The sum of us. Implementing a Person Centred Care Bundle - A narrative inquiry

Development of patient-centred care in acute hospital settings: A meta-narrative review

BACKGROUND

Patient-centred care is widely recognised as a core aspect of quality health care and has been integrated into policy internationally. There remains a disconnect between policy and practice, with organisations and researchers continuing to offer definitions and frameworks to suit the operational context. It is unclear if and how patient-centred care has been adopted in the acute care context.

AIM

To understand the development of patient-centred care in the context of acute hospital settings over the past decade.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in accordance with RAMESES standards and principles for meta-narrative reviews. Five databases (Medline, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, JBI) were searched for full-text articles published between 2012 and 2021 related to patient-centred care in the acute care setting, in the context of nursing, medicine and health policy. Literature reviews and discussion papers were excluded. Articles were selected based on their relevance to the research aim. Descriptive and thematic analysis and synthesis of data were undertaken via an interpretivist process to understand the development of the topic.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty four articles were included that reported observational studies (n = 78), interventions (n = 34), tool development (n = 7), expert consensus (n = 2), quality improvement (n = 2), and reflection (n = 1). Most studies were conducted in developed countries and reported the perspective of patients (n = 33), nurses (n = 29), healthcare organisations (n = 7) or multiple perspectives (n = 50). Key words, key authors and organisations for patient-centred care were commonly recognised and provided a basis for the research. Fifty instruments measuring patient-centred care or its aspects were identified. Of the 34 interventions, most were implemented at the micro (clinical) level (n = 25) and appeared to improve care (n = 30). Four articles did not report outcomes. Analysis of the interventions identified three main types: i) staff-related, ii) patient and family-related, and iii) environment-related. Analysis of key findings identified five meta-narratives: i) facilitators of patient-centred care, ii) threats to patient-centred care, iii) outcomes of patient-centred care, iv) elements of patient-centred care, and v) expanding our understanding of patient-centred care.

CONCLUSIONS

Interest in patient centred care continues to grow, with reports shifting from conceptualising to operationalising patient-centred care. Interventions have been successfully implemented in acute care settings at the micro level, further research is needed to determine their sustainability and macro level implementation. Health services should consider staff, patient and organisational factors that can facilitate or threaten patient-centred care when planning interventions.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Patient-centred care in acute care settings - we have arrived! Is it sustainable?

'Paper care not patient care': Nurse and patient experiences of comprehensive risk assessment and care plan documentation in hospital

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To explore organisation-wide experiences of person-centred care and risk assessment practices using existing healthcare organisation documentation.

BACKGROUND

There is increasing emphasis on multidimensional risk assessments during hospital admission. However, little is known about how nurses use multidimensional assessment documentation in clinical practice to address preventable harms and optimise person-centred care.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive study reported according to COREQ.

METHODS

Metropolitan tertiary hospital and rehabilitation hospital servicing a population of 550,000. A sample of 111 participants (12 patients, 4 family members/carers, 94 nurses and 1 allied health professional) from a range of wards/clinical locations. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted at two time points. The audio recording was transcribed, and an inductive thematic analysis was used to provide insight from multiple perspectives.

RESULTS

Three main themes emerged: (1) 'What works well in practice' included: efficiency in the structure of the documentation; the Introduction, Situation, Background Assessment, Recommendation (ISBAR) framework and prompting for clinical decision-making were valued by nurses; and direct patient care is always prioritised. (2) 'What does not work well in practice': obtaining the patient's signature on daily care plans; multidisciplinary (MDT) involvement; duplication of paperwork and person-centred goals are not well-captured in care plan documentation. (3) 'Experience of care'; satisfaction of person-centred care; communication in the MDT was important, but sometimes insufficient; patients had variable involvement in their daily care plan; and inadequate integration of care between MDT team which negatively impacted patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Efficient and streamlined documentation systems should herald feedback from nurses to address their clinical workflow needs and can support, and capture, their decision-making that enables partnership with patients to improve the individualisation of care provision.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The integration of effective MDT involvement in clinical documentation was problematic and resulted in unmet supportive care from the patient's perspective.