Quality and Safety Indicators for Care Transitions by Older Adults: A Scoping Review.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Rangika L Fernando, Maria C Inacio, Janet K Sluggett, Stephanie A Ward, Elizabeth Beattie, Jyoti Khadka, Gillian E Caughey
{"title":"Quality and Safety Indicators for Care Transitions by Older Adults: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Rangika L Fernando, Maria C Inacio, Janet K Sluggett, Stephanie A Ward, Elizabeth Beattie, Jyoti Khadka, Gillian E Caughey","doi":"10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify quality and safety indicators routinely used to monitor, evaluate, and improve care transitions for older adults globally.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A scoping literature review.</p><p><strong>Setting and participants: </strong>This review identified indicators used internationally to monitor and evaluate the quality and safety of care transitions by older adults. Care transitions were defined as the transfer of health care at least once between care settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search of academic and gray literature identified indicators that were publicly available, used routinely at the population level, and reported on since 2012. Indicators were summarized by care domain (ie, hospitalization, consumer experience, access/waiting times, communication, follow-up, and medication-related), type (structure, process, outcome), quality dimension (patient centeredness, timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, safety, and equity), data collection approach, reporting strategies, and care settings involved.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review identified 361 quality indicators from 89 programs across 12 countries. Care domains included hospitalization (n = 112; 31.0%), consumer experience (n = 82; 22.7%), access/waiting times (n = 63; 17.5%), communication (n = 40; 11.1%), follow-up (n = 40; 11.1%), and medication-related (n = 24; 6.6%). Indicators measured outcomes (n = 227; 62.9%) or processes (n = 134; 37.1%) and represented the dimensions of patient centeredness (n = 155, 42.9%), timeliness (n = 91; 25.2%), and effectiveness (n = 87; 24.1%), efficiency (n = 18; 5.0%) and safety (n = 10; 2.8%). Most indicators were constructed from survey (n = 160; 44.3%) or administrative data (n = 138; 38.2%); 69% (n = 249) were publicly reported and 80% (n = 287) measured transitions related to acute settings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and implications: </strong>Eighty-nine international programs routinely monitor the quality and safety of care transitions, and focus on the domains of hospitalization, access and waiting times, and communication. Considering the vulnerability of older adults as they transition across settings and providers, it is important to ensure holistic measurement of the quality of these care transitions to identify sub-optimal transitions, inform quality improvement, and ultimately improve outcomes for older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":17180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","volume":" ","pages":"105424"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Directors Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2024.105424","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To identify quality and safety indicators routinely used to monitor, evaluate, and improve care transitions for older adults globally.

Design: A scoping literature review.

Setting and participants: This review identified indicators used internationally to monitor and evaluate the quality and safety of care transitions by older adults. Care transitions were defined as the transfer of health care at least once between care settings.

Methods: A search of academic and gray literature identified indicators that were publicly available, used routinely at the population level, and reported on since 2012. Indicators were summarized by care domain (ie, hospitalization, consumer experience, access/waiting times, communication, follow-up, and medication-related), type (structure, process, outcome), quality dimension (patient centeredness, timeliness, effectiveness, efficiency, safety, and equity), data collection approach, reporting strategies, and care settings involved.

Results: The review identified 361 quality indicators from 89 programs across 12 countries. Care domains included hospitalization (n = 112; 31.0%), consumer experience (n = 82; 22.7%), access/waiting times (n = 63; 17.5%), communication (n = 40; 11.1%), follow-up (n = 40; 11.1%), and medication-related (n = 24; 6.6%). Indicators measured outcomes (n = 227; 62.9%) or processes (n = 134; 37.1%) and represented the dimensions of patient centeredness (n = 155, 42.9%), timeliness (n = 91; 25.2%), and effectiveness (n = 87; 24.1%), efficiency (n = 18; 5.0%) and safety (n = 10; 2.8%). Most indicators were constructed from survey (n = 160; 44.3%) or administrative data (n = 138; 38.2%); 69% (n = 249) were publicly reported and 80% (n = 287) measured transitions related to acute settings.

Conclusions and implications: Eighty-nine international programs routinely monitor the quality and safety of care transitions, and focus on the domains of hospitalization, access and waiting times, and communication. Considering the vulnerability of older adults as they transition across settings and providers, it is important to ensure holistic measurement of the quality of these care transitions to identify sub-optimal transitions, inform quality improvement, and ultimately improve outcomes for older adults.

老年人护理过渡的质量和安全指标:范围审查。
目的:确定用于监测、评估和改善全球老年人护理转变的常规质量和安全指标。设计:范围文献综述。环境和参与者:本综述确定了国际上用于监测和评估老年人护理过渡质量和安全性的指标。护理转移被定义为在护理环境之间至少转移一次卫生保健。方法:检索学术文献和灰色文献,确定可公开获得的指标,在人口水平上常规使用,并自2012年以来报告。指标按护理领域(即住院、消费者体验、获取/等待时间、沟通、随访和药物相关)、类型(结构、过程、结果)、质量维度(以患者为中心、及时性、有效性、效率、安全性和公平性)、数据收集方法、报告策略和所涉及的护理环境进行总结。结果:审查确定了来自12个国家89个项目的361个质量指标。护理领域包括住院(N = 112;31.0%),消费者体验(N = 82;22.7%),就诊/等待时间(N = 63;17.5%),通讯(N = 40;11.1%),随访(N = 40;11.1%),与药物相关(N = 24;6.6%)。指标测量结果(N = 227;62.9%)或过程(N = 134;37.1%),分别代表以患者为中心(N = 155, 42.9%)、及时性(N = 91;25.2%)和疗效(N = 87;24.1%),效率(N = 18;5.0%)和安全性(N = 10;2.8%)。大多数指标根据调查构建(N = 160;44.3%)或行政资料(N = 138;38.2%);69% (N = 249)公开报道,80% (N = 287)测量与急性环境相关的转变。结论和意义:89个国际项目定期监测护理过渡的质量和安全,并关注住院、获取和等待时间以及沟通等领域。考虑到老年人在不同环境和提供者之间转换时的脆弱性,重要的是要确保对这些护理转换的质量进行全面测量,以确定次优转换,为质量改进提供信息,并最终改善老年人的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
6.60%
发文量
472
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: JAMDA, the official journal of AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine, is a leading peer-reviewed publication that offers practical information and research geared towards healthcare professionals in the post-acute and long-term care fields. It is also a valuable resource for policy-makers, organizational leaders, educators, and advocates. The journal provides essential information for various healthcare professionals such as medical directors, attending physicians, nurses, consultant pharmacists, geriatric psychiatrists, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, social workers, and others involved in providing, overseeing, and promoting quality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信