Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31637327›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2019

Patient's perspective on improving the quality of acute medical care: determining patient reported outcomes.

Marjolein N T Kremers, Tessel Zaalberg, Eva S van den Ende, Marlou van Beneden, Frits Holleman, Prabath W B Nanayakkara, Harm R Haak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Marjolein N T KremersFaculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, and CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Aging and Long Term care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Tessel ZaalbergInternal Medicine, Máxima MC, Veldhoven/Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
Eva S van den EndeInternal Medicine, Section Acute Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Marlou van BenedenInternal Medicine, Section Acute Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Frits HollemanInternal Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, location AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Prabath W B NanayakkaraInternal Medicine, Section Acute Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Harm R HaakFaculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, and CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Aging and Long Term care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThere is an increasing societal demand for quality assurance and transparency of medical care. The American National Academy of Medicine has determined patient centredness as a quality domain for improvement of healthcare. While many of the current quality indicators are disease specific, most emergency department (ED) patients present with undifferentiated complaints. Therefore, there is a need for generic outcome measures. Our objective was to determine relevant patient reported outcomes (PROs) for quality measurement of acute care.

methodsWe conducted semistructured interviews in patients ≥18 years presenting at the ED for internal medicine. Patients with a cognitive impairment or language barrier were excluded. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

resultsThirty patients were interviewed. Patients reported outcomes as relevant in five domains: relief of symptoms, understanding the diagnosis, presence and understanding of the diagnostic and/or therapeutic plan, reassurance and patient experiences. Experiences were often mentioned as relevant to the perceived quality of care and appeared to influence the domain reassurance.

conclusionWe determined five domains of relevant PROs in acute care. These domains will be used for developing generic patient reported measures for acute care. The patients' perspective will be incorporated in these measures with the ultimate aim of organising truly patient-centred care at the ED.

Indexed as

healthcare quality improvementpatient-centred carepatient reported outcome measures

Identifiers

PMID31637327
PMCPMC6768353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.