Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33378348›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Selecting home care quality indicators based on the Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC) for Switzerland: A public health and healthcare providers' perspective.

Aylin Wagner, Franziska Zúñiga, Peter Rüesch, René Schaffert, Julia Dratva, HCD Research Group

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Adjusting Client-Level Risks Impacts on Home Care Organization Ranking.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

6 authors.

Aylin WagnerInstitute of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6683-5671
Franziska ZúñigaInstitute of Nursing Science, Department of Public Health, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Peter RüeschInstitute of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland.
René SchaffertInstitute of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7248-5543
Julia DratvaInstitute of Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland.
HCD Research Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite an increasing importance of home care, quality assurance in this healthcare sector in Switzerland is hardly established. In 2010, Swiss home care quality indicators (QIs) based on the Resident Assessment Instrument-Home Care (RAI-HC) were developed. However, these QIs have not been revised since, although internationally new RAI-HC QIs have emerged. The objective of this study was to assess the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs to measure quality of home care in Switzerland from a public health and healthcare providers' perspective.

methodsFirst, the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs, identified in a recent systematic review, was assessed by a multidisciplinary expert panel based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method taking into account indicators' public health relevance, potential of influence, and comprehensibility. Second, the QIs selected by the experts were afterwards rated regarding their relevance, potential of influence, and practicability from a healthcare providers' perspective in focus groups with home care nurses based on the Nominal-Group-Technique. Data were analyzed using median scores and the Disagreement Index.

results18 of 43 RAI-HC QIs were rated appropriate by the experts from a public health perspective. The 18 QIs cover clinical, psychosocial, functional and service use aspects. Seven of the 18 QIs were subsequently rated appropriate by home care nurses from a healthcare providers' perspective. The focus of these QIs is narrow, because three of seven QIs are pain-related. From both perspectives, the majority of RAI-HC QIs were rated inappropriate because of insufficient potential of influence, with healthcare providers rating them more critically.

conclusionsThe study shows that the appropriateness of RAI-HC QIs differs according to the stakeholder perspective and the intended use of QIs. The findings of this study can guide policy-makers and home care organizations on selecting QIs and to critically reflect on their appropriate use.

Indexed as

Delphi TechniqueHome Care ServicesHumansPublic HealthQuality Indicators, Health CareSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID33378348
PMCPMC7773259

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.