首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >‘Practical’ resources to support patient and family engagement in healthcare decisions: a scoping review
【24h】

‘Practical’ resources to support patient and family engagement in healthcare decisions: a scoping review

机译:支持患者和家庭参与医疗保健决策的“实用”资源:范围界定审查

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Extensive literature exists on public involvement or engagement, but what actual tools or guides exist that are practical, tested and easy to use specifically for initiating and implementing patient and family engagement, is uncertain. No comprehensive review and synthesis of general international published or grey literature on this specific topic was found. A systematic scoping review of published and grey literature is, therefore, appropriate for searching through the vast general engagement literature to identify ‘patient/family engagement’ tools and guides applicable in health organization decision-making, such as within Alberta Health Services in Alberta, Canada. This latter organization requested this search and review to inform the contents of a patient engagement resource kit for patients, providers and leaders. Methods Search terms related to ‘patient engagement’, tools, guides, education and infrastructure or resources, were applied to published literature databases and grey literature search engines. Grey literature also included United States, Australia and Europe where most known public engagement practices exist, and Canada as the location for this study. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set, and include: English documents referencing ‘patient engagement’ with specific criteria, and published between 1995 and 2011. For document analysis and synthesis, document analysis worksheets were used by three reviewers for the selected 224 published and 193 grey literature documents. Inter-rater reliability was ensured for the final reviews and syntheses of 76 published and 193 grey documents. Results Seven key themes emerged from the literature synthesis analysis, and were identified for patient, provider and/or leader groups. Articles/items within each theme were clustered under main topic areas of ‘tools’, ‘education’ and ‘infrastructure’. The synthesis and findings in the literature include 15 different terms and definitions for ‘patient engagement’, 17 different engagement models, numerous barriers and benefits, and 34 toolkits for various patient engagement and evaluation initiatives. Conclusions Patient engagement is very complex. This scoping review for patient/family engagement tools and guides is a good start for a resource inventory and can guide the content development of a patient engagement resource kit to be used by patients/families, healthcare providers and administrators.
机译:背景技术存在大量关于公众参与或参与的文献,但是尚不确定有哪些实际的工具或指南可以实用,经过测试且易于使用,特别是用于发起和实施患者和家庭参与。尚未找到有关该特定主题的一般国际已出版或灰色文献的全面综述和综述。因此,对已发表的灰色文献进行系统的范围界定审查,适合于搜索大量的一般参与文献,以识别适用于卫生组织决策的“患者/家庭参与”工具和指南,例如在艾伯塔省的艾伯塔省卫生服务部门内,加拿大。后一个组织要求进行此搜索和审查,以告知患者,提供者和领导者的患者参与资源工具包的内容。方法将与“患者参与”,工具,指南,教育和基础设施或资源相关的搜索词应用于已发布的文献数据库和灰色文献搜索引擎。灰色文献还包括美国,澳大利亚和欧洲,其中存在着最著名的公众参与做法,加拿大是本研究的所在地。设置了纳入和排除标准,包括:引用了具有特定标准的“患者参与”的英文文档,并在1995年至2011年之间发布。对于文档分析和合成,三位审阅者使用了文档分析工作表,对选定的224种已发表论文和193篇灰色论文进行了分析。文献文件。最终评阅和综合了76篇发表的论文和193篇灰色的论文,确保了评分者之间的可靠性。结果从文献综合分析中得出了七个关键主题,并为患者,提供者和/或领导者群体确定了七个主题。每个主题中的文章/项目都集中在“工具”,“教育”和“基础设施”的主要主题区域下。文献中的综合和发现包括“患者参与”的15个不同术语和定义,17种不同的参与模型,无数的障碍和益处,以及用于各种患者参与和评估计划的34个工具包。结论患者的参与非常复杂。对患者/家庭参与工具和指南的范围界定审查是资源清单的良好开端,并且可以指导患者/家庭,医疗保健提供者和管理员使用的患者参与资源工具包的内容开发。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号