Background: 'What matters to me' is a five-category preference elicitation tool to assist clients and professionals in choosing long-term care. This study aimed to evaluate the use of and experiences with this tool.

Methods: A mixed-method process evaluation was applied. Participants were 71 clients or relatives, and 12 professionals. They were all involved in decision-making on long-term care. Data collection comprised online user activity logs (N = 71), questionnaires (N = 38) and interviews (N = 20). Descriptive statistics was used for quantitative data, and a thematic analysis for qualitative data.

Results: Sixty-nine per cent of participants completed one or more categories in an average time of 6.9 (±0.03) minutes. The tool was rated 6.63 (±0.88) of 7 in the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire (PSSUQ). Ninety-five per cent experienced the tool as useful in practice. Suggestions for improvement included a separate version for relatives and a non-digital version. Although professionals thought the potentially extended consultation time could be problematic, all participants would recommend the tool to others.

Conclusion: 'What matters to me' seems useful to assist clients and professionals with preference elicitation in long-term care. Evaluation of the impact on consultations between clients and professionals by using 'What matters to me' is needed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9291068PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13509DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

clients professionals
16
long-term care
16
'what matters
16
matters me'
16
process evaluation
8
preference elicitation
8
assist clients
8
clients
5
professionals
5
professionals elicit
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!