背景:患者导航干预(PNI)可以提供个性化支持,并促进健康和社会护理服务的适当协调或延续。在线PNI已显示出提高患者知识的巨大潜力,过渡准备,自我效能感,和使用服务。然而,特征(即,干预类型,交货方式,持续时间,频率,成果和成果衡量标准,干预改变的基础理论或机制,和影响)现有的在线PNI支持个人的健康和社会需求的疾病仍不清楚。
目的:对现有文献的范围界定综述旨在确定文献中报道的现有在线PNI的特征。
方法:根据JoannaBriggs研究所框架中概述的指南进行了范围审查。使用MEDLINE搜索1989年至2022年之间在在线PNI上发表的同行评审文献,CINAHL,Embase,PsycInfo,和Cochrane图书馆数据库。两名独立评审员进行了2个级别的筛选。进行数据抽象以概述关键研究特征(例如,研究设计,人口,和干预特征)。采用描述性统计和定性内容分析对数据进行分析。
结果:共有100项研究符合纳入标准。我们的研究结果表明,各种研究设计被用来描述和评估在线PNI,文献在2003年至2022年之间在西方国家出版。在这些研究中,39项(39%)研究为随机对照试验。此外,我们注意到自2019年以来报告的在线PNI有所增加。大多数研究涉及患有癌症的白人女性,并且观察到缺乏70岁或以上的参与者。大多数在线PNI通过导航提供支持,自我管理和生活方式的改变,咨询,Coaching,教育,或支持的组合。在交付方式方面注意到了变化,持续时间,和频率。只有少数研究描述了指导干预的理论框架或改变机制。
结论:据我们所知,这是第一个全面综合现有在线PNI文献的综述,通过关注这一领域干预措施和研究的特点。报告出版国不一致,人口特征,干预的持续时间和频率,缺乏使用基础理论和工作机制来为干预发展提供信息,为未来在线PNI的报告提供指导。
BACKGROUND: Patient navigation interventions (PNIs) can provide personalized support and promote appropriate coordination or continuation of health and social care services. Online PNIs have demonstrated excellent potential for improving patient knowledge, transition readiness, self-efficacy, and use of services. However, the characteristics (ie, intervention type, mode of delivery, duration, frequency, outcomes and outcome measures, underlying theories or mechanisms of change of the intervention, and impact) of existing online PNIs to support the health and social needs of individuals with illness remain unclear.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review of the existing literature aims to identify the characteristics of existing online PNIs reported in the literature.
METHODS: A scoping review based on the guidelines outlined in the Joanna Briggs Institute framework was conducted. A search for peer-reviewed literature published between 1989 and 2022 on online PNIs was conducted using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library databases. Two independent reviewers conducted 2 levels of screening. Data abstraction was conducted to outline key study characteristics (eg, study design, population, and intervention characteristics). The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 100 studies met the inclusion criteria. Our findings indicate that a variety of study designs are used to describe and evaluate online PNIs, with literature being published between 2003 and 2022 in Western countries. Of these studies, 39 (39%) studies were randomized controlled trials. In addition, we noticed an increase in reported online PNIs since 2019. The majority of studies involved White females with a diagnosis of cancer and a lack of participants aged 70 years or older was observed. Most online PNIs provide support through navigation, self-management and lifestyle changes, counseling, coaching, education, or a combination of support. Variation was noted in terms of mode of delivery, duration, and frequency. Only a small number of studies described theoretical frameworks or change mechanisms to guide intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first review to comprehensively synthesize the existing literature on online PNIs, by focusing on the characteristics of interventions and studies in this area. Inconsistency in reporting the country of publication, population characteristics, duration and frequency of interventions, and a lack of the use of underlying theories and working mechanisms to inform intervention development, provide guidance for the reporting of future online PNIs.