Patient experiences of integrated care within the United Kingdom: A systematic review

IF 0.8 Q4 NURSING
L. Davidson, J. Scott, Natalie Forster
{"title":"Patient experiences of integrated care within the United Kingdom: A systematic review","authors":"L. Davidson, J. Scott, Natalie Forster","doi":"10.1177/20534345211004503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Integrated care and patient experience are central to the coordination and delivery of high quality health and social care in the UK, but their joint application is poorly understood. This systematic review aimed to gain an understanding of patient experience within current integrated care services in the UK, and specifically, whether they reflect person-centred coordinated care (PCCC). Methods Following PRISMA, electronic databases (ProQuest, EBSCO and Cochrane Library) were searched from 2012 to 2019 for primary, peer-reviewed literature. Papers were included where patients’ or carers’ experiences of integrated care were reported. Papers were excluded where they focused on acute integrated care interventions, measured experience via satisfaction scores only, or findings lacked sufficient depth to answer the research question. Quality was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and findings synthesised using a framework approach, incorporating the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care and Measuring Integrated Care Patient Framework. Results Sixteen studies were included. Person-centred and shared responsibility experiences were most often discussed. Experiences were not always described as positive and some patients experienced a lack of PCCC. Clinical, professional/organisational and functional integration processes were associated with experiencing domains of PCCC. Discussion People with complex needs experience a lack of coordination across teams and wider community resources, and limited associations were made between integration processes and patient experience. Further research which gives context to individual experience, provides greater detail of integration processes and utilises validated patient experience measures of PCCC is required to understand the association between integration processes and domains of PCCC.","PeriodicalId":43751,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Care Coordination","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/20534345211004503","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Care Coordination","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20534345211004503","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

Introduction Integrated care and patient experience are central to the coordination and delivery of high quality health and social care in the UK, but their joint application is poorly understood. This systematic review aimed to gain an understanding of patient experience within current integrated care services in the UK, and specifically, whether they reflect person-centred coordinated care (PCCC). Methods Following PRISMA, electronic databases (ProQuest, EBSCO and Cochrane Library) were searched from 2012 to 2019 for primary, peer-reviewed literature. Papers were included where patients’ or carers’ experiences of integrated care were reported. Papers were excluded where they focused on acute integrated care interventions, measured experience via satisfaction scores only, or findings lacked sufficient depth to answer the research question. Quality was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, and findings synthesised using a framework approach, incorporating the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care and Measuring Integrated Care Patient Framework. Results Sixteen studies were included. Person-centred and shared responsibility experiences were most often discussed. Experiences were not always described as positive and some patients experienced a lack of PCCC. Clinical, professional/organisational and functional integration processes were associated with experiencing domains of PCCC. Discussion People with complex needs experience a lack of coordination across teams and wider community resources, and limited associations were made between integration processes and patient experience. Further research which gives context to individual experience, provides greater detail of integration processes and utilises validated patient experience measures of PCCC is required to understand the association between integration processes and domains of PCCC.
英国综合护理的患者体验:一项系统回顾
引言综合护理和患者体验是英国协调和提供高质量健康和社会护理的核心,但人们对其联合应用知之甚少。这项系统审查旨在了解英国当前综合护理服务中的患者体验,特别是它们是否反映了以人为中心的协调护理(PCCC)。方法根据PRISMA,从2012年到2019年,检索电子数据库(ProQuest、EBSCO和Cochrane Library)中的主要同行评审文献。纳入了报告患者或护理人员综合护理经验的论文。论文被排除在外,因为它们专注于急性综合护理干预,仅通过满意度得分来衡量经验,或者研究结果缺乏足够的深度来回答研究问题。使用混合方法评估工具评估质量,并使用框架方法综合结果,结合综合护理的彩虹模型和衡量综合护理患者框架。结果纳入16项研究。最常讨论的是以人为中心和分担责任的经验。经验并不总是被描述为积极的,一些患者缺乏PCCC。临床、专业/组织和功能整合过程与PCCC的体验领域相关。讨论有复杂需求的人在团队和更广泛的社区资源之间缺乏协调,整合过程和患者体验之间的关联有限。需要进一步的研究,为个人体验提供背景,提供更详细的整合过程,并利用经验证的PCCC患者体验测量,以了解整合过程和PCCC领域之间的关联。
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
3.10
自引率
14.30%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Care Coordination (formerly published as the International Journal of Care Pathways) provides an international forum for the latest scientific research in care coordination. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles which describe basic research to a multidisciplinary field as well as other broader approaches and strategies hypothesized to improve care coordination. The Journal offers insightful overviews and reflections on innovation, underlying issues, and thought provoking opinion pieces in related fields. Articles from multidisciplinary fields are welcomed from leading health care academics and policy-makers. Published articles types include original research, reviews, guidelines papers, book reviews, and news items.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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