The COSMIN criteria were developed in an international Delphi study, which aimed at developing consensus on definitions and assessments of measurement properties. The remaining studies were extracted and assessed by one reviewer only (EC). To reduce any bias that may occur through single reviewer assessment, two randomly selected studies were extracted and assessed independently by two (EC and IS). Both rating instruments are described below. Second, the quality of the psychometric properties of the identified rating scales was assessed using the quality criteria developed by Terwee et al. First, the methodological quality of the studies was assessed by applying the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist with a 4-point scale. The process of assessing the quality consisted of two distinct steps. The data extraction sheet contained both descriptive data and data to assess the quality of the included studies. Overall, this is the first review which provides a comprehensive overview of existing information needs measures and their quality.ĭata extraction was conducted by using a data extraction sheet, which was already used in other systematic reviews of measures conducted by the research team. Therefore we aimed to identify studies assessing psychometric properties of measures capturing patient information needs, to evaluate the methodological quality of these studies and to assess the quality of the psychometric properties of the identified measures. For this reason, psychometrically sound measures are needed to assess individual information needs. Standardized measurement instruments aid to uncover those needs and allow to give relevant information to the patient. The very first step to satisfy individual information needs is to elicit and understand these. Health communication tailored to individual needs enhances the information processed by the patient and supports motivation and behavior changes. Thus, it is important to assess individual needs and tailor information accordingly. Not all patients wish for all information and the exact information needs can vary individually. With this overload patients tend to forget relevant information or feel stressed.
Too much information can lead to a cognitive overload for the patients. Nonetheless, providing all potentially relevant information can be problematic too. On the other hand, patients themselves have been found insecure or reluctant to voice their personal information needs. Especially when facing a life-threatening disease, giving the right amount of information to the patient has been found challenging for the HCP as HCPs often assume that too much information might harm. In addition, some HCPs lack the skills to assess the patients’ information needs and to provide tailored information. Misunderstandings between patient and clinician can lead to missing or false information and/or different appraisal or perception of the importance of information. On the one hand, HCPs tend to underestimate patients’ information needs and may as well overestimate the amount of information given. Studies show that patients often do not receive satisfactory information from their healthcare provider (HCP). treatment adherence, emotional and psychological health/wellbeing, quality of life). Furthermore, the provision of disease related information is an important determinant for patient-reported health-related outcomes (e.g. Meeting information needs increases treatment satisfaction and aids informed decision making. Patient information has been found to be one of the most important dimensions of patient-centered care. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Ĭompeting interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.ĭata Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.įunding: This project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (project number: 01GX1043). Received: ApAccepted: DecemPublished: January 31, 2019Ĭopyright: © 2019 Christalle et al. PLoS ONE 14(1):Įditor: Karima Chaabna, Weill Cornell Medical College in Qatar, QATAR (2019) Assessment of patient information needs: A systematic review of measures. Citation: Christalle E, Zill JM, Frerichs W, Härter M, Nestoriuc Y, Dirmaier J, et al.
0 kommentar(er)
