Development and validation of trigger tools in primary care: A scoping review

0Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In primary care, trigger tools have been utilized to evaluate and identify patient safety events. The use of trigger tools could help clinicians and patients detect adverse events in a patient’s medical record. Due to a lack of research on the process development of trigger tools in primary care, the purpose of this scoping review is to investigate the trigger development and validation process in primary care settings. A scoping review methodology was used to map the published literature using the Joanna Briggs Methodology of performing scoping review. We considered only studies published in English in the last five years and included both qualitative and quantitative study designs. The final review included five articles. The primary care and combined primary-secondary care studies are included to gain more knowledge in the process development and validation of trigger tools. The trigger tool development process begins with clearly defining the triggers, which are then programmed into a combined computerized algorithm. The validation process was then carried out in two steps by both physician and non-physician experts for content and concurrent validity. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of the final algorithm were critical in determining the validity of each trigger. This study provided a comprehensive guide to developing trigger tools, emphasizing the importance of precisely defining triggers through a thorough literature review and dual validation process. There were similarities in the development and validation of trigger tools across primary care and hospital settings, allowing primary care to learn from hospital settings.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dhamanti, I., Zairina, E., Nurhaida, I., Salsabila, S., & Yakub, F. (2025). Development and validation of trigger tools in primary care: A scoping review. PLoS ONE, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308906

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free