Search

Objective: To determine the types and effectiveness of interventions to increase the knowledge about, attitudes towards, and use of standardized outcome measures in rehabilitation professionals. Data sources: An electronic search using Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Ergonomics Abstracts, Sports Discus. The search is current to February 2016. Study selection: All study designs testing interventions were included as were all provider and patient types. Two reviewers independently conducted a title and abstract review, followed by a full-text review. Data extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted a priori variables and used consensus for disagreements. Quality assessment was conducted using the Assessment of Quantitative Studies published by the Effective Public Health Practice Group. Data synthesis: We identified 11 studies involving at least 1200 providers. Nine of the studies showed improvements in outcome measure use rates but only three of these studies used an experimental or quasi-experimental design. Eight of the studies used an educational approach in the intervention and three used audit and feedback. Poor intervention description and quality of studies limited recommendations. Conclusions: Increased attention to testing interventions focused on known barriers, matched to behavior change techniques, and with stronger designs is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure (Mercer et al., 2004) is a patient-rated experience measure of practitioner empathy, developed and validated within adult health services. This study reports the feasibility, acceptability, reliability and validity of three adapted versions of the original CARE measure for the paediatric setting, namely the Visual CARE Measure 5Q, 10Q and 10Q Parent (also known as the Paediatric CARE Measure). Three hundred and sixty-nine participants (N = 149 children (40%) and N = 220 parents (60%)) completed the measure following consultation with an Allied Health Professional (AHP). AHPs felt it was feasible to use the measure in routine practice and the majority of children and parents found the measure easy to understand (98%) and complete (98%). Internal reliability (Cronbach’s α) was .746 for the 5Q, .926 for the 10Q and .963 for the 10Q parent. Few participants used the ‘not applicable’ response (N = 28 (8%)), suggesting high content validity. AHPs found the measures relevant (95%) and useful (90%) and reported that they were likely to use them again (96%). The Visual CARE Measure shows promise as a useful tool to enable children and their parents to give their views. Further research on the tool’s reliability and validity is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]