28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patientenorientierung Translated title: Patient-centeredness

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Hintergrund

          Patientenorientierung entwickelt sich politisch und gesellschaftlich zum entscheidenden Leitbild unseres Gesundheitssystems, doch in der praktischen Umsetzung zeigen sich Probleme durch konfligierende Ziele und Interessen.

          Ziel der Arbeit

          Darstellung des Begriffs Patientenorientierung sowie möglicher Messmethoden mit besonderem Fokus auf den deutschen Sprachraum.

          Material und Methoden

          Narrative Übersichtsarbeit durch Literatursuche in Medline, der Cochrane Library, PsyINfo und CINHAL. Aus den Ergebnissen wird das Konzept von „Patient-Reported Experience Measures“ (PREMs) und ein PREM-System entwickelt.

          Ergebnisse

          Die Patientenorientierung ist kein abgeschlossenes theoretisches Konstrukt. Aktuell werden 16 Dimensionen der Patientenorientierung unterschieden. Die am weitesten verbreitete Messmethode zur Erfassung der Patientenorientierung sind PREMs. Anders als in anderen Ländern gibt es im Deutschen nur eine begrenzte Anzahl von PREMs, deren methodologische Messungsqualität häufig unklar ist. Wesentliche chirurgische Aspekte der Patientenversorgung werden durch vorliegende deutschsprachige PREMs nicht erfasst. Es wird ein PREM-System in deutscher Sprache entwickelt und der Forschungsbedarf aufgezeigt.

          Diskussion

          Anders als in anderen Ländern gibt es in deutscher Sprache kein zusammenhängendes PREM-System. Die systematische Erfassung der Patientenorientierung ist daher insbesondere in der Chirurgie aktuell nicht adäquat möglich. Wesentliche methodologische, organisatorische, regulatorische und finanzielle Aspekte müssen bewältigt werden, bevor die Patientenorientierung als fundiertes Konstrukt im klinischen Alltag implementiert werden kann.

          Translated abstract

          Background

          Patient-centeredness has developed into the guiding principle of healthcare policy over the last decade. However, its practical implementation is hindered by numerous problems and opposing interests.

          Objective

          To define and elucidate the term patient-centeredness, describe evidence-based measurement tools and outline recommendations for practical implementation.

          Material and methods

          A narrative literature review was carried out in Medline, Cochrane Library, PsyINfo and CINHAL. Based on the results the concept of Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREM) is explained and a comprehensive PREM system is developed.

          Results

          Patient-centeredness is a not yet clearly defined theoretical construct. Patient-centeredness covers up to 16 different aspects ranging from patient involvement to the transition of care. Patient centeredness is most frequently measured via PREMs. Contrary to other countries, there are only a limited number of validated PREMs available in German and measurement qualities are frequently unclear or insufficient. No comprehensive PREM system has been developed for the German language so far. Important aspects of surgical care are not captured by currently available German language PREMs.

          Conclusion

          Contrary to other countries no comprehensive PREM system is available in the German language. Currently available German PREMs do not enable the adequate assessment of surgical aspects of care. Important organizational, regulatory, methodological, and financial aspects must be addressed before patient-centeredness can be implemented into every clinical practice in German-speaking countries.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures

          Purpose Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ from reviews of interventions and diagnostic test accuracy studies and are complex. In fact, conducting a review of one or more PROMs comprises of multiple reviews (i.e., one review for each measurement property of each PROM). In the absence of guidance specifically designed for reviews on measurement properties, our aim was to develop a guideline for conducting systematic reviews of PROMs. Methods Based on literature reviews and expert opinions, and in concordance with existing guidelines, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) steering committee developed a guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. Results A consecutive ten-step procedure for conducting a systematic review of PROMs is proposed. Steps 1–4 concern preparing and performing the literature search, and selecting relevant studies. Steps 5–8 concern the evaluation of the quality of the eligible studies, the measurement properties, and the interpretability and feasibility aspects. Steps 9 and 10 concern formulating recommendations and reporting the systematic review. Conclusions The COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs includes methodology to combine the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties with the quality of the PROM itself (i.e., its measurement properties). This enables reviewers to draw transparent conclusions and making evidence-based recommendations on the quality of PROMs, and supports the evidence-based selection of PROMs for use in research and in clinical practice.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes.

            Lack of consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions has led to confusion about which measurement properties are relevant and which concepts they represent. The aim was to clarify and standardize terminology and definitions of measurement properties by reaching consensus among a group of experts and to develop a taxonomy of measurement properties relevant for evaluating health instruments. An international Delphi study with four written rounds was performed. Participating experts had a background in epidemiology, statistics, psychology, and clinical medicine. The panel was asked to rate their (dis)agreement about proposals on a five-point scale. Consensus was considered to be reached when at least 67% of the panel agreed. Of 91 invited experts, 57 agreed to participate and 43 actually participated. Consensus was reached on positions of measurement properties in the taxonomy (68-84%), terminology (74-88%, except for structural validity [56%]), and definitions of measurement properties (68-88%). The panel extensively discussed the positions of internal consistency and responsiveness in the taxonomy, the terms "reliability" and "structural validity," and the definitions of internal consistency and reliability. Consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties was reached. Hopefully, this will lead to a more uniform use of terms and definitions in the literature on measurement properties. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              An Integrative Model of Patient-Centeredness – A Systematic Review and Concept Analysis

              Background Existing models of patient-centeredness reveal a lack of conceptual clarity. This results in a heterogeneous use of the term, unclear measurement dimensions, inconsistent results regarding the effectiveness of patient-centered interventions, and finally in difficulties in implementing patient-centered care. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the different dimensions of patient-centeredness described in the literature and to propose an integrative model of patient-centeredness based on these results. Methods Protocol driven search in five databases, combined with a comprehensive secondary search strategy. All articles that include a definition of patient-centeredness were eligible for inclusion in the review and subject to subsequent content analysis. Two researchers independently first screened titles and abstracts, then assessed full texts for eligibility. In each article the given definition of patient-centeredness was coded independently by two researchers. We discussed codes within the research team and condensed them into an integrative model of patient-centeredness. Results 4707 records were identified through primary and secondary search, of which 706 were retained after screening of titles and abstracts. 417 articles (59%) contained a definition of patient-centeredness and were coded. 15 dimensions of patient-centeredness were identified: essential characteristics of clinician, clinician-patient relationship, clinician-patient communication, patient as unique person, biopsychosocial perspective, patient information, patient involvement in care, involvement of family and friends, patient empowerment, physical support, emotional support, integration of medical and non-medical care, teamwork and teambuilding, access to care, coordination and continuity of care. In the resulting integrative model the dimensions were mapped onto different levels of care. Conclusions The proposed integrative model of patient-centeredness allows different stakeholders to speak the same language. It provides a foundation for creating better measures and interventions. It can also be used to inform the development of clinical guidance documents and health policy directives, and through this support the shift towards patient-centered health care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                andre.mihaljevic@uni-ulm.de
                Journal
                Chirurgie (Heidelb)
                Chirurgie (Heidelb)
                Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)
                Springer Medizin (Heidelberg )
                2731-6971
                2731-698X
                7 April 2022
                7 April 2022
                2022
                : 93
                : 9
                : 861-869
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.410712.1, ISNI 0000 0004 0473 882X, Klinik für Allgemein- und Viszeralchirurgie, , Universitätsklinikum Ulm, ; Albert-Einstein-Allee 23, 89081 Ulm, Deutschland
                [2 ]GRID grid.15788.33, ISNI 0000 0001 1177 4763, Executive Academy, , Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, ; Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Wien, Österreich
                [3 ]Complexity-Research, Schönbrunner Str. 32/3/20, 1050 Wien, Österreich
                Article
                1629
                10.1007/s00104-022-01629-4
                9399187
                35391553
                46397faf-ec01-4104-a4a1-6ce5ae930eda
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open Access Dieser Artikel wird unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht, welche die Nutzung, Vervielfältigung, Bearbeitung, Verbreitung und Wiedergabe in jeglichem Medium und Format erlaubt, sofern Sie den/die ursprünglichen Autor(en) und die Quelle ordnungsgemäß nennen, einen Link zur Creative Commons Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden.

                Die in diesem Artikel enthaltenen Bilder und sonstiges Drittmaterial unterliegen ebenfalls der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz, sofern sich aus der Abbildungslegende nichts anderes ergibt. Sofern das betreffende Material nicht unter der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz steht und die betreffende Handlung nicht nach gesetzlichen Vorschriften erlaubt ist, ist für die oben aufgeführten Weiterverwendungen des Materials die Einwilligung des jeweiligen Rechteinhabers einzuholen.

                Weitere Details zur Lizenz entnehmen Sie bitte der Lizenzinformation auf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de.

                History
                : 3 March 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: Universitätsklinikum Ulm (8941)
                Categories
                Übersichten
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2022

                patientenorientierung,patientenzentrierung,patient-reported experience measures,patient-reported outcome measures,patient-centeredness,patient outcome assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content140

                Cited by1

                Most referenced authors385