Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A state-of-the-art review of direct observation tools for assessing competency in person-centred care
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: International Journal of Nursing Studies, ISSN 0020-7489, E-ISSN 1873-491X, Vol. 109, article id 103634Article, review/survey (Refereed) 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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2020. Vol. 109, article id 103634
Keywords [en]
Observation-based methods, Patient-centred care, Person-centred care, State-of-the-art review
National Category
Nursing Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy
Identifiers
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
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2009-1088Available from: 2020-08-24 Created: 2020-08-24 Last updated: 2023-03-24Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1665 kB)255 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1665 kBChecksum SHA-512
53dabe1cd4912f169437117f8cf9e49e01b6250b6b24192c58c3c22c6a34aa9a16dcc850801fd6b7ea9879da1b20824d51a3657e92fa55352cd06f254c2fb54b
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Boström, Eva

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Boström, Eva
By organisation
Department of Nursing
In the same journal
International Journal of Nursing Studies
NursingHealth Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 255 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 431 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf