Twelve studies were included in the review. Where reported, sample size ranged from 13 to 3,442 participants (total number of participants unclear). The quality of included studies was considered by the authors to be low. Individual study quality was not presented. Most studies did not include comparative data. Half of the studies used a pre-post intervention design. There was one randomised controlled trial (RCT).
Five studies showed that structured patient assessments improved the relevance of collected information, particularly through use of prompt or algorithms (three studies) and reduced the incidence of missed injuries (two studies). Completeness and quality of clinical documentation was improved in three studies (including the RCT). The authors reported that evidence was limited and/or contradictory in respect of the impact of patient assessment frameworks on implementation of care (five studies), clinician and patient satisfaction (two studies, including the RCT), communication between clinician and patient (one study) and other patient outcomes such as mortality and minor disability (three studies, including the RCT).