Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Patient-reported experience measures show heterogeneous conceptualization and measurement in non-hospital care settingsMapping Patient Experiences in Community and Home Care Settings

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that PREMs in community care are currently heterogeneous and under-represent equity-related domains and specific populations.

This scoping review synthesized 168 studies to map how patient-reported experiences (PREs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are conceptualized, measured, and utilized within primary, home, and community care settings. The review highlights a significant lack of standardization in the current literature. Of the 168 studies, 105 exclusively used validated PREMs, while 45 used ad hoc instruments, and 14 utilized a combination of both.

Commonly assessed domains include communication and information, access to services, patient-professional relationships, quality of care, continuity, care coordination, and patient involvement. However, the authors note several significant gaps in the current evidence base. Specifically, equity-related domains, pediatric populations, older adults, and data from low- and middle-income countries are underrepresented in current research.

Clinical application of PREMs in non-hospital settings has the potential to improve person-centered care. However, the authors note that current PREMs do not yet fully capture the diversity of patient experiences due to heterogeneous measurement and a lack of inclusion of equity-sensitive domains. Further standardization is required to improve the utility of these tools in diverse community settings.

This scoping review looked at 168 different studies to see how patient-reported experiences (PREs) and measures (PREMs) are used in primary, home, and community care. The goal was to understand how these tools are designed and used to capture how patients feel about their care.

Researchers found that while many studies use validated tools, others use custom-made instruments. Common areas of focus include communication, access to services, and the relationship between patients and professionals. However, the study noted that several important areas are currently under-represented. These include equity-related topics, care for children, and care for older adults.

Because the way these experiences are measured is currently inconsistent, it can be hard to compare results across different settings. While these tools have the potential to improve care, they are not yet perfectly consistent. This review suggests that more standardized tools and a broader focus on diverse populations are needed to fully capture the variety of patient experiences.

What this means for you:
Patient-reported measures are useful for improving care but currently lack consistency and diversity in many areas.

Common questions

What are patient-reported experience measures?

Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are tools used to capture how patients feel about their care. They focus on areas like communication, access to services, and the relationship between patients and professionals. These tools help providers understand the quality of care from the patient's perspective in home and community settings.

What areas are currently under-represented in these reports?

The review found that several important areas are not well-represented in current data. These include equity-related domains, care for pediatric populations, and care for older adults. Additionally, there is less data available from low- and middle-income countries.

Are these measurement tools consistent across different studies?

No, the measurement of these experiences is currently inconsistent. Out of 168 studies, 105 used validated tools, 45 used ad hoc instruments, and 14 used a combination of both. This variety means that the way patient experiences are captured can vary significantly between different care settings.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
IntroductionPatient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are increasingly used to evaluate person-centred and value-based healthcare. However, evidence regarding their application in primary, home, and community care remains fragmented.ObjectiveTo map how patient-reported experiences (PREs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) have been conceptualized, measured, and used across primary, home, and community care settings.MethodsThe review followed Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 2025. Peer-reviewed studies investigating PREs or PREMs in primary, home, or community care were included. Data were synthesized using descriptive statistics, thematic content analysis, and narrative synthesis.ResultsOverall, 168 studies were included, predominantly quantitative and conducted in high-income countries. Among them, 105 exclusively used validated PREMs, 45 used ad hoc instruments, and 14 combined both approaches. The most frequently assessed domains were communication and information, access to services, patient–professional relationships, quality of care, continuity, care coordination, and patient involvement. Equity-related domains were less consistently represented, while pediatric populations, older adults, and low- and middle-income countries were underrepresented.DiscussionPREM use in primary, home, and community care is increasing but remains heterogeneous in terms of conceptualization, measurement approaches, and domains assessed. Greater standardization of PREMs and broader inclusion of equity-sensitive domains are needed to strengthen the relevance and comparability of patient experience assessment across care settings.ConclusionPREMs offer substantial potential to support person-centred quality improvement beyond hospital settings, but their current use does not yet fully capture the diversity of patient experiences. Future research should prioritize standardized and context-sensitive measurement approaches, greater attention to equity, and stronger representation of underserved populations and low- and middle-income settings.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/R5SQF, Identifier: 10.17605/OSF.IO/R5SQF.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.