Nicholas J Parr, Sarah Young, Becky Baltich Nelson
{"title":"Assessing Whole-Person Outcomes During Routine Clinical Care: A Rapid Scoping Review.","authors":"Nicholas J Parr, Sarah Young, Becky Baltich Nelson","doi":"10.1097/MLR.0000000000002046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify and describe research conducted on the implementation, validity, and utility of whole-person outcome measures administered during routine inpatient or outpatient care.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Incorporating information about patients' overall health, health-related quality of life, and global well-being into health care delivery has the potential to increase referral rates, enhance doctor-patient communication, and improve the detection of untreated symptoms. Assessment of these whole-person outcomes during routine clinical care is of broad interest to health care providers and health systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We employed a scoping review design and searched Ovid MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and CINAHL for relevant English-language primary studies and systematic reviews published through November 13, 2023. Screening for inclusion and data abstraction were conducted by 1 investigator then checked by another. Study risks of bias and the strength of available evidence were not assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1327 potentially relevant publications, 44 primary studies and 5 systematic reviews met eligibility criteria. Assessment of global well-being was comparatively less researched than overall health or health-related quality of life. Available research provided a range of perspectives on the performance, feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and clinical utility of whole-person outcome measures. No studies reported change in patient health or disease outcomes attributed to whole person outcome assessment (directly or through changes to care delivery).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Currently available evidence provides insights about the performance and implementation of whole-person outcome measures during routine clinical care, but no studies are available that examine the impact of assessing whole-person outcomes on clinical or patient outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":18364,"journal":{"name":"Medical Care","volume":"62 12 Suppl 1","pages":"S34-S42"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11548827/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Care","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000002046","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To identify and describe research conducted on the implementation, validity, and utility of whole-person outcome measures administered during routine inpatient or outpatient care.
Background: Incorporating information about patients' overall health, health-related quality of life, and global well-being into health care delivery has the potential to increase referral rates, enhance doctor-patient communication, and improve the detection of untreated symptoms. Assessment of these whole-person outcomes during routine clinical care is of broad interest to health care providers and health systems.
Methods: We employed a scoping review design and searched Ovid MEDLINE, APA PsycINFO, and CINAHL for relevant English-language primary studies and systematic reviews published through November 13, 2023. Screening for inclusion and data abstraction were conducted by 1 investigator then checked by another. Study risks of bias and the strength of available evidence were not assessed.
Results: Of 1327 potentially relevant publications, 44 primary studies and 5 systematic reviews met eligibility criteria. Assessment of global well-being was comparatively less researched than overall health or health-related quality of life. Available research provided a range of perspectives on the performance, feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and clinical utility of whole-person outcome measures. No studies reported change in patient health or disease outcomes attributed to whole person outcome assessment (directly or through changes to care delivery).
Conclusions: Currently available evidence provides insights about the performance and implementation of whole-person outcome measures during routine clinical care, but no studies are available that examine the impact of assessing whole-person outcomes on clinical or patient outcomes.
期刊介绍：
Rated as one of the top ten journals in healthcare administration, Medical Care is devoted to all aspects of the administration and delivery of healthcare. This scholarly journal publishes original, peer-reviewed papers documenting the most current developments in the rapidly changing field of healthcare. This timely journal reports on the findings of original investigations into issues related to the research, planning, organization, financing, provision, and evaluation of health services.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
