What is measured matters: A scoping review of analysis methods used for qualitative patient reported experience measure data

被引:2
作者
Engstrom, Teyl [1 ]
Shteiman, Max [2 ]
Kelly, Kim [3 ]
Sullivan, Clair [1 ,4 ]
Pole, Jason D. [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Queensland Digital Hlth Ctr, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Herston, Qld, Australia
[2] Univ Queensland, Ochsner Clin Sch, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[3] IQVIA, Qualitat Res Ctr Excellence, Tucson, AZ USA
[4] Royal Brisbane & Womens Hosp, Herston, Qld, Australia
[5] Univ Toronto, Dalla Lana Sch Publ Hlth, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
Routinely collected heath data; Patient reported experience measures; Qualitative research; Natural language processing; CARE; SATISFACTION; INFORMATION; SYSTEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2024.105559
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Introduction: Hospitals are increasingly turning to patients for valuable feedback regarding their care experience. A common method to collect this information is patient reported experience measures (PREMs) surveys. Health care workers report qualitative PREMs as more interesting, relevant, and informative than quantitative survey responses. However, a major barrier to utilising qualitative PREMs data to drive quality improvements is a lack of resources to analyse the data. This scoping review aimed to review the methods used to analyse qualitative PREMs survey data from routine hospital care. Methods: We utilised the JBI scoping review methodology, and searched four databases for articles from 2013 to 2023 which analysed qualitative PREMs survey data from routine care in hospitals. Study characteristics were extracted, as well as the analysis method - specifically, whether the study used traditional manual analysis methods in which the researcher reads the text and categorise the data, or automated methods utilising computers and algorithms to read and categorise the data. Results: From 960 unique articles, 123 went through full-text review and 54 were deemed eligible. 75.9 % used only manual content analysis methods to analyse the qualitative responses, 16.7 % of studies used a combination of manual and automated methods, and only 7.4 % used exclusively automated methods. Automated methods were used in 27.5 % of studies published 2019-2023, compared to 14.3 % of studies published 2013-2018. All bar one study using automated methods focused on investigating the validity of the automated methodology or used it to complement manual content analysis. Conclusion: The studies included in this review show a transition from traditional time-consuming manual analyses to computerised methods enabling analysis at a larger scale. As the volume of PREMs data collected grows, efficient and effective ways to analyse qualitative PREMs data at scale are required to enable health services to capture the patient voice and drive consumer-centred improvements in care.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 82 条
  • [1] Assessing the quality of bereavement care after perinatal death: development and piloting of a questionnaire to assess parents' experiences
    Aiyelaagbe, Esther
    Scott, Rebecca E.
    Holmes, Victoria
    Lane, Emma
    Heazell, Alexander E. P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2017, 37 (07) : 931 - 936
  • [2] Relationship between patient reported experience (PREMs) and patient reported outcomes (PROMs) in elective surgery
    Black, Nick
    Varaganum, Mira
    Hutchings, Andrew
    [J]. BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2014, 23 (07) : 534 - 542
  • [3] Patients' cancer care perceptions conceptualized through the Cancer Experience Measurement Framework
    Bourque, Michaela A.
    Loiselle, Carmen G.
    [J]. BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [4] Natural Language Processing of Patient-Experience Comments After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty
    Bovonratwet, Patawut
    Shen, Tony S.
    Islam, Wasif
    Ast, Michael P.
    Haas, Steven B.
    Su, Edwin P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2021, 36 (03) : 927 - 934
  • [5] Is There an Association Between Negative Patient-Experience Comments and Perioperative Outcomes After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?
    Bovonratwet, Patawut
    Shen, Tony S.
    Islam, Wasif
    Sculco, Peter K.
    Padgett, Douglas E.
    Su, Edwin P.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2021, 36 (06) : 2016 - 2023
  • [6] Evaluation of an Inpatient Psychiatric Mother-Baby Unit Using a Patient Reported Experience and Outcome Measure
    Branjerdporn, Grace
    Hudson, Carly
    Sheshinski, Roy
    Parlato, Linda
    Healey, Lyndall
    Ellis, Aleshia
    Reid, Alice
    Finnerty, Catherine
    Arnott, Rachelle
    Curtain, Rebecca
    McLean, Miranda
    Parmar, Snehal
    Roberts, Susan
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2022, 19 (09)
  • [7] Braun V., 2006, QUAL RES PSYCHOL, V3, P77, DOI [DOI 10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238, 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
  • [8] The patient experience of ambulatory cancer treatment: a descriptive study
    Bridge, E.
    Conn, L. Gotlib
    Dhanju, S.
    Singh, S.
    Moody, L.
    [J]. CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 (04) : E482 - E493
  • [9] Cancer services patient experience in England: quantitative and qualitative analyses of the National Cancer Patient Experience Survey
    Brookes, Gavin
    Baker, Paul
    [J]. BMJ SUPPORTIVE & PALLIATIVE CARE, 2023, 13 (E3) : e1149 - e1155
  • [10] Clown doctors and forensic paediatricians enhance the patient experience at the Royal Children's Hospital in Melbourne
    Brys, Trusha
    Symons, David
    Dean, Joanne
    Smith, Jennifer Anne Sutherland
    [J]. CHILD ABUSE REVIEW, 2022, 31 (05)