Patient-reported outcome and experience measures for peripheral venous catheters: a scoping review protocol
The purpose of this scoping review is to conduct a systematic search and establish the current state of evidence for tools and instruments used to measure self-reported outcomes and experiences, including satisfaction scores, specifically for peripheral venous access devices (PVADs).
A systematic search of the literature will be conducted using medical databases including: MEDLINE (Ovid); CINAHL (EbscoHost); PubMed (NCBI); and Scopus (Elsevier); Google (Scholar); and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.
Experimental, and observational studies, published in English, after 1990 will be eligible for inclusion if they: consist of (i) a survey, instrument or tool that is designed to (ii) collect outcome, experience and/or satisfaction data, relating to PVAD insertion, care, maintenance and/or removal, among (iii) adult and paediatric participants.
PVAD-specific patient-reported outcome and experience measures are necessary for researchers, clinicians and policy decision makers to explore more thoroughly the quality of PVAD care provided, and further inform health economic analyses in the context of quality improvement interventions for vascular access devices. This scoping review will establish the existence—or paucity—of instruments to measure these selfreported outcomes and experiences of PVADs, in order to guide value-based healthcare delivery into the future.
Healthcare delivery is currently experiencing a significant change from what was traditionally a volume-based model, to one that is based on the value of healthcare delivery (Squitieri et al, 2017). The aim of a value-based healthcare (VBHC) delivery model is to improve patient safety, quality of care and cost-efficiency of interventions (Elf et al, 2017) by: effectively engaging consumers (Wilson et al, 2016); improving care coordination (Chen et al, 2013); and, endeavouring to reduce purchasing costs (Haywood, 2010).
VBHC considers the benefits of care to patients relative to the costs of achieving these (eg staff, consumables). At a policy level, this involves a cost-utility analysis which, while more complex than standard economic analysis, has been adopted as core business for many healthcare systems, due to a high rate of healthcare inflation, in the context of finite resources (Brown et al, 2003). At the foundation of VBHC delivery is evidence-based medicine, which is the implementation of care that is supported by high-level evidence, carried out by skilled/expert clinicians, taking into account patient values and the perceived value of care provided (Brown et al, 2003; Svet al, 2000). For example, a high-cost procedure that demonstrates little benefit is not an efficient use of funds, while cost-saving poor-quality care is similarly inefficient (Porter and Teisberg, 2006). In practice, this has led to Value-Based Insurance Designs (relevant for primarily privatized health systems), which are aimed at minimizing both under-use and over-use of healthcare systems (Fendrick et al, 2010). Public health systems have similarly begun to implement this concept of value in their national systems, such as use in the assessment of pharmaceuticals prior to insurance (public or private) subsidization (Claxton et al, 2008).
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting British Journal of Nursing and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for nurses. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:
Limited access to clinical or professional articles
Unlimited access to the latest news, blogs and video content