Tools
Tools
Morrissey, M, Shepherd, E, Kinley, E, McClatchey, K and Pinnock, H (2021) Effectiveness and perceptions of using templates in long-term condition reviews: a systematic synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies. The British journal of general practice, 71 (710). e652-e659. ISSN 0960-1643
|
Text
Effectiveness and perceptions of using templates in longterm condition reviews a systematic synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (307kB) | Preview |
|
|
Text
Effectiveness and perceptions of using templates in long-term condition reviews a systematic synthesis of quantitative and qualitative studies. Corrections.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (42kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Background Review templates are commonly used in long-term condition (LTC) consultations to standardise care for patients and promote consistent data recording. However, templates may affect interactions during the review and, potentially, inhibit patient-centred care. Aim To systematically review the literature about the impact that LTC review templates have on process and health outcomes, and the views of health professionals and patients on using review templates in consultations. Design and setting Parallel qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews. Method Following Cochrane methodology, nine databases were searched (1995–2019; updated July 2020) for clinical trials and qualitative studies of LTC templates in healthcare settings. Duplicate selection, risk-of-bias assessment, and data extraction were performed. The quantitative and qualitative analyses were conducted in parallel, and findings synthesised narratively. Results In total, 12 qualitative and 14 quantitative studies were included (two studies reported both qualitative and quantitative data, and were included in both analyses). Review templates were well used, but the only study to assess health outcomes showed no effect. Templates can improve documentation of key measures and act as a reminder tool; however, they can restrict the review process, and risk health professionals’ agendas being prioritised over those of patients. Templates may also limit opportunities to discuss individuals’ concerns about living with their condition and act as a barrier to providing patient-centred care. Conclusion Future research should evaluate health, as well as process, outcomes. The potential benefits of templates in improving documentation should be balanced against concerns that ‘tick boxes’ may override patient agendas, unless templates are designed to promote patient-centred care.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Humans; Perception; Qualitative Research; Health Personnel; Patient-Centered Care; Bias; chronic conditions; delivery of health care; long-term conditions; patient-centred care; primary care; review templates; Bias; Health Personnel; Humans; Patient-Centered Care; Perception; Qualitative Research; 1117 Public Health and Health Services; Public Health |
| Subjects: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology |
| Divisions: | Psychology (from Sep 2019) |
| Publisher: | Royal College of General Practitioners |
| SWORD Depositor: | A Symplectic |
| Date Deposited: | 10 May 2024 08:54 |
| Last Modified: | 10 May 2024 09:00 |
| DOI or ID number: | 10.3399/bjgp.2020.0963 |
| URI: | https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/23209 |
 |
View Item |