Organizational capacity for patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: interviews with patient/family advisors, managers and clinicians

Building Engagement-Capable Environments for Health System Transformation: Development and Early Implementation of a Capability Framework for Patient, Family and Caregiver Engagement in Ontario Health Teams

INTRODUCTION

Despite widespread calls to involve patients, families and caregivers (PFCs) as partners at all levels of health system planning and design, there is unevenness in how engagement efforts are supported across these settings. The concept of 'engagement-capable environments' offers a way forward to uncover the key requirements for sustainable, high-quality engagement, but more work is needed to identify the specific competencies required to create these environments. We addressed this gap by developing a capability framework for Ontario Health Teams (OHTs), a newly established structure for planning, designing, organizing and delivering care in Ontario, Canada.

METHODS

The framework was co-developed by a Working Group of OHT staff and leaders, PFC partners, researchers and government personnel. Project activities occurred over four phases: (1) planning, (2) evidence review and surveying of intended users to identify key competencies, (3) framework design and (4) implementation.

RESULTS

An evidence review identified more than 90 potential competencies for this work. These results were contextualized and expanded through a survey of OHT stakeholders to brainstorm potential competencies, supports and enablers for engagement. Surveys were completed by 69 individuals; 689 knowledge and skill competency statements, 462 attitude and behaviour competency statements and 250 supports and enablers were brainstormed. The statements were analysed and organized into initial competency categories, which were reviewed, discussed and iteratively refined by Working Group members and through broader consultations with the OHT community. The final framework includes six competency domains and four support and enabler domains, each with sub-domain elements, mapped across a three-stage maturity model. The framework has been disseminated across OHTs, and its adoption and implementation are now requirements within OHT agreements.

CONCLUSION

The framework combines a strong conceptual foundation with actionable elements informed by the literature and consultations with the intended users of the framework. Although developed for OHTs, the framework should be broadly applicable to other health system organizations seeking similar health system transformation goals.

PATIENT CONTRIBUTION

Patient, family and caregiver partners were involved at all stages and in all aspects of the work. As end users of the framework, their perspectives, knowledge and opinions were critical.

Motivation for patient engagement in patient safety: a multi-perspective, explorative survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite increasing calls for more patient engagement in patient safety, limited knowledge remains on what actually motivates key stakeholders in healthcare to promote patient engagement. We therefore set out to survey key stakeholders of patient engagement in patient safety (i.e., patients, healthcare professionals, and managers). We aimed to identify and explore stakeholder's distinct and shared motives for patient engagement.

METHODS

A stepwise Delphi method was applied, utilizing semi-structured online interviews for determination of stakeholder motives for patient engagement in patient safety. In a subsequent online survey, statements were evaluated and identified. 34 subject-matter experts from all relevant stakeholder groups completed the online interviews and 33 the online survey. We used content analysis approaches for qualitative and descriptive analyses for quantitative measures. Further, we evaluated the consensus on distinct and shared motives across stakeholder groups.

RESULTS

Seven key motives for patient engagement in patient safety were identified. Major motives attributed to patients were: (1) To improve experiences and care outcomes for oneself, as well as (2) for future patients, (3) to express gratitude and appreciation, (4) to cope successfully with treatment-related emotions. A motive shared by patients and professionals was (5) to contribute actively to improved delivery of healthcare. To optimize patient safety, costs, and care processes (6) was shared by professionals and managers. Lastly, (7) to improve patient-provider relationships was jointly shared by all stakeholder groups. For four motives (1, 2, 6, 7) consensus was established.

CONCLUSIONS

In order to unlock the full potential of future interventions in patient engagement, a deeper understanding of stakeholder motives is essential. We identified a set of distinct and shared motives for patient engagement across relevant stakeholder groups. Our findings may inform future interventions in patient engagement that take account of the motivational foundations and aspirations of all stakeholders who are key for the success for collaborative patient safety and care improvements.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ID DRKS00031837 (Date May 8, 2023).

Patient and family perceptions of a discharge bedside board

Objective

To explore patient and family perspectives of a discharge bedside board for supporting engagement in patient care and discharge planning to inform tool revision.

Methods

This qualitative descriptive study included 45 semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of English-speaking patients (n = 44; mean age 58.5 years) and their family members (n = 5) across seven adult inpatient units at a tertiary acute care hospital in mid-western Canada. Thematic (interviews), content (board, organization procedure document), and framework-guided integrated (all data) analyses were performed.

Results

Four themes were generated from interview data: understanding the board, included essential information to guide care, balancing information on the board, and maintaining a sense of connection. Despite application inconsistencies, documented standard procedures aligned with recommended board (re)orientation, timely patient-friendly content, attention to privacy, and patient-provider engagement strategies.

Conclusion

Findings indicate the tool supported consultation and some involvement level engagement in patient care and discharge. Board information was usually valued, however, perceived procedural gaps in tool education, privacy, and the quality of tool-related communication offer opportunities to strengthen patients' and families' tool experience.

Innovation

Novel application of a continuum engagement framework in the exploration of multiple data sources generated significant insights to guide tool revision.

Is there any difference in organizational commitment between general hospitals and specialized hospitals? Empirical evidence from public hospitals in Beijing, China

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study on the one hand is to see different hospital organization commitment have difference, including the overall score and various dimensions, on the other hand, due to the different hospital type, its function orientation is different, the factors of the doctor organization commitment may also exist differences, so the study of another purpose is to determine for different types of hospital doctor organization commitment the focus and key groups, provide reference for the doctor incentive strategy.

METHODS

A total of 292 doctors in four large public hospitals in Beijing were investigated. Physicians' perceived organizational commitment was investigated using self-made electronic questionnaires. Data were analyzed by factor analysis, descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, and multiple linear regression.

RESULTS

In the large public hospital doctor perception of the hospital commitment status, Specialized hospitals had higher overall commitment behavior scores, it is 3.47 ± 0.86; General hospital commitment behavior scored low at 3.39 ± 0.91. In the regression results, department category, working years, administrative position, and entry mode are the influencing factors of the organizational commitment of doctors in general hospitals, while in specialized hospitals, in addition to whether to hold an administrative position, entry mode, and working hours, the influencing factors also include gender, professional title and overseas learning background.

CONCLUSION

There are differences in the perceived organizational commitment by doctors in different types of public hospitals, and different factors influencing their organizational commitment.Hospital type directly influences physicians' organizational commitment and plays a moderating role in influencing other factors. A possible solution is general hospital specialization, encouraging general hospitals to develop the dominant discipline. These findings can help healthcare service hospital executives or government policymakers understand the impact of hospital specialization strategies and develop more efficient medical staff incentive systems.

A holistic approach to integrating patient, family, and lived experience voices in the development of the BrainHealth Databank: a digital learning health system to enable artificial intelligence in the clinic

Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and digital health innovations have tremendous potential to advance patient-centred, data-driven mental healthcare. To enable the clinical application of such innovations, the Krembil Centre for Neuroinformatics at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Canada's largest mental health hospital, embarked on a journey to co-create a digital learning health system called the BrainHealth Databank (BHDB). Working with clinicians, scientists, and administrators alongside patients, families, and persons with lived experience (PFLE), this hospital-wide team has adopted a systems approach that integrates clinical and research data and practices to improve care and accelerate research. PFLE engagement was intentional and initiated at the conception stage of the BHDB to help ensure the initiative would achieve its goal of understanding the community's needs while improving patient care and experience. The BHDB team implemented an evolving, dynamic strategy to support continuous and active PFLE engagement in all aspects of the BHDB that has and will continue to impact patients and families directly. We describe PFLE consultation, co-design, and partnership in various BHDB activities and projects. In all three examples, we discuss the factors contributing to successful PFLE engagement, share lessons learned, and highlight areas for growth and improvement. By sharing how the BHDB navigated and fostered PFLE engagement, we hope to motivate and inspire the health informatics community to collectively chart their paths in PFLE engagement to support advancements in digital health and artificial intelligence.

Consensus on how to optimise patient/family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: a Delphi survey

OBJECTIVE

Patient and family engagement (PE) in health service planning and improvement is widely advocated, yet little prior research offered guidance on how to optimise PE, particularly in hospitals. This study aimed to engage stakeholders in generating evidence-informed consensus on recommendations to optimise PE.

DESIGN

We transformed PE processes and resources from prior research into recommendations that populated an online Delphi survey.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Panellists included 58 persons with PE experience including: 22 patient/family advisors and 36 others (PE managers, clinicians, executives and researchers) in round 1 (100%) and 55 in round 2 (95%).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Ratings of importance on a seven-point Likert scale of 48 strategies organised in domains: engagement approaches, strategies to integrate diverse perspectives, facilitators, strategies to champion engagement and hospital capacity for engagement.

RESULTS

Of 50 recommendations, 80% or more of panellists prioritised 32 recommendations (27 in round 1, 5 in round 2) across 5 domains: 5 engagement approaches, 4 strategies to identify and integrate diverse patient/family advisor perspectives, 9 strategies to enable meaningful engagement, 9 strategies by which hospitals can champion PE and 5 elements of hospital capacity considered essential for supporting PE. There was high congruence in rating between patient/family advisors and healthcare professionals for all but six recommendations that were highly rated by patient/family advisors but not by others: capturing diverse perspectives, including a critical volume of advisors on committees/teams, prospectively monitoring PE, advocating for government funding of PE, including PE in healthcare worker job descriptions and sharing PE strategies across hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision-makers (eg, health system policy-makers, hospitals executives and managers) can use these recommendations as a framework by which to plan and operationalise PE, or evaluate and improve PE in their own settings. Ongoing research is needed to monitor the uptake and impact of these recommendations on PE policy and practice.

Facilitating and supporting the engagement of patients, families and caregivers in research: the "Ottawa model" for patient engagement in research

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement is increasingly being recognized as a critical component of health research; however, institutional models for building infrastructure and capacity for patient engagement in research are limited. There is an opportunity to create reproducible and scalable models of patient engagement in research and share best and promising practices.

MAIN BODY

In this article, we describe the development and features of the framework for the Ottawa Patient Engagement in Research Model at The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI). Key components of the model include: a Patient and Family Engagement Program at TOH, which recruits, educates, and supports patients, families and caregivers to engage in clinical care, governance, and research; the Ottawa Methods Centre within the OHRI, which leads methodological research and provides support to investigators for patient engagement and patient-oriented research at TOH; and the Office of Patient Engagement in Research Activities, also within the OHRI, which facilitates collaborations between patients, researchers, clinicians and other stakeholders. Early success of this model can be attributed to aligned institutional priorities between TOH, OHRI and patients, the establishment of a patient engagement policy, ongoing education and support provided to patient partners and researchers, and innovative recruitment, tracking and evaluation procedures. Ongoing challenges and next steps include promoting diversity among patient partners, implementing an equitable compensation policy, engaging patients across a variety of roles and research areas, and developing resources to expand and sustain this program.

CONCLUSION

This model represents a unique effort of patients, clinicians, researchers, and policymakers across disciplines and institutions to produce a harmonized strategy and infrastructure for meaningful collaboration with patients and families in health research, and capacity building in patient-oriented research.

Impacts of patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: qualitative interviews with patient/family advisors and hospital staff

Background

Patient engagement (PE) in hospital planning and improvement is widespread, yet we lack evidence of its impact. We aimed to identify benefits and harms that could be used to assess the impact of hospital PE.

Methods

We interviewed hospital-affiliated persons involved in PE activities using a qualitative descriptive approach and inductive content analysis to derive themes. We interpreted themes by mapping to an existing framework of healthcare performance measures and reported themes with exemplar quotes.

Results

Participants included 38 patient/family advisors, PE managers and clinicians from 9 hospitals (2 < 100 beds, 4 100 + beds, 3 teaching). Benefits of PE activities included 9 impacts on the capacity of hospitals. PE activities involved patient/family advisors and clinicians/staff in developing and spreading new PE processes across hospital units or departments, and those involved became more adept and engaged. PE had beneficial effects on hospital structures/resources, clinician staff functions and processes, patient experience and patient outcomes. A total of 14 beneficial impacts of PE were identified across these domains. Few unintended or harmful impacts were identified: overextended patient/family advisors, patient/family advisor turnover and clinician frustration if PE slowed the pace of planning and improvement.

Conclusions

The 23 self reported impacts were captured in a Framework of Impacts of Patient/Family Engagement on Hospital Planning and Improvement, which can be used by decision-makers to assess and allocate resources to hospital PE, and as the basis for ongoing research on the impacts of hospital PE and how to measure it.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07747-3.