以患者为中心的结果测量的设计和管理:限制生命或危及生命的儿童和青少年及其家庭成员的观点。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Lucy Coombes, Daney Harðardóttir, Debbie Braybrook, Anna Roach, Hannah Scott, Katherine Bristowe, Clare Ellis-Smith, Julia Downing, Myra Bluebond-Langner, Lorna K Fraser, Fliss E M Murtagh, Richard Harding
{"title":"以患者为中心的结果测量的设计和管理:限制生命或危及生命的儿童和青少年及其家庭成员的观点。","authors":"Lucy Coombes,&nbsp;Daney Harðardóttir,&nbsp;Debbie Braybrook,&nbsp;Anna Roach,&nbsp;Hannah Scott,&nbsp;Katherine Bristowe,&nbsp;Clare Ellis-Smith,&nbsp;Julia Downing,&nbsp;Myra Bluebond-Langner,&nbsp;Lorna K Fraser,&nbsp;Fliss E M Murtagh,&nbsp;Richard Harding","doi":"10.1007/s40271-023-00627-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Self-reported health data from children with life-limiting conditions is rarely collected. To improve acceptability and feasibility of child and family-centred outcome measures for children, they need to be designed in a way that reflects preferences, priorities and abilities.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim was to identify preferences for patient-reported outcome measure design (recall period, response format, length, administration mode) to improve the feasibility, acceptability, comprehensibility and relevance of a child and family-centred outcome measure, among children with life-limiting conditions and their family members.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A semi-structured qualitative interview study seeking the perspectives of children with life-limiting conditions, their siblings and parents on measure design was conducted. Participants were purposively sampled and recruited from nine UK sites. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 participants were recruited: 39 children aged 5-17 years (26 living with a life-limiting condition; 13 healthy siblings) and 40 parents (of children aged 0-17 years). Children found a short recall period and a visually appealing measure with ten questions or fewer most acceptable. Children with life-limiting conditions were more familiar with using rating scales such as numeric and Likert than their healthy siblings. Children emphasised the importance of completing the measure alongside interactions with a healthcare professional to enable them to talk about their responses. While parents assumed that electronic completion methods would be most feasible and acceptable, a small number of children preferred paper.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates that children with life-limiting conditions can engage in communicating preferences regarding the design of a patient-centred outcome measure. Where possible, children should be given the opportunity to participate in the measure development process to enhance acceptability and uptake in clinical practice. Results of this study should be considered in future research on outcome measure development in children.</p>","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/bc/56/40271_2023_Article_627.PMC10205035.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Design and Administration of Patient-Centred Outcome Measures: The Perspectives of Children and Young People with Life-Limiting or Life-Threatening Conditions and Their Family Members.\",\"authors\":\"Lucy Coombes,&nbsp;Daney Harðardóttir,&nbsp;Debbie Braybrook,&nbsp;Anna Roach,&nbsp;Hannah Scott,&nbsp;Katherine Bristowe,&nbsp;Clare Ellis-Smith,&nbsp;Julia Downing,&nbsp;Myra Bluebond-Langner,&nbsp;Lorna K Fraser,&nbsp;Fliss E M Murtagh,&nbsp;Richard Harding\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40271-023-00627-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Self-reported health data from children with life-limiting conditions is rarely collected. To improve acceptability and feasibility of child and family-centred outcome measures for children, they need to be designed in a way that reflects preferences, priorities and abilities.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim was to identify preferences for patient-reported outcome measure design (recall period, response format, length, administration mode) to improve the feasibility, acceptability, comprehensibility and relevance of a child and family-centred outcome measure, among children with life-limiting conditions and their family members.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A semi-structured qualitative interview study seeking the perspectives of children with life-limiting conditions, their siblings and parents on measure design was conducted. Participants were purposively sampled and recruited from nine UK sites. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 79 participants were recruited: 39 children aged 5-17 years (26 living with a life-limiting condition; 13 healthy siblings) and 40 parents (of children aged 0-17 years). Children found a short recall period and a visually appealing measure with ten questions or fewer most acceptable. Children with life-limiting conditions were more familiar with using rating scales such as numeric and Likert than their healthy siblings. Children emphasised the importance of completing the measure alongside interactions with a healthcare professional to enable them to talk about their responses. While parents assumed that electronic completion methods would be most feasible and acceptable, a small number of children preferred paper.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates that children with life-limiting conditions can engage in communicating preferences regarding the design of a patient-centred outcome measure. Where possible, children should be given the opportunity to participate in the measure development process to enhance acceptability and uptake in clinical practice. Results of this study should be considered in future research on outcome measure development in children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51271,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/bc/56/40271_2023_Article_627.PMC10205035.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-023-00627-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-023-00627-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:很少收集有生命限制条件的儿童自我报告的健康数据。为了提高以儿童和家庭为中心的结果措施的可接受性和可行性,这些措施的设计需要反映出儿童的偏好、优先事项和能力。目的:目的是确定患者报告的结果测量设计的偏好(回忆期、反应格式、长度、给药模式),以提高以儿童和家庭为中心的结果测量在生命受限儿童及其家庭成员中的可行性、可接受性、可理解性和相关性。方法:采用半结构化的质性访谈法,对生活受限儿童及其兄弟姐妹和父母进行问卷调查。参与者是有目的地从英国的9个地点抽样和招募的。采用框架分析对逐字抄本进行分析。结果:共招募79名参与者:39名5-17岁的儿童(26名患有生命限制疾病;13名健康的兄弟姐妹)和40名父母(0-17岁儿童)。孩子们发现较短的回忆时间和一个有10个或更少问题的具有视觉吸引力的测试是最容易接受的。有生命限制条件的儿童比健康的兄弟姐妹更熟悉使用数字和李克特等评分量表。孩子们强调了完成这项措施的重要性,同时与医疗保健专业人员进行互动,使他们能够谈论他们的反应。虽然家长认为电子填写方式是最可行和可接受的,但少数孩子更喜欢纸质填写。结论:本研究表明,在以患者为中心的结果测量设计中,有生命限制条件的儿童可以参与沟通偏好。在可能的情况下,应给予儿童参与措施制定过程的机会,以提高临床实践中的可接受性和吸收性。本研究的结果应在未来儿童结局测量发展的研究中予以考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Design and Administration of Patient-Centred Outcome Measures: The Perspectives of Children and Young People with Life-Limiting or Life-Threatening Conditions and Their Family Members.

Background: Self-reported health data from children with life-limiting conditions is rarely collected. To improve acceptability and feasibility of child and family-centred outcome measures for children, they need to be designed in a way that reflects preferences, priorities and abilities.

Objectives: The aim was to identify preferences for patient-reported outcome measure design (recall period, response format, length, administration mode) to improve the feasibility, acceptability, comprehensibility and relevance of a child and family-centred outcome measure, among children with life-limiting conditions and their family members.

Method: A semi-structured qualitative interview study seeking the perspectives of children with life-limiting conditions, their siblings and parents on measure design was conducted. Participants were purposively sampled and recruited from nine UK sites. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using framework analysis.

Results: A total of 79 participants were recruited: 39 children aged 5-17 years (26 living with a life-limiting condition; 13 healthy siblings) and 40 parents (of children aged 0-17 years). Children found a short recall period and a visually appealing measure with ten questions or fewer most acceptable. Children with life-limiting conditions were more familiar with using rating scales such as numeric and Likert than their healthy siblings. Children emphasised the importance of completing the measure alongside interactions with a healthcare professional to enable them to talk about their responses. While parents assumed that electronic completion methods would be most feasible and acceptable, a small number of children preferred paper.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that children with life-limiting conditions can engage in communicating preferences regarding the design of a patient-centred outcome measure. Where possible, children should be given the opportunity to participate in the measure development process to enhance acceptability and uptake in clinical practice. Results of this study should be considered in future research on outcome measure development in children.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence. The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making. Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.
×
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