↓ Skip to main content

Quality in the provision of headache care. 1: systematic review of the literature and commentary

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Headache and Pain, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quality in the provision of headache care. 1: systematic review of the literature and commentary
Published in
The Journal of Headache and Pain, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10194-012-0466-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michele Peters, Suraj Perera, Elizabeth Loder, Crispin Jenkinson, Raquel Gil Gouveia, Rigmor Jensen, Zaza Katsarava, Timothy J. Steiner

Abstract

Widely accepted quality indicators for headache care would provide a basis not only for assessment of care but also, and more importantly, for its improvement. The objective of the study was to identify and summarize existing information on such indicators: specifically, did indicators exist, how had they been developed, what aspects of headache care did they relate to and how and with what utility were they being used? A systematic review of the medical literature was performed. A total of 32 articles met criteria for inclusion. We identified 55 existing headache quality indicators of which 37 evaluated processes of headache care. Most were relevant only to specific populations of patients and to care delivered in high-resource settings. Indicators had been used to describe overall quality of headache care at a national level, but not systematically applied to the evaluation and improvement of headache services in other settings. Some studies had evaluated the use of existing disability and quality of life instruments, but their findings had not been incorporated into quality indicators. Existing headache care quality indicators are incomplete and inadequate for purpose. They emphasize processes of care rather than structure or outcomes, and are not widely applicable to different levels and locations of headache care. Furthermore, they do not fully incorporate accepted evidence regarding optimal methods of care. There is a clear need for consensus-based indicators that fully reflect patients' and public-health priorities. Ideally, these will be valid across cultures and health-care settings.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Professor 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Neuroscience 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 14 26%