Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Developing quality criteria for patient-directed knowledge tools related to clinical practice guidelines. A development and consensus study.
van der Weijden, Trudy; Dreesens, Dunja; Faber, Marjan J; Bos, Nanne; Drenthen, Ton; Maas, Ingrid; Kersten, Sonja; Malanda, Uriëll; van der Scheur, Sander; Post, Heleen; Knops, Anouk.
Afiliação
  • van der Weijden T; MUMC+ CAPRHI, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Dreesens D; MUMC+ CAPRHI, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Faber MJ; Radboudumc, IQ Healthcare, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  • Bos N; Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research NIVEL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Drenthen T; Dutch College of General Practitioners, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Maas I; Dutch Association of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Kersten S; Dutch Nurses' Association, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Malanda U; Health Care Institute of the Netherlands, Diemen, The Netherlands.
  • van der Scheur S; Health Care Institute of the Netherlands, Diemen, The Netherlands.
  • Post H; Dutch Federation of Patients' Organisations, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  • Knops A; Dutch Federation of Patients' Organisations, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Health Expect ; 22(2): 201-208, 2019 04.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30417517
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Patient-directed knowledge tools such as patient versions of guidelines and patient decision aids are increasingly developed to facilitate shared decision making. In this paper, we report how consensus was reached within the Netherlands on quality criteria for development, content and governance of these tools.

METHOD:

A 12-month development and consensus study. The consortium worked on four work packages (a) reviewing existing criteria; (b) drafting the quality criteria; (c) safe-guarding the acceptability and feasibility of the draft criteria by participatory research in on-going tool development projects; and (d) gaining formal support from national stakeholders on the quality criteria.

RESULTS:

We reached consensus on a 8-step guidance; describing minimal quality criteria for (a) the team composition; (b) setting the scope; (c) identifying needs; (d) the content and format; (e) testing the draft; (f) finalizing and approval; (g) dissemination and application, and (h) ownership and revision. The participants of the on-going tool development projects were positive about the quality criteria in general, but divided as to the degree of detail. Whereas some expressed a clear desire for procedural standards, others felt that it would be sufficient to provide only general directions. Despite the different views as to the degree of detail, consensus was reached in three stakeholder meetings.

DISCUSSION:

We successfully collaborated with all stakeholders and achieved formal support from national stakeholders on a set of minimum criteria for the development process, content and governance of patient-directed knowledge tools.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Fomentar_producao_conhecimento_especifico Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Participação do Paciente / Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão / Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Aspecto: Patient_preference Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Health Expect Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Temas: Fomentar_producao_conhecimento_especifico Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Participação do Paciente / Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão / Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Aspecto: Patient_preference Limite: Humans País/Região como assunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Health Expect Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article