Measuring the Patient Experience of Mental Health Care: A Systematic and Critical Review of Patient-Reported Experience Measures.
PPA. 2020-11-01; Volume 14: 2147-2161
DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s255264
Lire sur PubMed
1. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020 Nov 3;14:2147-2161. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S255264.
eCollection 2020.
Measuring the Patient Experience of Mental Health Care: A Systematic and
Critical Review of Patient-Reported Experience Measures.
Fernandes S(1), Fond G(1), Zendjidjian XY(1), Baumstarck K(1), Lançon C(1),
Berna F(2), Schurhoff F(2), Aouizerate B(2), Henry C(2), Etain B(2), Samalin
L(2), Leboyer M(2), Llorca PM(2), Coldefy M(3), Auquier P(1), Boyer L(1); French
PREMIUM Group.
Author information:
(1)Aix-Marseille University, School of Medicine – La Timone Medical Campus, EA
3279: CEReSS – Health Service Research and Quality of Life Center, Marseille,
France.
(2)FondaMental Foundation, Créteil, France.
(3)Institute for Research and Information in Health Economics (IRDES), Paris,
France.
BACKGROUND: There is growing concern about measuring patient experience with
mental health care. There are currently numerous patient-reported experience
measures (PREMs) available for mental health care, but there is little guidance
for selecting the most suitable instruments. The objective of this systematic
review was to provide an overview of the psychometric properties and the content
of available PREMs.
METHODS: A comprehensive review following the preferred reporting items for
systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted using the
MEDLINE database with no date restrictions. The content of PREMs was analyzed
using an inductive qualitative approach, and the methodological quality was
assessed according to Pesudovs quality criteria.
RESULTS: A total of 86 articles examining 75 PREMs and totaling 1932 items were
included. Only four PREMs used statistical methods from item response theory
(IRT). The 1932 items covered seven key mental health care domains:
interpersonal relationships (22.6%), followed by respect and dignity (19.3%),
access and care coordination (14.9%), drug therapy (14.1%), information (9.6%),
psychological care (6.8%) and care environment (6.1%). Additionally, a few items
focused on patient satisfaction (6.7%) rather than patient experience. No
instrument covered the latent trait continuum of patient experience, as defined
by the inductive qualitative approach, and the psychometric properties of the
instruments were heterogeneous.
CONCLUSION: This work is a critical step in the creation of an item library to
measure mental health care patient-reported experience that will be used in
France to develop, validate, and standardize item banks and computerized
adaptive testing (CAT) based on IRT. It will also provide internationally
replicable measures that will allow direct comparisons of mental health care
systems.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02491866.
© 2020 Fernandes et al.
DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S255264
PMCID: PMC7653683
PMID: 33192054
Conflict of interest statement: Bruno Aouizerate reports personal fees from
Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Sanofi, and Lundbeck, outside the submitted work.
Pierre-Michel Llorca reports personal fees from lundbeck, otsuka, Sanofi,
Recordatti, and Gedeon Richter, and personal fees and non-financial support from
Janssen, outside the submitted work. The authors report no other possible
conflicts of interest in this work.