Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublikasjoner
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A state-of-the-art review of direct observation tools for assessing competency in person-centred care
Vise andre og tillknytning
2020 (engelsk)Inngår i: International Journal of Nursing Studies, ISSN 0020-7489, E-ISSN 1873-491X, Vol. 109, artikkel-id 103634Artikkel, forskningsoversikt (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Direct observation is a common assessment strategy in health education and training, in which trainees are observed and assessed while undertaking authentic patient care and clinical activities. A variety of direct observation tools have been developed for assessing competency in delivering person-centred care (PCC), yet to our knowledge no review of such tools exists.

OBJECTIVE: To review and evaluate direct observation tools developed to assess health professionals' competency in delivering PCC.

DESIGN: State-of-the-art review DATA SOURCES: Electronic literature searches were conducted in PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL, and Web of Science for English-language articles describing the development and testing of direct observation tools for assessing PCC published until March 2017.

REVIEW METHODS: Three authors independently assessed the records for eligibility. Duplicates were removed and articles were excluded that were irrelevant based on title and/or abstract. All remaining articles were read in full text. A data extraction form was developed to cover and extract information about the tools. The articles were examined for any conceptual or theoretical frameworks underlying tool development and coverage of recognized PCC dimensions was evaluated against a standard framework. The psychometric performance of the tools was obtained directly from the original articles.

RESULT: 16 tools were identified: five assessed PCC holistically and 11 assessed PCC within specific skill domains. Conceptual/theoretical underpinnings of the tools were generally unclear. Coverage of PCC domains varied markedly between tools. Most tools reported assessments of inter-rater reliability, internal consistency reliability and concurrent validity; however, intra-rater reliability, content and construct validity were rarely reported. Predictive and discriminant validity were not assessed.

CONCLUSION: Differences in scope, coverage and content of the tools likely reflect the complexity of PCC and lack of consensus in defining this concept. Although all may serve formative purposes, evidence supporting their use in summative evaluations is limited. Patients were not involved in the development of any tool, which seems intrinsically paradoxical given the aims of PCC. The tools may be useful for providing trainee feedback; however, rigorously tested and patient-derived tools are needed for high-stakes use.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Elsevier, 2020. Vol. 109, artikkel-id 103634
Emneord [en]
Observation-based methods, Patient-centred care, Person-centred care, State-of-the-art review
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-174421DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103634ISI: 000578971400003PubMedID: 32531569Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85086134831OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-174421DiVA, id: diva2:1460508
Forskningsfinansiär
Swedish Research Council, 2009-1088Tilgjengelig fra: 2020-08-24 Laget: 2020-08-24 Sist oppdatert: 2023-03-24bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

fulltext(1665 kB)258 nedlastinger
Filinformasjon
Fil FULLTEXT01.pdfFilstørrelse 1665 kBChecksum SHA-512
53dabe1cd4912f169437117f8cf9e49e01b6250b6b24192c58c3c22c6a34aa9a16dcc850801fd6b7ea9879da1b20824d51a3657e92fa55352cd06f254c2fb54b
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMedScopus

Person

Boström, Eva

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Boström, Eva
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
International Journal of Nursing Studies

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Totalt: 258 nedlastinger
Antall nedlastinger er summen av alle nedlastinger av alle fulltekster. Det kan for eksempel være tidligere versjoner som er ikke lenger tilgjengelige

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 439 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf