Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures.
Christalle, Eva; Zill, Jördis M; Frerichs, Wiebke; Härter, Martin; Nestoriuc, Yvonne; Dirmaier, Jörg; Scholl, Isabelle.
Afiliación
  • Christalle E; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Zill JM; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Frerichs W; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Härter M; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Nestoriuc Y; Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg and Schön Clinic Hamburg Eilbek, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Dirmaier J; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
  • Scholl I; Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
PLoS One ; 14(1): e0209165, 2019.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30703103
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Providing patient information is a central aspect of patient-centered care. Fulfilling personal information needs has positive effects on several health-related outcomes. Measurement instruments help to identify individual information needs in an effective way. The present study gives an overview of existing information needs measures and further evaluates the quality of their psychometric properties and their psychometric studies.

METHODS:

We conducted a systematic search on psychometric studies of measures that assess information needs in PubMed and Embase. Furthermore, we carried out a secondary search with reference and citation tracking of the included articles. Title, abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers for eligibility. We extracted data on content of the measures, validation samples and psychometric properties. In addition we rated the methodological quality with the COSMIN checklist and the quality of psychometric properties with the criteria of Terwee and colleagues.

RESULTS:

24 studies on 21 measures were included. Most instruments assessed information needs of patients with cancer or cardiac diseases. The majority of the instruments were in English language and from western countries. Most studies included information on internal consistency and content validity. The ratings showed mixed results with clear deficiencies in the methodological quality of most studies.

DISCUSSION:

This is the first systematic review that summarized the existing evidence on measures on patient information needs using two instruments for a systematic quality assessment. The results show a need for more psychometric studies on existing measures. In addition, reporting on psychometric studies needs to be improved to be able to evaluate the reliability of the psychometric properties. Furthermore, we were not able to identify any measures on information needs for some frequent chronic diseases. Other methods to elicit information needs (e.g. open-ended interviews, question prompt sheets) could be considered as alternatives if sound measures are missing.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Psicometría / Atención Dirigida al Paciente Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Asunto de la revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Psicometría / Atención Dirigida al Paciente Tipo de estudio: Prognostic_studies / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Asunto de la revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Año: 2019 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania