# Instruments for assessing patient-reported experience measures among patients with diabetes mellitus: a scoping review

## TL;DR

This review identifies tools for measuring patient experiences in diabetes care, highlighting common domains and the need for culturally adapted measures.

## Contribution

The study proposes five core domains for patient experience measures in diabetes care and emphasizes cultural adaptation.

## Key findings

- Eight articles from six countries were identified, showing variability in PREM instrument development.
- Five common domains were found: care planning, patient education, professionalism, quality of care, and hospital care and transition.
- The study highlights the limited number of tools and the need for culturally adapted measures.

## Abstract

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) management is increasingly focusing on patient-centered care, making patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) critical for understanding the subjective aspects of diabetes treatment and self-management. These measures differ based on cultural contexts and individual perspectives, leading different countries to the development of country-specific tools to assess care quality from the patient’s viewpoint. This review aimed to identify available instruments for assessing patient-reported experiences in individuals with diabetes and examine the different domains, items, and the validity and reliability of these instruments.

Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, databases including PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Scopus were searched for English-language articles without year limitations. This scoping review focused on PREMs that evaluate the quality of diabetes care among adolescent and adult patients with type 1 and type 2 DM. Studies that used patient expectation questionnaires, involved individuals not receiving care, or focused on patient-reported outcomes rather than experiences were excluded.

Eight articles from six countries representing different healthcare settings were included, mostly from developed countries. A variety of methodologies were used to develop these PREM instruments, with unique domains and items. Content analysis revealed five commonly measured domains: (1) care planning, (2) patient education, (3) professionalism, (4) quality of care, and (5) hospital care and transition, reflecting diverse patient experiences across healthcare services.

This scoping review identifies a limited number of tools for evaluating PREMs in diabetes care, highlighting variability in their development and domain coverage. Five core domains are proposed across different settings, with an emphasis on culturally adapted measures to enhance the accuracy of patient experience capture in diverse populations.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-025-00848-7.