Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clients and professionals elicit long-term care preferences by using 'What matters to me': A process evaluation in the Netherlands.
van Leersum, Catharina M; Moser, Albine; van Steenkiste, Ben; Wolf, Judith R L M; van der Weijden, Trudy.
Affiliation
  • van Leersum CM; Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
  • Moser A; Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
  • van Steenkiste B; Research Centre for Autonomy and Participation of Persons with a Chronic Illness, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands.
  • Wolf JRLM; Department of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, The Netherlands.
  • van der Weijden T; Impuls - Netherlands Center for Social Care Research, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
Health Soc Care Community ; 30(4): e1037-e1047, 2022 07.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34254385
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

'What matters to me' is a five-category preference elicitation tool to assist clients and professionals in choosing long-term care. This study aimed to evaluate the use of and experiences with this tool.

METHODS:

A mixed-method process evaluation was applied. Participants were 71 clients or relatives, and 12 professionals. They were all involved in decision-making on long-term care. Data collection comprised online user activity logs (N = 71), questionnaires (N = 38) and interviews (N = 20). Descriptive statistics was used for quantitative data, and a thematic analysis for qualitative data.

RESULTS:

Sixty-nine per cent of participants completed one or more categories in an average time of 6.9 (±0.03) minutes. The tool was rated 6.63 (±0.88) of 7 in the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). Ninety-five per cent experienced the tool as useful in practice. Suggestions for improvement included a separate version for relatives and a non-digital version. Although professionals thought the potentially extended consultation time could be problematic, all participants would recommend the tool to others.

CONCLUSION:

'What matters to me' seems useful to assist clients and professionals with preference elicitation in long-term care. Evaluation of the impact on consultations between clients and professionals by using 'What matters to me' is needed.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Long-Term Care / Patient Preference Type of study: Qualitative_research Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Health Soc Care Community Journal subject: CIENCIAS SOCIAIS / MEDICINA SOCIAL / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country:

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Long-Term Care / Patient Preference Type of study: Qualitative_research Aspects: Patient_preference Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Health Soc Care Community Journal subject: CIENCIAS SOCIAIS / MEDICINA SOCIAL / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: