Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLloyd, Helen
dc.contributor.authorJenkinson, C
dc.contributor.authorHadi, M
dc.contributor.authorGibbons, E
dc.contributor.authorFitzpatrick, R
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-26T19:54:38Z
dc.date.available2016-01-26T19:54:38Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.issn1477-7525
dc.identifier.issn1477-7525
dc.identifier.otherARTN 5
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/4236
dc.description.abstract

Patient reports or ratings are essential for measuring the quality of patient care. Measures designed for this purpose tend to focus on the processes and structures of care rather than the outcomes of it. The latter is arguably the most valid indicator of the quality of care patients receive. Typically this information is gathered by probing patient satisfaction with treatment as part of an investigation of satisfaction with hospital care. More recently patient ratings of the outcome of treatment have been obtained to measure treatment efficacy in clinical trials. However, a more direct approach is to ask patients to assess the benefit of treatment on their current health status. We performed a structured literature review on patient reported satisfaction with outcomes of treatment and direct patient assessments of the same. The purpose of this was to identify suitable candidate questions for a short instrument to tap patient evaluations of in-patient hospital interventions. Articles were included if they dealt with patient satisfaction or patient assessment of the outcomes of treatment. Articles were excluded if they dealt more generally with patient satisfaction with care. We identified 169 papers, 79 were included in the review. The findings of this review suggest that there are a number of benefits of directly asking patients to assess the outcome of hospital treatment. Importantly this approach reflects outcomes relevant to the patient and is also more likely to reflect patient report in routine clinical practice. There is also evidence that such approaches have face validity and construct validity. The problems associated with this approach (i.e. response bias), are those common to patient reported outcome surveys, but employing appropriate strategies can minimize them. Furthermore, employing a simple set of questions that asks patients to assess the outcomes of treatment they receive can be time and resource efficient in comparison to administering lengthy measures. This approach could be tested for potential generic use as an evaluative measure for patients in hospital settings.

dc.format.extent5-5
dc.format.mediumElectronic
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC
dc.subjectPatient evaluation
dc.subjectHospital
dc.subjectHospital care
dc.subjectTreatment satisfaction
dc.subjectReview
dc.subjectTransition items
dc.subjectQuality of care
dc.titlePatient reports of the outcomes of treatment: a structured review of approaches
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeReview
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000330116600001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue1
plymouth.volume12
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalHealth and Quality of Life Outcomes
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1477-7525-12-5
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/FoH - Community and Primary Care
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Translational and Stratified Medicine (ITSMED)/CCT&PS
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Plymouth Institute of Health and Care Research (PIHR)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeEngland
dcterms.dateAccepted2013-12-12
dc.identifier.eissn1477-7525
dc.rights.embargoperiodNot known
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1186/1477-7525-12-5
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2014-01-14
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV