Objective:
This scoping review aimed to map how occupational therapists evaluate the outcomes of services they provide within primary care. This evidence was considered in relation to how identified outcome evaluation methods align to principles of value-based health care.
Introduction:
Primary care services are experiencing unprecedented demands. Occupational therapy is an allied health profession that supports health and care provision in primary care, using a timely and proactive approach. There has been a notable increase in occupational therapy roles across primary care services in the past decade; however, the mechanisms for evaluating outcomes and the wider impact of these services remain under-researched. The aim of value-based health care, a global transformative approach, is to establish better health outcomes for individuals and communities through addressing value in system-wide care. However, it is not yet clear how evaluation methods used within occupational therapy align to the principles of a value-based agenda.
Inclusion criteria:
Peer-reviewed journal articles and gray literature written in English were included to identify outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of occupational therapy services provided in a primary care setting. Outcome evaluation methods used exclusively for the purpose of conducting research and not for capturing data within an occupational therapy primary care setting as part of routine clinical practice were excluded.
Methods:
This review followed JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The literature search was undertaken during June and July 2022. The following databases were searched from their earliest dates of availability: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Scopus, AMED, and Web of Science. Two reviewers extracted data, supported by use of an extraction form developed by the reviewers. Findings were mapped using a framework developed based on key principles of value-based health care.
Results:
From 2394 articles, 16 eligible studies were included in the review. Of these, 9 were quantitative and 7 were of mixed methods design. Studies were from the UK, USA, Sweden, Spain, and Canada. The occupational therapy services represented were mainly heterogeneous. Four services were part of multidisciplinary programs of care and 12 services were specific to occupational therapy. Identified outcome evaluation methods broadly aligned to principles of value-based health care, with most alignment noted for measures demonstrating the aim of establishing better health. A wide range of evaluation methods were described to address both individual-level and service-level outcomes, with the use of patient-reported outcome measures identified in 13 studies. To capture patient experience, most studies reported a variety of methods. The aim of reducing the per capita cost of health care was least represented in the literature.
Conclusion:
This scoping review highlights a multifaceted but inconsistent approach to measuring the outcomes of occupational therapy provided in primary care. This has implications for establishing effectiveness and capturing data at scale to assist with wider planning of care and to enable the profession to demonstrate its contribution to value-based health care.
Review registration:
Open Science Framework https://osf.io/hnaq4/
