Advertisement

 

 

Patient-Reported Measures for Person-Centered Coordinated Care: A Comparative Domain Map and Web-Based Compendium for Supporting Policy Development and Implementation.

Patient-Reported Measures for Person-Centered Coordinated Care: A Comparative Domain Map and Web-Based Compendium for Supporting Policy Development and Implementation.
Author Information (click to view)

Lloyd H, Wheat H, Horrell J, Sugavanam T, Fosh B, Valderas JM, Close J,


Lloyd H, Wheat H, Horrell J, Sugavanam T, Fosh B, Valderas JM, Close J, (click to view)

Lloyd H, Wheat H, Horrell J, Sugavanam T, Fosh B, Valderas JM, Close J,

Advertisement

Journal of medical Internet research 2018 02 1420(2) e54 doi 10.2196/jmir.7789
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Patient-reported measure (PRM) questionnaires were originally used in research to measure outcomes of intervention studies. They have now evolved into a diverse family of tools measuring a range of constructs including quality of life and experiences of care. Current health and social care policy increasingly advocates their use for embedding the patient voice into service redesign through new models of care such as person-centered coordinated care (P3C). If chosen carefully and used efficiently, these tools can help improve care delivery through a variety of novel ways, including system-level feedback for health care management and commissioning. Support and guidance on how to use these tools would be critical to achieve these goals.

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to develop evidence-based guidance and support for the use of P3C-PRMs in health and social care policy through identification of PRMs that can be used to enhance the development of P3C, mapping P3C-PRMs against an existing model of domains of P3C, and integration and organization of the information in a user-friendly Web-based database.

METHODS
A pragmatic approach was used for the systematic identification of candidate P3C-PRMs, which aimed at balancing comprehensiveness and feasibility. This utilized a number of resources, including existing compendiums, peer-reviewed and gray literature (using a flexible search strategy), and stakeholder engagement (which included guidance for relevant clinical areas). A subset of those candidate measures (meeting prespecified eligibility criteria) was then mapped against a theoretical model of P3C, facilitating classification of the construct being measured and the subsequent generation of shortlists for generic P3C measures, specific aspects of P3C (eg, communication or decision making), and condition-specific measures (eg, diabetes, cancer) in priority areas, as highlighted by stakeholders.

RESULTS
In total, 328 P3C-PRMs were identified, which were used to populate a freely available Web-based database. Of these, 63 P3C-PRMs met the eligibility criteria for shortlisting and were classified according to their measurement constructs and mapped against the theoretical P3C model. We identified tools with the best coverage of P3C, thereby providing evidence of their content validity as outcome measures for new models of care. Transitions and medications were 2 areas currently poorly covered by existing measures. All the information is currently available at a user-friendly web-based portal (p3c.org.uk), which includes all relevant information on each measure, such as the constructs targeted and links to relevant literature, in addition to shortlists according to relevant constructs.

CONCLUSIONS
A detailed compendium of P3C-PRMs has been developed using a pragmatic systematic approach supported by stakeholder engagement. Our user-friendly suite of tools is designed to act as a portal to the world of PRMs for P3C, and have utility for a broad audience, including (but not limited to) health care commissioners, managers, and researchers.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

eight − seven =

[ HIDE/SHOW ]