Sustainable generation of patient-led resources in a learning health system

The role of patient and family advisory boards in promoting greater attention to patient social needs by U.S. acute care hospitals

BACKGROUND

There is growing attention to individual-level patient social needs such as unstable housing and food insecurity. Such considerations, however, have historically been the purview of public health and have not been a priority of more traditional health care delivery organizations, such as acute care hospitals.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the presence of patient and family advisory boards (PFABs) among acute care community hospitals was associated with screening for and programs to address patient social needs.

METHODS

We used a secondary data set derived from the American Hospital Association's 2020 and 2021 annual surveys, along with multinomial and negative binomial regression models to assess the relationship between the presence/absence of a PFAB and the likelihood of offering and the number of areas addressed by social needs screening programs.

RESULTS

More than half (55.9%) of all responding hospitals reported having a PFAB in 2020 (55.9%) and 2021 (52.7%). The presence of a PFAB among hospitals was significantly associated with patient social needs screening, more areas addressed by programs, and more types of partners to address these needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Community hospitals with a PFAB have more robust programs and partnerships to address patient social needs.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Hospital leaders should consider going beyond simply establishing programs to address social needs but also consider comprehensiveness of these programs to recognize the intersectionality of social needs. One way to do this is to formally establish a PFAB to help hospitals better identify and prioritize the needs in local communities and design social needs programs/solutions that are patient- and family-centric.

Interventions to improve system-level coproduction in the Cystic Fibrosis Learning Network

BACKGROUND

Coproduction is defined as patients and clinicians collaborating equally and reciprocally in healthcare and is a crucial concept for quality improvement (QI) of health services. Learning Health Networks (LHNs) provide insights to integrate coproduction with QI efforts from programmes from various health systems.

OBJECTIVE

We describe interventions to develop and maintain patient and family partner (PFP) coproduction, measured by PFP-reported and programme-reported scales. We aim to increase percentage of programmes with PFPs reporting active QI work within their programme, while maintaining satisfaction in PFP-clinician relationships.

METHODS

Conducted in the Cystic Fibrosis Learning Network (CFLN), an LHN comprising over 30 cystic fibrosis (CF) programmes, people with CF, caregivers and clinicians cocreated interventions in readiness awareness, inclusive PFP recruitment, onboarding process, partnership development and leadership opportunities. Interventions were adapted by CFLN programmes and summarised in a change package for existing programmes and the orientation of new ones. We collected monthly assessments for PFP and programme perceptions of coproduction and PFP self-rated competency of QI skills and satisfaction with programme QI efforts. We used control charts to analyse coproduction scales and run charts for PFP self-ratings.

RESULTS

Between 2018 and 2022, the CFLN expanded to 34 programmes with 52% having ≥1 PFP reporting active QI participation. Clinicians from 76% of programmes reported PFPs were actively participating or leading QI efforts. PFPs reported increased QI skills competency (17%-32%) and consistently high satisfaction and feeling valued in their work.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing system-level programmatic strategies to engage and sustain partnerships between clinicians and patients and families with CF improved perceptions of coproduction to conduct QI work. Key adaptable strategies for programmes included onboarding and QI training, supporting multiple PFPs simultaneously and developing financial recognition processes. Interventions may be applicable in other health conditions beyond CF seeking to foster the practice of coproduction.

Conceptualizing and redefining successful patient engagement in patient advisory councils in learning health networks

Introduction

Patient engagement has historically referenced engagement in one's healthcare, with more recent definitions expanding patient engagement to encompass patient advocacy work in Learning Health Networks (LHNs). Efforts to conceptualize and define what patient engagement means-and what successful patient engagement means-are, however, lacking and a barrier to meaningful and sustainable patient engagement via patient advisory councils (PACs) across LHNs.

Methods

Several co-authors (Madeleine Huwe, Becky Woolf, Jennie David) are former ImproveCareNow (ICN) PAC members, and we integrate a narrative review of the extant literature and a case study of our lived experiences as former ICN PAC members. We present nuanced themes of successful patient engagement from our lived experiences on ICN's PAC, with illustrative quotes from other PAC members, and then propose themes and metrics to consider in patient engagement across LHNs.

Results

Successful patient engagement in our experiences with ICN's PAC reaches beyond the "levels of engagement" previously described in the literature. We posit that our successful patient/PAC engagement experiences with ICN represent key mechanisms that could be applied across LHNs, including (1) personal growth for PAC members, (2) PAC internal engagement/community, (3) PAC engagement and presence within the LHN, (4) local institutional engagement for those who participate in the LHN, and (5) tangible resources/products from PAC members.

Conclusion

Patient engagement in LHNs, like ICN, holds significant power to meaningfully shape and co-produce healthcare systems, and engagement is undervalued and conceptualized dichotomously (eg, engaged or not engaged). Reconceptualizing successful patient/PAC engagement is critical in ongoing efforts to study, support, and understand mechanisms of sustainable and successful patient engagement. Having a modern, multidimensional definition for successful patient engagement in LHNs can support efforts to increase underrepresented voices in PACs, measure and track successful multidimensional patient engagement, and study how successful patient engagement may impact outcomes for patients and LHNs.

What Are the Best Practices for Co-Creating Patient-Facing Educational Materials? A Scoping Review of the Literature

Co-creating patient-facing educational materials (PEMs) can enhance person-centered care by responding to patient priorities and unmet needs. Little data exist on 'best practices' for co-creation. We followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework to conduct a systematic literature search of nine databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute, TRIP-April, 2022) to identify empirical studies published in English on PEM co-creation to distill 'best practices'. Following an independent dual review of articles, data were collated into tables, and thematic analysis was employed to synthesize 'best practices' that were validated by a patient experienced in co-creating PEMs. Bias was not assessed, given the study heterogeneity. Of 6998 retrieved articles, 44 were included for data extraction/synthesis. Studies utilized heterogeneous methods spanning a range of health conditions/populations. Only 5/45 (11%) studies defined co-creation, 14 (32%) used a guiding framework, and 18 (41%) used validated evaluation tools. Six 'best practices' were identified: (1) begin with a review of the literature, (2) utilize a framework to inform the process, (3) involve clinical and patient experts from the beginning, (4) engage diverse perspectives, (5) ensure patients have the final decision, and (6) employ validated evaluation tools. This scoping review highlights the need for clear definitions and validated evaluation measures to guide and assess the co-creation process. Identified 'best practices' are relevant for use with diverse patient populations and health issues to enhance person-centered care.