A total of 582 abstracts were reviewed using PubMed (from inception through April 2009). RESULTS: A total of 582 citations were identified. After screening of title/abstract, 212 articles were excluded. From the remaining 370 citations, 258 manuscripts identified explicit PBOA; 112 abstracts did not include any PBOA. The five most common PBOA instruments identified were the Visual Analog Scale, Symptom Diary, Numerical Pain Rating Scales, SF-36, and depression scales such as the Beck Depression Inventory. CONCLUSIONS: The way a questionnaire or scale is administered can have an effect on the outcome. Also, developing and validating outcome measures can be costly and difficult. Therefore, reviewing the literature on existing measures before creating or modifying PBOA instruments can significantly reduce the burden of developing a new measure.
Resumo:
Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) introduced at the beginning of pre-registration training for healthcare professionals attempts to prevent the formation of negative interprofessional attitudes which may hamper future interprofessional collaboration. However, the potential for IPE depends, to some extent, on the readiness of healthcare students to learn together. Objectives: To measure changes in readiness for interprofessional learning, professional identification, and amount of contact between students of different professional groups; and to examine the influence of professional group, student characteristics and an IPE course on these scores over time. Design: Annual longitudinal panel questionnaire survey at four time-points of pre-registration students (n = 1683) drawn from eight healthcare groups from three higher education institutions (HEIs) in the UK. Results: The strength of professional identity in all professional groups was high on entry to university but it declined significantly over time for some disciplines. Similarly students’ readiness for interprofessional learning was high at entry but declined significantly over time for all groups, with the exception of nursing students. A small but significant positive relationship between professional identity and readiness for interprofessional learning was maintained over time. There was very minimal contact between students from different disciplines during their professional education programme. Students who reported gaining the least from an IPE course suffered the most dramatic drop in their readiness for interprofessional learning in the following and subsequent years; however, these students also had the lowest expectations of an IPE course on entry to their programme of study. Conclusion: The findings provide support for introducing IPE at the start of the healthcare students’ professional education to capitalise on students’ readiness for interprofessional learning and professional identities, which appear to be well formed from the start. However, this study suggests that students who enter with negative attitudes towards interprofessional learning may gain the least from IPE courses and that an unrewarding experience of such courses may further reinforce their negative attitudes.
Resumo:
Background: Minority ethnic groups in the UK are reported to have a poor experience of mental health services, but comparative information is scarce. Aims: To examine ethnic differences in patients’ experience of community mental health services. Method: Trusts providing mental health services in England conducted surveys in 2004 and 2005 of users of community mental health services. Multiple regression was used to examine ethnic differences in responses. Results: About 27 000 patients responded to each of the surveys, of whom 10% were of minority ethnic origin. In the 2004 survey, age, living alone, the 2004 survey, age, living alone, detention and hospital admissions were stronger predictors of patient experience than ethnicity. Self-reported mental health status had the strongest explanatory effect. In the 2005 survey, the main negative differences relative to the White British were for Asians. Conclusions: Ethnicity had a smaller effect on patient experience than other variables. Relative to the White British, the Black group did not report negative experiences whereas the Asian group were most likely to respond negatively. However, there is a need for improvements in services for minority ethnic groups, including access to talking therapies and better recording of ethnicity.
Resumo:
Increasing emphasis is being placed on the evaluation of health-related quality of life. However, there is no consensus on the definition of this concept and as a result there are a plethora of existing measurement instruments. Head-to-head comparisons of the psychometric properties of existing instruments are necessary to facilitate evidence-based decisions about which instrument should be chosen for routine use. Therefore, an individualised instrument (the modified Patient Generated Index), a generic instrument (the Short Form 36) and a disease-specific instrument (the Quality of Life after Myocardial Infarction questionnaire) were administered to patients with ischaemic heart disease (n=117) and the evidence for the validity, reliability and sensitivity of each instrument was examined and compared. The modified Patient Generated Index compared favourably with the other instruments but none of the instruments examined provided sound evidence for sensitivity to change. Therefore, any recommendation for the use of the individualised approach in the routine collection of health-related quality of life data in clinical practice must be conditional upon the submission of further evidence to support the sensitivity of such instruments.
Resumo:
Teledermatology consultations were organized between two health centers and two hospitals in Northern Ireland using low-cost videoconferencing equipment. A prospective study of patient satisfaction was carried out. Following each teleconsultation, patients were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing their satisfaction with the service. Over 22 months, 334 patients were seen by a dermatologist over the video-link, and 292 patients (87%) completed the 16-item questionnaire. Patients reported universal satisfaction with the technical aspects of teledermatology. The quality of both the audio and the display was highly acceptable to patients. Personal experiences of the teledermatology consultation were also favourable: 85% felt comfortable using the video-link. The benefits of teledermatology were generally recognized: 88% of patients thought that a teleconsultation could save time. Patients found the teledermatology consultation to be as acceptable as the conventional dermatology consultation. These findings suggest overall patient satisfaction with realtime teledermatology.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Measures that reflect patients' assessment of their health are of increasing importance as outcome measures in randomised controlled trials. The methodological approach used in the pre-validation development of new instruments (item generation, item reduction and question formatting) should be robust and transparent. The totality of the content of existing PRO instruments for a specific condition provides a valuable resource (pool of items) that can be utilised to develop new instruments. Such 'top down' approaches are common, but the explicit pre-validation methods are often poorly reported. This paper presents a systematic and generalisable 5-step pre-validation PRO instrument methodology.
METHODS: The method is illustrated using the example of the Aberdeen Glaucoma Questionnaire (AGQ). The five steps are: 1) Generation of a pool of items; 2) Item de-duplication (three phases); 3) Item reduction (two phases); 4) Assessment of the remaining items' content coverage against a pre-existing theoretical framework appropriate to the objectives of the instrument and the target population (e.g. ICF); and 5) qualitative exploration of the target populations' views of the new instrument and the items it contains.
RESULTS: The AGQ 'item pool' contained 725 items. Three de-duplication phases resulted in reduction of 91, 225 and 48 items respectively. The item reduction phases discarded 70 items and 208 items respectively. The draft AGQ contained 83 items with good content coverage. The qualitative exploration ('think aloud' study) resulted in removal of a further 15 items and refinement to the wording of others. The resultant draft AGQ contained 68 items.
CONCLUSIONS: This study presents a novel methodology for developing a PRO instrument, based on three sources: literature reporting what is important to patient; theoretically coherent framework; and patients' experience of completing the instrument. By systematically accounting for all items dropped after the item generation phase, our method ensures that the AGQ is developed in a transparent, replicable manner and is fit for validation. We recommend this method to enhance the likelihood that new PRO instruments will be appropriate to the research context in which they are used, acceptable to research participants and likely to generate valid data.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To identify vision Patient-Reported Outcomes instruments relevant to glaucoma and assess their content validity.
METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and SCOPUS (to January 2009) were systematically searched. Observational studies or randomised controlled trials, published in English, reporting use of vision instruments in glaucoma studies involving adults were included. In addition, reference lists were scanned to identify additional studies describing development and/or validation to ascertain the final version of the instruments. Instruments' content was then mapped onto a theoretical framework, the World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for inclusion and quality assessed instrument content.
RESULTS: Thirty-three instruments were identified. Instruments were categorised into thirteen vision status, two vision disability, one vision satisfaction, five glaucoma status, one glaucoma medication related to health status, five glaucoma medication side effects and six glaucoma medication satisfaction measures according to each instruments' content. The National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire-25, Impact of Vision Impairment and Treatment Satisfaction Survey-Intraocular Pressure had the highest number of positive ratings in the content validity assessment.
CONCLUSION: This study provides a descriptive catalogue of vision-specific PRO instruments, to inform the choice of an appropriate measure of patient-reported outcomes in a glaucoma context.
Resumo:
PurposeThe World Health Organisation (WHO) identified patient safety in surgery as an important public health matter and advised the adoption of a universal peri-operative surgical checklist. An adapted version of the WHO checklist has been mandatory in the National Health Service since 2010. Wrong intraocular lens (IOL) implantation is a particular safety concern in ophthalmology. The Royal College of Ophthalmologists launched a bespoke checklist for cataract surgery in 2010 to reduce the likelihood of preventable errors. We sought to ascertain the use of checklists in cataract surgery in 2012.Patients and methodsA survey of members of the Royal College of Ophthalmologists seeking views on the use of checklists in cataract surgery. Four hundred and sixty-nine completed responses were received (18% response rate).ResultsRespondents worked in England (75%), Scotland (11%), Wales (5%), Northern Ireland (2%), the Republic of Ireland (1%), and overseas (6%). Ninety-four per cent of respondents support the use of a checklist for cataract surgery and 85% say that they always use a checklist before cataract surgery. Sixty-seven per cent of cataract surgeons stated they undertake a pre-operative team brief. Thirty-six per cent use a cataract surgery checklist developed locally, 18% use the college's bespoke cataract surgery checklist, 39% use a generic surgical checklist, and 4% reported that they do not use a checklist.ConclusionNinety-three per cent of cataract surgeons responding to the questionnaire report using a surgical checklist and 67% use a team brief. However, only 54% use a checklist, which addresses the selection of the correct intraocular implant. We recommend wider adoption of checklists, which address risks relevant to cataract surgery, in particular the possibility of selection of an incorrect IOL.Eye advance online publication, 24 May 2013; doi:10.1038/eye.2013.101.
Resumo:
The research reports on a survey of 228 blind and partially sighted persons in 15 health authorities across Scotland. The survey reports data on patient experience of receiving health information in accessible reading formats. Data indicated that about 90% of blind and partially sighted persons did not receive communications from various NHS health departments in a format that they could read by themselves. The implications for patient privacy, confidentiality and wider impact on life and health care are highlighted. The implications for professional ethical medical practice and for public policy are also discussed. Recommendations for improved practice are made.