ABSTRACT
Objetivos: Diseño, construcción y validación de un test autocumplimentable que permita al médico de familia (MF) valorar en qué medida integra en su práctica clínica la atención centrada en la persona (ACP).Diseño: Cualitativo. Diseño de cuestionarios. Emplazamiento: Atención primaria. Participantes: 214 MF y residentes de medicina familiar y comunitaria de 62 de los 80 centros de salud de la comunidad autónoma de Murcia. Métodos: Construcción de un cuestionario a partir de un banco de 873 ítems provenientes de una revisión sistemática y un estudio Delphi. Revisión por panel de 8 expertos ACP. Realización de pretest cognitivo con 10 MF. Se invita a participar a los médicos de 62 centros de salud. Con las respuestas medimos la fiabilidad, la validez y la factibilidad. Resultados: El cuestionario final contiene 37 ítems. Medimos la fiabilidad a través de la consistencia interna con un alfa de Cronbach de 0,915. Para la validez de constructo, el test de esfericidad de Bartlett adecuado y la medida de Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin de 0,889 nos permitió realizar un análisis factorial con la extracción de nueve factores (regla de Kaiser), siendo 5 los principales (Scree Test), cuyos ítems coinciden con las dimensiones propuestas por los expertos. Para valorar su factibilidad consideramos la tasa de respuesta del 31,15%, el tiempo de respuesta de 17 minutos 23 segundos, y solo el 0,9% de encuestados consideraban el cuestionario largo o complejo. Conclusiones: El cuestionario ACPAPS es una herramienta fiable, válida y factible para valorar la ACP en el MF, lo cual tiene múltiples y trascendentes aplicaciones.(AU)
Objectives: Design, construction and validation of a self-completion test that allows the Family Physician (FP) to assess the extent to which he/she integrates person-centred care (PCC) in his/her clinical practice. Design: Qualitative. Questionnaire design. Location: Primary care. Participants: Two hundred and fourteen family and community medicine physicians and residents, from 62 of the 80 health centres in the autonomous community of Murcia (Spain). Methods: Construction of a questionnaire from a bank of 873 items from a systematic review and a Delphi study. Review by PCC panel of experts (8). Cognitive pretest with 10 FP. Doctors from 62 health centres were invited to participate. With the responses we measured reliability, validity and feasibility. Results: The final questionnaire contains 37 items. We measured reliability through internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha of .915. For construct validity, the appropriate Bartlett's test of sphericity and the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin measure of .889 allowed us to carry out a factor analysis with the extraction of nine factors (Kaiser's rule) with five main factors (Scree test) whose items coincide with the dimensions proposed by the experts. To assess its feasibility we considered the response rate of 31.15%, the response time of 17minutes 23seconds and only .9% of respondents considered the questionnaire long or complex. Conclusions: The ACPAPS questionnaire is a reliable, valid and feasible tool to assess PCC in FM, which has multiple and far-reaching applications.(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Patient-Centered Care/methods , Physicians, Family , Physician-Patient Relations , Primary Health Care , Surveys and Questionnaires , Spain , Patient Care , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Design, construction and validation of a self-completion test that allows the Family Physician (FP) to assess the extent to which he/she integrates person-centred care (PCC) in his/her clinical practice. DESIGN: Qualitative. Questionnaire design. LOCATION: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and fourteen family and community medicine physicians and residents, from 62 of the 80 health centres in the autonomous community of Murcia (Spain). METHODS: Construction of a questionnaire from a bank of 873 items from a systematic review and a Delphi study. Review by PCC panel of experts (8). Cognitive pretest with 10 FP. Doctors from 62 health centres were invited to participate. With the responses we measured reliability, validity and feasibility. RESULTS: The final questionnaire contains 37 items. We measured reliability through internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha of .915. For construct validity, the appropriate Bartlett's test of sphericity and the Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin measure of .889 allowed us to carry out a factor analysis with the extraction of nine factors (Kaiser's rule) with five main factors (Scree test) whose items coincide with the dimensions proposed by the experts. To assess its feasibility we considered the response rate of 31.15%, the response time of 17minutes 23seconds and only .9% of respondents considered the questionnaire long or complex. CONCLUSIONS: The ACPAPS questionnaire is a reliable, valid and feasible tool to assess PCC in FM, which has multiple and far-reaching applications.
Subject(s)
Patient-Centered Care , Physicians, Family , Female , Humans , Male , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Objetivos: Conocer la perspectiva de profesionales sobre aspectos y dimensiones que deberían formar parte indispensable de la Atención Centrada en la Persona (ACP).DiseñoTécnica Delphi.EmplazamientoAtención Primaria.ParticipantesSetenta y cuatro expertos médicos especialistas en medicina familiar y comunitaria (MF), tutores docentes, psicólogos y sociólogos distribuidos por todo el territorio nacional (enero-junio 2015).MétodosRespondieron a tres cuestionarios: primero sobre aspectos que debería tener en cuenta un MF para realizar ACP en todas sus dimensiones. En el segundo se preguntó sobre el grado de acuerdo con cada ítem y dimensión en que lo clasificaba. Las respuestas se priorizaron en un tercer cuestionario (escala Likert, rango de puntuación 1-10).ResultadosLa tasa de respuesta (TR) al primer cuestionario fue de 54,05%, obteniéndose 84 ítems, los más frecuentes Respeto y Atención Integral. El 2.° cuestionario con TR=48,6%, obtuvo 52 ítems con acuerdo superior al 75%. La TR del tercer cuestionario fue de 52,7%, obteniendo 21 ítems con puntuación >9. Los valores más altos correspondieron a aspectos esenciales de la ACP: respeto, atención integral, enfoque biopsicosocial, autonomía del paciente y participación en la toma de decisiones.ConclusionesSe identificaron nuevas dimensiones: Prevención y promoción de la salud, Gestión de Recursos y Competencia Clínica; añadidas a las previamente descritas: Perspectiva biopsicosocial, Médico como persona, Paciente como persona, Relación médico-paciente y Poder y Responsabilidad compartidas.El respeto, la atención integral, el enfoque biopsicosocial, la autonomía del paciente y su participación en la toma de decisiones, son los aspectos más valorados entre los seleccionados por los profesionales participantes.
Objectives: To know the perspective of professionals on aspects and dimensions that should be an indispensable part of Person-Centered Care (PCA).DesignDelphi Technique.LocationPrimary Care.Participants74 medical experts specializing in family and community medicine (FM), teaching tutors, psychologists and sociologists distributed throughout the national territory (January-June 2015).MethodsThey responded to three questionnaires: first, on aspects that a FP should take into account to carry out PCA in all its dimensions. In the second, they asked about the degree of agreement with each item and dimension in which it was classified. The responses were prioritized in a third questionnaire (Likert scale, score range 1-10).ResultsThe response rate (RR) to the 1st questionnaire was 54.05%, obtaining 84 items, the most frequent Respect and Comprehensive Attention. The 2nd questionnaire with RR = 48.6%, obtained 52 items with a degree of agreement greater than 75%. The RR of the 3rd questionnaire was 52.7%, obtaining 21 items with a score> 9. The highest values corresponded to essential aspects of PCA: respect, comprehensive care, biopsychosocial approach, patient autonomy, and participation in decision-making.
Subject(s)
Humans , Health Sciences , Primary Health Care/trends , Patient-Centered Care , Interviews as Topic/methods , Physicians, Family/trends , Patient Outcome AssessmentABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To know the perspective of professionals on aspects and dimensions that should be an indispensable part of Person-Centered Care (PCA). DESIGN: Delphi Technique. LOCATION: Primary Care. PARTICIPANTS: 74 medical experts specializing in family and community medicine (FM), teaching tutors, psychologists and sociologists distributed throughout the national territory (January-June 2015). METHODS: They responded to three questionnaires: first, on aspects that a FP should take into account to carry out PCA in all its dimensions. In the second, they asked about the degree of agreement with each item and dimension in which it was classified. The responses were prioritized in a third questionnaire (Likert scale, score range 1-10). RESULTS: The response rate (RR) to the 1st questionnaire was 54.05%, obtaining 84 items, the most frequent Respect and Comprehensive Attention. The 2nd questionnaire with RR = 48.6%, obtained 52 items with a degree of agreement greater than 75%. The RR of the 3rd questionnaire was 52.7%, obtaining 21 items with a score> 9. The highest values corresponded to essential aspects of PCA: respect, comprehensive care, biopsychosocial approach, patient autonomy, and participation in decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: New dimensions were identified: Prevention and health promotion, Resource Management and Clinical Competence, added to those previously described: Biopsychosocial perspective, Doctor as a person, Patient as a person, Doctor-patient relationship and Shared Power and Responsibility. Respect, comprehensive care, the biopsychosocial approach, the patient's autonomy and their participation in decision-making, are the most valued aspects among those selected by the participating professionals.
Subject(s)
Physician-Patient Relations , Self Care , Delphi Technique , Humans , Patient-Centered Care , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The objectives of this study were to codify the events triggering bedside recording and to report the types of performance issues identified that were then used to inform dedicated ICU quality improvement efforts. DESIGN: This is a retrospective descriptive analysis of a video review program conducted at a single institution from July 2016 to November 2019. SETTING: Surgical and Trauma ICU at a single urban academic quaternary care center. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the surgical and trauma ICU between July 2016 and November 2019 were eligible for the study as all ICU beds in our health system institutions are equipped with closed circuit video/audio monitoring. Through an institutional review board approved program, any event triggering the immediate bedside presence of a provider in the ICU is routinely recorded at the discretion of the care team or tele-intensivist. INTERVENTIONS: A database of these events was created over a 3-year period, and cases were reviewed for content, quality improvement, and educational opportunities. Select recordings were analyzed and shared at multidisciplinary/multiprofessional video review sessions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 286 critical events video recorded and reviewed in the ICUs between July 2016 and November 2019. The most commonly recorded events included: cardiopulmonary arrests (n = 75), intubations (n = 71), and acute clinical decompensation triggered by nonreassuring vital signs (n = 57) or arrhythmias (n = 13). Of these recordings, 59 were shared at video review conferences, where quality of care was assessed and thematic opportunities for improvement were characterized. Recurrent quality improvement themes that were identified included adherence to protocols, the importance of teamwork and closed-loop communication, clearly designated team leadership, and the use of universal precautions. CONCLUSIONS: Video review in the ICU is feasible and presents valuable opportunities for quality improvement and educational discussions.
ABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Pese a la importancia de la «atención centrada en la persona» (ACP), hay evidentes limitaciones para valorarla y medirla, debidas probablemente a la dificultad para definirla. El objetivo del estudio fue identificar herramientas validadas que midiesen la ACP o algunos de sus aspectos en el ámbito de la atención primaria. DISEÑO: Revisión sistemática. Fuentes de datos: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, PSYCinfo, IME-Biomedicina, LILACS y TESEO hasta del 31 de mayo de 2018. SELECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS: Los criterios de inclusión fueron: a) estudios de validación de cuestionarios, revisiones sistemáticas sobre estudios de validación u otros estudios descriptivos, b) realizados todos ellos en el ámbito de la atención primaria y c) que midieran aspectos de la ACP en profesionales y/o pacientes. Dos investigadores revisaron de forma independiente los artículos y sus discrepancias fueron resueltas por un tercer investigador. Extracción de datos: Se recogieron datos sobre los aspectos de la ACP medidos, población a la que se dirige, tipo de cuestionario, y datos sobre validez y fiabilidad. RESULTADOS: Se localizaron 1.415 artículos a los que se añadieron 54 referencias adicionales identificadas a través de referencias de los artículos de la revisión sistemática. Tras una depuración finalmente fueron 75 los artículos que cumplieron todos los criterios y 39 las herramientas identificadas y clasificadas según las dimensiones analizadas. CONCLUSIONES: Debido a la dificultad de medir la ACP en su conjunto, la mayor parte de los artículos hacen referencia solo a alguno de sus aspectos o dimensiones, predominando la perspectiva del paciente frente a la del profesional. Estas herramientas son, no obstante, un importante punto de partida para futuros cuestionarios que intenten valorar de forma integral la ACP
OBJECTIVE: Despite the acknowledged importance of 'Person Centered Care' (PCC), there are obvious limitations for its determination and measurement due to the difficulty of its exact definition. The objective of our review is to identify valid tools that measure the PCC or some of its aspects in the field of Primary Health Care. DESIGN: Systematic review Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, PSYCinfo, IME-Biomedicine, LILACS and TESEO until May 31, 2018. Selection of studies: The inclusion criteria were: validation studies of questionnaires, systematic reviews of validation or other descriptive studies, all of which were carried out in the context of the Primary Health Care and that measured aspects of the PCC in professionals and/or patients. Two investigators independently reviewed the articles and their discrepancies were resolved by a third investigator. Data extraction: Data were collected on the measured ACP aspects, target population, type of questionnaire, and data on validity and reliability. RESULTS: 1,415 articles were located, to which 54 additional references were subsequently added via cross references. Finally, there were 75 articles that fulfilled all the criteria and there were 39 which had the tools identified and classified according to the dimensions analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the difficulty of measuring PCC as a whole, most of the articles refer only to one of its aspects or dimensions, with the patient's perspective prevailing over that of the professional. All these tools are, nevertheless, an important starting point for future questionnaires that attempt an integral approach to the PCC
Subject(s)
Humans , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Patient-Centered Care/standards , Primary Health Care/standards , Physicians, Family , PerceptionABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Despite the acknowledged importance of 'Person Centered Care' (PCC), there are obvious limitations for its determination and measurement due to the difficulty of its exact definition. The objective of our review is to identify valid tools that measure the PCC or some of its aspects in the field of Primary Health Care. DESIGN: Systematic review DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, PSYCinfo, IME-Biomedicine, LILACS and TESEO until May 31, 2018. SELECTION OF STUDIES: The inclusion criteria were: validation studies of questionnaires, systematic reviews of validation or other descriptive studies, all of which were carried out in the context of the Primary Health Care and that measured aspects of the PCC in professionals and/or patients. Two investigators independently reviewed the articles and their discrepancies were resolved by a third investigator. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were collected on the measured ACP aspects, target population, type of questionnaire, and data on validity and reliability. RESULTS: 1,415 articles were located, to which 54 additional references were subsequently added via cross references. Finally, there were 75 articles that fulfilled all the criteria and there were 39 which had the tools identified and classified according to the dimensions analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the difficulty of measuring PCC as a whole, most of the articles refer only to one of its aspects or dimensions, with the patient's perspective prevailing over that of the professional. All these tools are, nevertheless, an important starting point for future questionnaires that attempt an integral approach to the PCC.
Subject(s)
Primary Health Care , Self Care , Humans , Patient-Centered Care , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Societal guidelines exist for the management of pain, agitation, and delirium (PAD) in critically ill patients. This contemporary practice aims for a more awake and interactive patient. Institutions are challenged to translate the interrelated multivariable concepts of PAD into daily clinical practice and to demonstrate improvement in quality outcomes. An interdisciplinary goal-directed approach shows outcomes in high-acuity surgical critical care during the early stages of implementation. METHODS: This study was a prospective preintervention and postintervention design. A formal PAD clinical practice guideline targeting standardized assessment and "light" levels of sedation was instituted. All mechanically ventilated patients admitted to a 24-bed surgical intensive care unit (ICU) at an academic medical center during a 6-month period were included (3 months before and 3 months after implementation). Sedation and agitation were measured using the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS), pain measured using a Behavioral or Numeric Pain Scale (NPS/BPS), and delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Total ventilator days with exposure to continuous opioid or sedative infusions and total ICU days where the patient received a physical activity session exercising out of bed were recorded. RESULTS: There were 106 patients (54 at preintervention and 52 at postintervention). Mean percentage of RASS scores between 0 to -1 increased from 38% to 50% postintervention (P < .02). Mean percentage of NPS/BPS scores within the goal range (<5 for BPS and <3 for NPS) remained stable, 86% to 83% (P = .16). There was a decrease in use of continuous narcotic infusions for mechanically ventilated patients. This was reported as mean percentage of total ventilator days with a continuous opioid infusing: 65% before implementation versus 47% after implementation (P < .01). Mean percentage of ICU days with physical activity sessions increased from 24% to 41% (P < .001). Overall mean ventilator-free days and ICU length of stay were 5.4 to 4.5 days (P = .29) and 11.75 to 9.5 days (P = .20), respectively. CONCLUSION: Measureable patient outcomes are achievable in the early stages of PAD guideline initiatives and can inform future systems-level organizational change. Pain, agitation, and delirium assessment tools form the foundation for clinical implementation and evaluation. High-acuity surgical critical care patients can achieve more time at goal RASS, decreased ventilator days, and less exposure to continuous opioid infusions, all while maintaining stable analgesia.
