Journal of evaluation in clinical practice
-
Review
Routine outcome monitoring and feedback on physical or mental health status: evidence and theory.
Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) is an important quality tool for measuring outcome of treatment in health care. The objective of this article is to summarize the evidence base that supports the provision of feedback on ROM results to (mental) health care professionals and patients. Also, some relevant theoretical aspects are considered. ⋯ ROM appears especially effective for the monitoring of patients who are not doing well in therapy. Further research into this topic and the clinical-and cost-effectiveness of ROM is recommended, especially in mental health care for both adults and children. Also, more theory-driven research is needed with relevant conceptualizations such as Feedback Intervention Theory, Therapeutic Assessment.
-
The objective of this review is to systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of aromatherapy in the treatment of high blood pressure. ⋯ The existing trial evidence does not show convincingly that aromatherapy is effective for hypertension. Future studies should be of high quality with a particular emphasis on designing an adequate control intervention.
-
The Cochrane Collaboration is strongly encouraging the use of a newly developed tool, the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool (CCRBT), for all review groups. However, the psychometric properties of this tool to date have yet to be described. Thus, the objective of this study was to add information about psychometric properties of the CCRBT including inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity, in comparison with the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP). ⋯ Both tools performed quite differently when evaluating the risk of bias or methodological quality of studies in knowledge translation interventions for cancer pain. The newly introduced CCRBT assigned these studies a higher risk of bias. Its psychometric properties need to be more thoroughly validated, in a range of research fields, to understand fully how to interpret results from its application.
-
Many clinical guidelines for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention contain risk estimation charts/calculators. These have shown a tendency to overestimate risk, which indicates that there might be theoretical flaws in the algorithms. Total cholesterol is a frequently used variable in the risk estimates. Some studies indicate that the predictive properties of cholesterol might not be as straightforward as widely assumed. Our aim was to document the strength and validity of total cholesterol as a risk factor for mortality in a well-defined, general Norwegian population without known CVD at baseline. ⋯ Our study provides an updated epidemiological indication of possible errors in the CVD risk algorithms of many clinical guidelines. If our findings are generalizable, clinical and public health recommendations regarding the 'dangers' of cholesterol should be revised. This is especially true for women, for whom moderately elevated cholesterol (by current standards) may prove to be not only harmless but even beneficial.
-
Building a strong and positive safety culture in health care teams and organizations is essential for patient safety. Measuring individual perceptions of safety climate is an integral part of this process. Evidence of the successful application and potential usefulness of this approach is increasingly available for secondary care settings but little is known about the safety climate in UK primary care. We therefore aimed to measure perceptions of safety climate in primary care. Further aims were to determine whether perceptions varied significantly between practice teams and according to specific participant and practice characteristics. ⋯ This was the first known attempt to measure perceptions of safety climate in UK primary care with a validated instrument specifically developed for that purpose. Reported perceptions of the prevailing safety climate were generally positive. This may reflect ongoing efforts to build a strong safety culture in primary care or alternatively point to an overestimation of the effectiveness of local safety systems. The significant variation in perception between certain staff groups has potential safety implications and may have to be aligned for a positive and strong safety culture to be built. While safety climate measurement has various benefits at the individual, practice team and regional level, further research of its association with specific safety outcomes is required.