Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33169288›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2020

The needs of key-stakeholders for evaluating client's experienced quality of home care: a qualitative approach.

Roy Haex, Theresa Thoma-Lürken, Sandra Zwakhalen, Anna Beurskens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The dementia care workforce: Essential to care but large research gaps exist.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2025
    Review
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

4 authors.

Roy HaexCAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Health Services Research, Living Lab on Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands. r.haex@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6500-1819
Theresa Thoma-LürkenCAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Health Services Research, Living Lab on Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Sandra ZwakhalenCAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Health Services Research, Living Lab on Ageing and Long-Term Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Anna BeurskensCAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo optimize home care, it is essential to determine how care recipients experience quality of care. Traditionally, quality of care is measured with normative quality indicators such as safety, efficiency, or prevalence rates such as falls. The growing interest for qualitative patient-reported experience measures in home care requires insight into the needs of care receivers, providers, and organizations as key-stakeholders. Each stakeholder has their own needs that are important to communicate and use to conduct thorough comparisons before implementing new experience measures. This study aims to understand the needs of clients, formal/informal caregivers, and managers/policy officers in measuring client's experienced quality of care in home care.

methodsFour focus group interviews and 25 semi-structured interviews with key-stakeholders were conducted and analyzed by means of content analysis. The value-proposition canvas was used as a thematic framework to explore the purpose of experience quality of care measures and related pains and gains.

resultsThere were two main purposes for measuring experienced quality of care: first improving the primary care process of individual clients and second for learning and improving in home care team. Using experienced quality of care measures for external accountability and transparency on an organizational or national level were considered less relevant. Among others, participants described not having time and no clear procedure for conducting an evaluation as a pain of the current methods used to evaluate perceived quality of home care. As gains they put forward the ability to informally evaluate experiences during care delivery and to openly discuss complaints with a familiar caregiver.

conclusionsThis study advocates that home care organizations should be aware of the goal of quality of care measures. They should consider selecting experienced quality of care measures mainly for improving primary care processes of individual clients. The results also underline the relevance of adopting next to quantitative evaluations, more narrative evaluation methods which support communicating openly on care experiences, leading to concrete point-of-improvement. The findings of this study can serve as a guide for both the development or selection of adequate methods, from the perspectives of key-stakeholders, in assessing experienced quality in home care.

Indexed as

Care relationshipExperienced qualityHome careInformal caregivingNeeds assessmentNursingOlder peopleQuality of care

Identifiers

PMID33169288
PMCPMC7652985

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.