衡量严重疾病患者-提供者关系的质量:范围审查。

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Palliative Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-06 DOI:10.1177/02692163251315304
Karen Wassef, Kristine Ma, Brigitte N Durieux, Tyler L Brown, Joanna Paladino, Sally Thorne, Justin J Sanders
{"title":"衡量严重疾病患者-提供者关系的质量:范围审查。","authors":"Karen Wassef, Kristine Ma, Brigitte N Durieux, Tyler L Brown, Joanna Paladino, Sally Thorne, Justin J Sanders","doi":"10.1177/02692163251315304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People affected by serious illness face several threats to their well-being: physical symptoms, psychological distress, disrupted social relations, and spiritual/existential crises. Relationships with clinicians provide a form of structured support that promotes shared decision-making and adaptive stress coping. Measuring relationship quality may improve quality assessment and patient care outcomes. However, researchers and those promoting quality improvement lack clear guidance on measuring this.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and assess items from valid measures of patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings for guiding quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Scoping review.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We identified peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1990 to 2023 in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. Eligible articles described the validation of measures assessing healthcare experiences of patient populations characterized by serious illness. We used Clarke et al.'s theory of relationship quality to assess relationship-focused items.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 3868 screened articles, we identified 101 publications describing 47 valid measures used in serious illness settings. Measures assessed patients and other caregivers. We determined that 597 of 2238 items (26.7%) related to relationships. Most measures (<i>n</i> = 46) included items related to engaging the patient as a whole person. Measures evaluated how providers promote information exchange (<i>n</i> = 35), foster therapeutic alliance (<i>n</i> = 35), recognize and respond to emotion (<i>n</i> = 27), and include patients in care-related decisions (<i>n</i> = 23). Few instruments (<i>n</i> = 9) assessed patient self-management and navigation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Measures include items that assess patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings. Researchers may consider these for evaluating and improving relationship quality, a patient-centered care and research outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"332-345"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877987/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring the quality of patient-provider relationships in serious illness: A scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Karen Wassef, Kristine Ma, Brigitte N Durieux, Tyler L Brown, Joanna Paladino, Sally Thorne, Justin J Sanders\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692163251315304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People affected by serious illness face several threats to their well-being: physical symptoms, psychological distress, disrupted social relations, and spiritual/existential crises. Relationships with clinicians provide a form of structured support that promotes shared decision-making and adaptive stress coping. Measuring relationship quality may improve quality assessment and patient care outcomes. However, researchers and those promoting quality improvement lack clear guidance on measuring this.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and assess items from valid measures of patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings for guiding quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Scoping review.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We identified peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1990 to 2023 in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. Eligible articles described the validation of measures assessing healthcare experiences of patient populations characterized by serious illness. We used Clarke et al.'s theory of relationship quality to assess relationship-focused items.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 3868 screened articles, we identified 101 publications describing 47 valid measures used in serious illness settings. Measures assessed patients and other caregivers. We determined that 597 of 2238 items (26.7%) related to relationships. Most measures (<i>n</i> = 46) included items related to engaging the patient as a whole person. Measures evaluated how providers promote information exchange (<i>n</i> = 35), foster therapeutic alliance (<i>n</i> = 35), recognize and respond to emotion (<i>n</i> = 27), and include patients in care-related decisions (<i>n</i> = 23). Few instruments (<i>n</i> = 9) assessed patient self-management and navigation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Measures include items that assess patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings. Researchers may consider these for evaluating and improving relationship quality, a patient-centered care and research outcome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"332-345\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11877987/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163251315304\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163251315304","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:受严重疾病影响的人面临着对其福祉的几种威胁:身体症状、心理困扰、社会关系中断以及精神/存在危机。与临床医生的关系提供了一种促进共同决策和适应性压力应对的结构化支持形式。测量关系质量可以改善质量评估和患者护理结果。然而,研究人员和那些促进质量改善的人缺乏衡量这一点的明确指导。目的:从严重疾病环境中有效的医患关系质量测量中识别和评估项目,以指导质量评估。设计:范围审查。数据来源:我们确定了1990年至2023年在CINAHL、Embase和PubMed上发表的同行评议的英文文章。符合条件的文章描述了评估以严重疾病为特征的患者群体的医疗保健经历的措施的有效性。我们使用Clarke等人的关系质量理论来评估以关系为中心的项目。结果:从3868篇筛选的文章中,我们确定了101篇出版物,描述了47种用于严重疾病环境的有效措施。测量评估了患者和其他护理人员。我们确定2238项中有597项(26.7%)与关系有关。大多数测量(n = 46)包括与患者作为一个完整的人参与相关的项目。测量评估了提供者如何促进信息交流(n = 35),培养治疗联盟(n = 35),识别和回应情绪(n = 27),并将患者纳入护理相关决策(n = 23)。很少有仪器(n = 9)评估患者的自我管理和导航。结论:措施包括项目,评估严重疾病设置患者-提供者关系的质量。研究人员可能会考虑这些来评估和改善关系质量,以病人为中心的护理和研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measuring the quality of patient-provider relationships in serious illness: A scoping review.

Background: People affected by serious illness face several threats to their well-being: physical symptoms, psychological distress, disrupted social relations, and spiritual/existential crises. Relationships with clinicians provide a form of structured support that promotes shared decision-making and adaptive stress coping. Measuring relationship quality may improve quality assessment and patient care outcomes. However, researchers and those promoting quality improvement lack clear guidance on measuring this.

Aim: To identify and assess items from valid measures of patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings for guiding quality assessment.

Design: Scoping review.

Data sources: We identified peer-reviewed, English-language articles published from 1990 to 2023 in CINAHL, Embase, and PubMed. Eligible articles described the validation of measures assessing healthcare experiences of patient populations characterized by serious illness. We used Clarke et al.'s theory of relationship quality to assess relationship-focused items.

Results: From 3868 screened articles, we identified 101 publications describing 47 valid measures used in serious illness settings. Measures assessed patients and other caregivers. We determined that 597 of 2238 items (26.7%) related to relationships. Most measures (n = 46) included items related to engaging the patient as a whole person. Measures evaluated how providers promote information exchange (n = 35), foster therapeutic alliance (n = 35), recognize and respond to emotion (n = 27), and include patients in care-related decisions (n = 23). Few instruments (n = 9) assessed patient self-management and navigation.

Conclusions: Measures include items that assess patient-provider relationship quality in serious illness settings. Researchers may consider these for evaluating and improving relationship quality, a patient-centered care and research outcome.

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
Palliative Medicine
Palliative Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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