Involvement of patients or their representatives in quality management functions in EU hospitals: implementation and impact on patient-centred care strategies

Priority strategies to reduce socio-gendered inequities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: Delphi survey

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence, severity and related comorbid conditions are greater among women compared with men, but women, particularly racialised women, are less likely than men to access OA care. We aimed to prioritise strategies needed to reduce inequities in OA management.

DESIGN

Delphi survey of 28 strategies derived from primary research retained if at least 80% of respondents rated 6 or 7 on a 7-point Likert scale.

SETTING

Online.

PARTICIPANTS

35 women of diverse ethno-cultural groups and 29 healthcare professionals of various specialties from across Canada.

RESULTS

Of the 28 initial and 3 newly suggested strategies, 27 achieved consensus to retain: 20 in round 1 and 7 in round 2. Respondents retained 7 patient-level, 7 clinician-level and 13 system-level strategies. Women and professionals agreed on all but one patient-level strategy (eg, consider patients' cultural needs and economic circumstances) and all clinician-level strategies (eg, inquire about OA management needs and preferences). Some discrepancies emerged for system-level strategies that were more highly rated by women (eg, implement OA-specific clinics). Comments revealed general support among professionals for system-level strategies provided that additional funding or expanded scope of practice was targeted to only formally trained professionals and did not reduce funding for professionals who already managed OA.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified multilevel strategies that could be implemented by healthcare professionals, organisations or systems to mitigate inequities and improve OA care for diverse women.

Health system responsiveness and associated factors for delivery care in public health facilities, Dessie City Administration, South Wollo zone, Ethiopia: Cross-sectional study design

OBJECTIVE

To assess health system responsiveness (HSR) and associated factors for delivery care in public health facilities, Northeast Ethiopia.

DESIGN

Institutional-based cross-sectional study.

SETTING

South Wollo zone, Ethiopia.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 430 women who delivered within the study period from 1 June 2022 to 5 July 2022 were included for this analysis.

OUTCOME

HSR.

METHODS

Institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted from 1 June 2022 to 5 July 2022 in nine public health facilities. The data were collected through semistructured interviewer administered questionnaire, reviewing delivery registration books and client charts. HSR for delivery care was assessed by eight domains based on WHO responsiveness assessment framework. Binary logistic regression analyses were employed to check the association of variables with HSR. An adjusted OR (AOR) with 95% CI was determined to show the strength of association, and a p<0.05 was taken as level of statistical significance.

RESULTS

In this study, the health system was responsive for 45.8% (95% CI 41.1% to 50.6%) of delivered mothers. The highest (74.2%) and lowest (45.8%) rated domains were dignity and basic amenity, respectively. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, caesarian delivery (AOR 3.67, 95% CI 1.91 to 7.06), obstetric complication in current pregnancy (AOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.85), referred during labour (AOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.69), birth within 17:30-8:30 hours (AOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.81) and good satisfaction (AOR 5.77, 95% CI 3.44 to 9.69) were statistically significant associated factors with HSR.

CONCLUSION

The overall responsiveness of delivery care was low. Basic amenities, choice of provider and social support domains were least rated responsiveness domains. If health professionals give emphasis to mothers during spontaneous vaginal delivery, able to prevent obstetric complications, and if health facilities increase the number of professionals to duty time, handover, the referred mothers appropriately; having clean and attractive delivery wards will be important interventions to improve responsiveness for delivery care.

Assessment of Labor Practices in Healthcare Using an Innovatory Framework for Sustainability

Background and Objectives: The concept of sustainability in healthcare is poorly researched. There is a perceived need for new theoretical and empirical studies, as well as for new instruments to assess the implementation of new labor practices in the field. Such practices address unmet social needs and consolidate the sustainable development systems which promote health equity. The objective of the research is to design an innovative reference framework for sustainable development and health equity of healthcare facilities, and to provide a practical validation of this framework. Materials and Methods: The research methods consist of designing the elements of the new frame of reference, designing an indicator matrix, elaborating indicator content, and assessing the reference framework. For the assessment stage, we used sustainable medical practices reported in the scientific literature as well as a pilot reference framework that was implemented in healthcare practice. Results: The new reference framework suggested by the present study is composed of 57 indicators organized in five areas: environmental responsibility, economic performance, social responsibility, institutional capacity, and provision of sustainable healthcare services. These indicators were adapted and integrated into the seven basic topics of the social responsibility standard. The study presents the content of the indicators in the field of labor practices, as well as their evaluation grids. The innovative format of the evaluation grids aims to describe achievement degrees, both qualitatively and quantitatively. The theoretical model was validated in practice through its implementation at the Emergency Hospital in Targu Mures. Conclusions: The conclusions of the study reflect the usefulness of the new reference framework, which is compatible with the requirements in the healthcare field, but differs from other existing frameworks, considering its objective regarding the promotion of sustainable development. This objective facilitates the continuous quantification of the sustainability level, the promotion of sustainable development strategies, and sustainability-oriented approaches on the part of interested parties.

Consumers' and health providers' views and perceptions of partnering to improve health services design, delivery and evaluation: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Partnering with consumers in the planning, delivery and evaluation of health services is an essential component of person-centred care. There are many ways to partner with consumers to improve health services, including formal group partnerships (such as committees, boards or steering groups). However, consumers' and health providers' views and experiences of formal group partnerships remain unclear. In this qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), we focus specifically on formal group partnerships where health providers and consumers share decision-making about planning, delivering and/or evaluating health services. Formal group partnerships were selected because they are widely used throughout the world to improve person-centred care. For the purposes of this QES, the term 'consumer' refers to a person who is a patient, carer or community member who brings their perspective to health service partnerships. 'Health provider' refers to a person with a health policy, management, administrative or clinical role who participates in formal partnerships in an advisory or representative capacity. This QES was co-produced with a Stakeholder Panel of consumers and health providers. The QES was undertaken concurrently with a Cochrane intervention review entitled Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.

OBJECTIVES

1. To synthesise the views and experiences of consumers and health providers of formal partnership approaches that aimed to improve planning, delivery or evaluation of health services. 2. To identify best practice principles for formal partnership approaches in health services by understanding consumers' and health providers' views and experiences.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL for studies published between January 2000 and October 2018. We also searched grey literature sources including websites of relevant research and policy organisations involved in promoting person-centred care.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included qualitative studies that explored consumers' and health providers' perceptions and experiences of partnering in formal group formats to improve the planning, delivery or evaluation of health services.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Following completion of abstract and full-text screening, we used purposive sampling to select a sample of eligible studies that covered a range of pre-defined criteria, including rich data, range of countries and country income level, settings, participants, and types of partnership activities. A Framework Synthesis approach was used to synthesise the findings of the sample. We appraised the quality of each study using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skill Program) tool. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach. The Stakeholder Panel was involved in each stage of the review from development of the protocol to development of the best practice principles.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 182 studies that were eligible for inclusion. From this group, we selected 33 studies to include in the final synthesis. These studies came from a wide range of countries including 28 from high-income countries and five from low- or middle-income countries (LMICs). Each of the studies included the experiences and views of consumers and/or health providers of partnering in formal group formats. The results were divided into the following categories. Contextual factors influencing partnerships: government policy, policy implementation processes and funding, as well as the organisational context of the health service, could facilitate or impede partnering (moderate level of confidence). Consumer recruitment: consumer recruitment occurred in different ways and consumers managed the recruitment process in a minority of studies only (high level of confidence). Recruiting a range of consumers who were reflective of the clinic's demographic population was considered desirable, particularly by health providers (high level of confidence). Some health providers perceived that individual consumers' experiences were not generalisable to the broader population whereas consumers perceived it could be problematic to aim to represent a broad range of community views (high level of confidence). Partnership dynamics and processes: positive interpersonal dynamics between health providers and consumers facilitated partnerships (high level of confidence). However, formal meeting formats and lack of clarity about the consumer role could constrain consumers' involvement (high level of confidence). Health providers' professional status, technical knowledge and use of jargon were intimidating for some consumers (high level of confidence) and consumers could feel their experiential knowledge was not valued (moderate level of confidence). Consumers could also become frustrated when health providers dominated the meeting agenda (moderate level of confidence) and when they experienced token involvement, such as a lack of decision-making power (high level of confidence) Perceived impacts on partnership participants: partnering could affect health provider and consumer participants in both positive and negative ways (high level of confidence). Perceived impacts on health service planning, delivery and evaluation: partnering was perceived to improve the person-centredness of health service culture (high level of confidence), improve the built environment of the health service (high level of confidence), improve health service design and delivery e.g. facilitate 'out of hours' services or treatment closer to home (high level of confidence), enhance community ownership of health services, particularly in LMICs (moderate level of confidence), and improve consumer involvement in strategic decision-making, under certain conditions (moderate level of confidence). There was limited evidence suggesting partnering may improve health service evaluation (very low level of confidence). Best practice principles for formal partnering to promote person-centred care were developed from these findings. The principles were developed collaboratively with the Stakeholder Panel and included leadership and health service culture; diversity; equity; mutual respect; shared vision and regular communication; shared agendas and decision-making; influence and sustainability.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Successful formal group partnerships with consumers require health providers to continually reflect and address power imbalances that may constrain consumers' participation. Such imbalances may be particularly acute in recruitment procedures, meeting structure and content and decision-making processes. Formal group partnerships were perceived to improve the physical environment of health services, the person-centredness of health service culture and health service design and delivery. Implementing the best practice principles may help to address power imbalances, strengthen formal partnering, improve the experiences of consumers and health providers and positively affect partnership outcomes.

Integrating Patient and Expert Perspectives to Conceptualize High-Quality Palliative Cancer Care for Symptoms in the US Veterans Health Administration: A Qualitative Study

Quality measurement is typically the domain of clinical experts and health system leaders; patient/caregiver perspectives are rarely solicited. We aimed to describe and integrate clinician and patient/caregiver conceptualizations of high-quality palliative symptom care for patients receiving care for advanced cancer within the US Veterans Health Administration in the context of existing quality measures. We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of transcripts from prioritization discussions of process quality measures relevant to cancer palliative care. These discussions occurred during 2 modified RAND-UCLA appropriateness panels: a panel of 10 palliative care clinical expert stakeholders (7 physicians, 2 nurses, 1 social worker) and a panel of 9 patients/caregivers with cancer experience. Discussions were recorded, transcribed, and independently double-coded using an a priori logical framework. Content analysis was used to identify subthemes within codes and axial coding was used to identify crosscutting themes. Patients/caregivers and clinical experts contributed important perspectives to 3 crosscutting themes. First, proactive elicitation of symptoms is critical. Patients/caregivers especially emphasized importance of comprehensive and proactive screening and assessment, especially for pain and mental health. Second, screening and assessment alone is not enough; information elicited from patients must inform care. Measuring screening/assessment and management care processes separately has important limitations. Lastly, high-quality symptom management can be broadly defined if it is patient-centered; high-quality care takes an individualized approach and might include non-medical or non-pharmacological symptom management. Integrating the perspectives of clinical experts and patients/caregivers is critical for health systems to consider as they design and implement quality measures for palliative cancer care.

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.

How do hospitals engage patients and family members in quality management? A grounded theory study of hospitals in Brazil

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement (PFE) is considered an essential element of the transformation of the healthcare system. However, it is characterised by its complexity and a small number of institutions that have implemented the mechanisms of engagement.

OBJECTIVE

To understand PFE in quality management (QM) in the hospital environment.

DESIGN

A qualitative approach was guided by the grounded theory based in Straussian perspective. Data were gathered using semistructured interviews. The coding was performed by excerpts, using an inductive approach and the constant comparison technique.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A total of seven Brazilian hospitals were selected based on the theoretical sampling technique.

RESULTS

A total of five categories emerged, namely: patient partner, mechanisms of engagement, internal structure for engagement, maturity of the QM system and openness to change. Externally, three contextual factors can impact the engagement: the local health system, the profile of the community and the change in access to the information. At the centre of the change is the balance in power relations between patients and professionals, the sharing of information from the hospital and a proactive attitude towards improving services.

CONCLUSIONS

The PFE involves a cultural and process change. Cultural change is represented by 'openness', that is, openness to learn, to listen and to consider new perspectives. The change in processes is in turn characterised by the phrase 'test and venture' because the model to be adopted may be different between hospitals. The patient's perspective allows actions to be driven towards what really matters to them, ensuring quality of service and safety, obtaining a new perspective to understand and solve problems, and stimulating a sense of urgency, more empathy and compassion in professionals.

Patient and Caregiver Prioritization of Palliative and End-of-Life Cancer Care Quality Measures

BACKGROUND

Development and prioritization of quality measures typically relies on experts in clinical medicine, but patients and their caregivers may have different perspectives on quality measurement priorities.

OBJECTIVE

To inform priorities for health system implementation of palliative cancer and end-of-life care quality measures by eliciting perspectives of patients and caregivers.

DESIGN

Using modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Panel methods and materials tailored for knowledgeable lay participants, we convened a panel to rate cancer palliative care process quality measure concepts before and after a 1-day, in-person meeting.

PARTICIPANTS

Nine patients and caregivers with experience living with or caring for patients with cancer.

MAIN MEASURES

Panelists rated each concept on importance for providing patient- and family-centered care on a nine-point scale and each panelist nominated five highest priority measure concepts ("top 5").

KEY RESULTS

Cancer patient and caregiver panelists rated all measure concepts presented as highly important to patient- and family- centered care (median rating ≥ 7) in pre-panel (mean rating range, 6.9-8.8) and post-panel ratings (mean rating range, 7.2-8.9). Forced choice nominations of the "top 5" helped distinguish similarly rated measure concepts. Measure concepts nominated into the "top 5" by three or more panelists included two measure concepts of communication (goals of care discussions and discussion of prognosis), one measure concept on providing comprehensive assessments of patients, and three on symptoms including pain management plans, improvement in pain, and depression management plans. Patients and caregivers nominated one additional measure concept (pain screening) back into consideration, bringing the total number of measure concepts under consideration to 21.

CONCLUSIONS

Input from cancer patients and caregivers helped identify quality measurement priorities for health system implementation. Forced choice nominations were useful to discriminate concepts with the highest perceived importance. Our approach serves as a model for incorporating patient and caregiver priorities in quality measure development and implementation.

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.

An Innovative Framework for Sustainable Development in Healthcare: The Human Rights Assessment

Healthcare providers are investing considerable resources for the development of quality management systems in hospitals. Contrary to these efforts, the number of tools that allow the evaluation of implementation efforts and the results of quality, security and sustainable development is quite limited. The purpose of the study is to develop a reference framework for quality and sustainable development in healthcare, Sanitary-Quality (San-Q) at the micro system level, which is compatible with applicable national and international standards in the field. The research method consisted of the study of literature, identification and analysis of good sustainability practices in healthcare, which allowed identification of the areas of the new San-Q framework: quality, economic, environmental, social, institutional and healthcare. These areas are incorporated into the core topics of social responsibility mentioned by ISO26000. A total of 57 indicators have been defined that make up the new reference framework. The evaluation format of the indicators is innovative through a couple of values: completion degree–significance. In the experimental part of the research, a pilot implementation of the San-Q framework at an emergency hospital was performed, the results recorded in terms of responsibility for human rights being presented. The conclusions of the study reveal the innovative aspects of the framework that facilitate the development of a sustainability strategy promoted through performance indicators, the results obtained after evaluation being useful in establishing a reference level of sustainability but also in developing sustainability policies.

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

BACKGROUND

Patient and family engagement (PE) in healthcare planning and improvement achieves beneficial outcomes and is widely advocated, but a lack of resources is a critical barrier. Little prior research studied how organizations support engagement specifically in hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

We explored what constitutes hospital capacity for engagement.

METHODS

We conducted descriptive qualitative interviews and complied with criteria for rigour and reporting in qualitative research. We interviewed patient/family advisors, engagement managers, clinicians and executives at hospitals with high engagement activity, asking them to describe essential resources or processes. We used content analysis and constant comparison to identify themes and corresponding quotes and interpreted findings by mapping themes to two existing frameworks of PE capacity not specific to hospitals.

RESULTS

We interviewed 40 patient/family advisors, patient engagement managers, clinicians and corporate executives from nine hospitals (two < 100 beds, four 100 + beds, three teaching). Four over-arching themes about capacity considered essential included resources, training, organizational commitment and staff support. Views were similar across participant and hospital groups. Resources included funding and people dedicated to PE and technology to enable communication and collaboration. Training encompassed initial orientation and project-specific training for patient/family advisors and orientation for new staff and training for existing staff on how to engage with patient/family advisors. Organizational commitment included endorsement from the CEO and Board, commitment from staff and continuous evaluation and improvement. Staff support included words and actions that conveyed value for the role and input of patient/family advisors. The blended, non-hospital-specific framework captured all themes. Hospitals of all types varied in the availability of funding dedicated to PE. In particular, reimbursement of expenses and compensation for time and contributions were not provided to patient/family advisors. In addition to skilled engagement managers, the role of clinician or staff champions was viewed as essential.

CONCLUSION

The findings build on prior research that largely focused on PE in individual clinical care or research or in primary care planning and improvement. The findings closely aligned with existing frameworks of organizational capacity for PE not specific to hospital settings, which suggests that hospitals could use the blended framework to plan, evaluate and improve their PE programs. Further research is needed to yield greater insight into how to promote and enable compensation for patient/family advisors and the role of clinician or staff champions in supporting PE.

Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation

BACKGROUND

Health services have traditionally been developed to focus on specific diseases or medical specialties. Involving consumers as partners in planning, delivering and evaluating health services may lead to services that are person-centred and so better able to meet the needs of and provide care for individuals. Globally, governments recommend consumer involvement in healthcare decision-making at the systems level, as a strategy for promoting person-centred health services. However, the effects of this 'working in partnership' approach to healthcare decision-making are unclear. Working in partnership is defined here as collaborative relationships between at least one consumer and health provider, meeting jointly and regularly in formal group formats, to equally contribute to and collaborate on health service-related decision-making in real time. In this review, the terms 'consumer' and 'health provider' refer to partnership participants, and 'health service user' and 'health service provider' refer to trial participants. This review of effects of partnership interventions was undertaken concurrently with a Cochrane Qualitative Evidence Synthesis (QES) entitled Consumers and health providers working in partnership for the promotion of person-centred health services: a co-produced qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership, as an intervention to promote person-centred health services.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases from 2000 to April 2019; PROQUEST Dissertations and Theses Global from 2016 to April 2019; and grey literature and online trial registries from 2000 until September 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, and cluster-RCTs of 'working in partnership' interventions meeting these three criteria: both consumer and provider participants meet; they meet jointly and regularly in formal group formats; and they make actual decisions that relate to the person-centredness of health service(s).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened most titles and abstracts. One review author screened a subset of titles and abstracts (i.e. those identified through clinical trials registries searches, those classified by the Cochrane RCT Classifier as unlikely to be an RCT, and those identified through other sources). Two review authors independently screened all full texts of potentially eligible articles for inclusion. In case of disagreement, they consulted a third review author to reach consensus. One review author extracted data and assessed risk of bias for all included studies and a second review author independently cross-checked all data and assessments. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion, or by consulting a third review author to reach consensus. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the small number of included trials and their heterogeneity; we synthesised results descriptively by comparison and outcome. We reported the following outcomes in GRADE 'Summary of findings' tables: health service alterations; the degree to which changed service reflects health service user priorities; health service users' ratings of health service performance; health service users' health service utilisation patterns; resources associated with the decision-making process; resources associated with implementing decisions; and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five trials (one RCT and four cluster-RCTs), with 16,257 health service users and more than 469 health service providers as trial participants. For two trials, the aims of the partnerships were to directly improve the person-centredness of health services (via health service planning, and discharge co-ordination). In the remaining trials, the aims were indirect (training first-year medical doctors on patient safety) or broader in focus (which could include person-centredness of health services that targeted the public/community, households or health service delivery to improve maternal and neonatal mortality). Three trials were conducted in high income-countries, one was in a middle-income country and one was in a low-income country. Two studies evaluated working in partnership interventions, compared to usual practice without partnership (Comparison 1); and three studies evaluated working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention, compared to the same intervention without partnership (Comparison 2). No studies evaluated one form of working in partnership compared to another (Comparison 3). The effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership compared to usual practice without partnership are uncertain: only one of the two studies that assessed this comparison measured health service alteration outcomes, and data were not usable, as only intervention group data were reported. Additionally, none of the included studies evaluating this comparison measured the other primary or secondary outcomes we sought for the 'Summary of findings' table. We are also unsure about the effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership as part of a multi-component intervention compared to the same intervention without partnership. Very low-certainty evidence indicated there may be little or no difference on health service alterations or health service user health service performance ratings (two studies); or on health service user health service utilisation patterns and adverse events (one study each). No studies evaluating this comparison reported the degree to which health service alterations reflect health service user priorities, or resource use. Overall, our confidence in the findings about the effects of working in partnership interventions was very low due to indirectness, imprecision and publication bias, and serious concerns about risk of selection bias; performance bias, detection bias and reporting bias in most studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of consumers and providers working in partnership as an intervention, or as part of a multi-component intervention, are uncertain, due to a lack of high-quality evidence and/or due to a lack of studies. Further well-designed RCTs with a clear focus on assessing outcomes directly related to partnerships for patient-centred health services are needed in this area, which may also benefit from mixed-methods and qualitative research to build the evidence base.

Development, characteristics and impact of quality improvement casebooks: a scoping review

Background

Quality improvement (QI) casebooks, compilations of QI experiences, are one way to share experiential knowledge that healthcare policy-makers, managers and professionals can adapt to their own contexts. However, QI casebook use, characteristics and impact are unknown. We aimed to synthesize published research on QI prevalence, development, characteristics and impact.

Methods

We conducted a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and SCOPUS from inception to 4 February 2021. We extracted data on study characteristics and casebook definitions, development, characteristics (based on the WIDER [Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research] framework) and impact. We reported findings using summary statistics, text and tables.

Results

We screened 2999 unique items and included five articles published in Canada from 2011 to 2020 describing three studies. Casebooks focused on promoting positive weight-related conversations with children and parents, coordinating primary care-specialist cancer management, and showcasing QI strategies for cancer management. All defined casebooks similarly described real-world experiences of developing and implementing QI strategies that others could learn from, emulate or adapt. In all studies, casebook development was a multistep, iterative, interdisciplinary process that engages stakeholders in identifying, creating and reviewing content. While casebooks differed in QI topic, level of application and scope, cases featured common elements: setting or context, QI strategy details, impacts achieved, and additional tips for implementing strategies. Cases were described with a blend of text, graphics and tools. One study evaluated casebook impact, and found that it enhanced self-efficacy and use of techniques to improve clinical care. Although details about casebook development and characteristics were sparse, we created a template of casebook characteristics, which others can use as the basis for developing or evaluating casebooks.

Conclusion

Future research is needed to optimize methods for developing casebooks and to evaluate their impact. One approach is to assess how the many QI casebooks available online were developed. Casebooks should be evaluated alone or in combination with other interventions that support QI on a range of outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12961-021-00777-z.

Beyond tokenism in quality management policy and programming: moving from participation to meaningful involvement of people with HIV in New York State

BACKGROUND

Consumer involvement in health-care policy and quality management (QM) programming is a key element in making health systems people-centered. Involvement of health-care consumers in these areas, however, remains underdeveloped and under-prioritized. When consumer involvement is actively realized, few mechanisms for assessing its impact have been developed. The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) embraces consumer involvement of people with HIV in QM as a guiding principle, informed by early HIV/AIDS advocacy and a framework of people-centered quality care.

METHOD

HIV consumer involvement is implemented statewide and informs all quality of care programming as a standard for QM in health-care organizations, implemented through four key several initiatives: (i) a statewide HIV Consumer Quality Advisory Committee; (ii) leadership and QM trainings for consumers; (iii) specific tools and activities to engage consumers in QM activities at state, regional and health-care facility levels and (iv) formal organizational assessments of consumer involvement in health-care facility QM programs.

RESULTS

We review the literature on this topic and place the methods used by the NYSDOH within a theoretical framework for consumer involvement.

CONCLUSION

We present a model that offers a paradigm for practical implementation of routine consumer involvement in QM programs that can be replicated in other health-care settings, both disease-specific and general, reflecting the priority of active participation of consumers in QM activities at all levels of the health system.

Approaches to optimize patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: Qualitative interviews

Background

Patient engagement (PE) in health‐care planning and improvement is a growing practice. We lack evidence‐based guidance for PE, particularly in hospital settings. This study explored how to optimize PE in hospitals.

Methods

This study was based on qualitative interviews with individuals in various roles at hospitals with high PE capacity. We asked how patients were engaged, rationale for approaches chosen and solutions for key challenges. We identified themes using content analysis.

Results

Participants included 40 patient/family advisors, PE managers, clinicians and executives from 9 hospitals (2 < 100 beds, 4 100 + beds, 3 teaching). Hospitals most frequently employed collaboration (standing committees, project teams), followed by blended approaches (collaboration + consultation), and then consultation (surveys, interviews). Those using collaboration emphasized integrating perspectives into decisions; those using consultation emphasized capturing diverse perspectives. Strategies to support engagement included engaging diverse patients, prioritizing what benefits many, matching patients to projects, training patients and health‐care workers, involving a critical volume of patients, requiring at least one patient for quorum, asking involved patients to review outputs, linking PE with the Board of Directors and championing PE by managers, staff and committee/team chairs.

Conclusion

This research generated insight on concrete approaches and strategies that hospitals can use to optimize PE for planning and improvement. On‐going research is needed to understand how to recruit diverse patients and best balance blended consultation/collaboration approaches.

Patient or public contribution

Three patient research partners with hospital PE experience informed study objectives and interview questions.

Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA): An overview of a nation-wide, multi-level analysis of relationships between quality management systems and patient factors in 32 hospitals

OBJECTIVE

The Deepening our Understanding of Quality in Australia (DUQuA) project is a multisite, multi-level, cross-sectional study of 32 of the largest hospitals in Australia. This overview examines relationships between (i) organization-level quality management systems and department-level quality management strategies and (ii) patient-level measures (clinical treatment processes, patient-reported perceptions of care and clinical outcomes) within Australian hospitals.

DESIGN

We examined hospital quality improvement structures, processes and outcomes, collecting data at organization, department and patient levels for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), hip fracture and stroke. Data sources included surveys of quality managers, clinicians and patients, hospital visits, medical record reviews and national databases. Outcomes data and patient admissions data were analysed. Relationships between measures were evaluated using multi-level models. We based the methods on the Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe (DUQuE) framework, extending that work in parts and customizing the design to Australian circumstances.

SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES

The 32 hospitals, containing 119 participating departments, provided wide representation across metropolitan, inner and outer regional Australia. We obtained 31 quality management, 1334 clinician and 857 patient questionnaires, and conducted 2401 medical record reviews and 151 external assessments. External data via a secondary source comprised 14 460 index patient admissions across 14 031 individual patients. Associations between hospital, Emergency Department (ED) and department-level systems and strategies and five patient-level outcomes were assessed: 19 of 165 associations (11.5%) were statistically significant, 12 of 79 positive associations (15.2%) and 7 of 85 negative associations (8.2%).

RESULTS

We did not find clear relationships between hospital-level quality management systems, ED or department quality strategies and patient-level outcomes. ED-level clinical reviews were related to adherence to clinical practice guidelines for AMI, hip fracture and stroke, but in different directions. The results, when considered alongside the DUQuE results, are suggestive that front line interventions may be more influential than department-level interventions when shaping quality of care and that multi-pronged strategies are needed. Benchmark reports were sent to each participating hospital, stimulating targeted quality improvement activities.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no compelling relationships between the way care is organized and the quality of care across three targeted patient-level outcome conditions. The study was cross-sectional, and thus we recommend that the relationships studied should be assessed for changes across time. Tracking care longitudinally so that quality improvement activities are monitored and fed back to participants is an important initiative that should be given priority as health systems strive to develop their capacity for quality improvement over time.

Enacting quality improvement in ten European hospitals: a dualities approach

Background

Hospitals undertake numerous initiatives searching to improve the quality of care they provide, but these efforts are often disappointing. Current models guiding improvement tend to undervalue the tensional nature of hospitals. Applying a dualities approach that is sensitive to tensions inherent to hospitals’ quest for improved quality, this article aims to identify which organizational dualities managers should particularly pay attention to.

Methods

A set of cross-national, multi-level case studies was conducted involving 383 semi-structured interviews and 803 h of non-participant observation of key meetings and shadowing of staff in ten purposively sampled hospitals in five European countries (England, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and Norway).

Results

Six dualities that describe the quest for improved quality, each embracing a seemingly contradictory feature were identified: plural consensus, distributed connectedness, orchestrated emergence, formalized fluidity, patient coreness, and cautious generativeness.

Conclusions

We advocate for a move from the usual sequential and project-based and systemic thinking about quality improvement to the development of meta-capabilities to balance the simultaneous operation of opposing ideas or concepts. Doing so will help hospital managers to deal with major challenges of change inherent to quality improvement initiatives.

Defining Patient Engagement in Research: Results of a Systematic Review and Analysis: Report of the ISPOR Patient-Centered Special Interest Group

OBJECTIVES

Lack of clarity on the definition of "patient engagement" has been highlighted as a barrier to fully implementing patient engagement in research. This study identified themes within existing definitions related to patient engagement and proposes a consensus definition of "patient engagement in research."

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify definitions of patient engagement and related terms in published literature (2006-2018). Definitions were extracted and qualitatively analyzed to identify themes and characteristics. A multistakeholder approach, including academia, industry, and patient representation, was taken at all stages. A proposed definition is offered based on a synthesis of the findings.

RESULTS

Of 1821 abstracts identified and screened for eligibility, 317 were selected for full-text review. Of these, 169 articles met inclusion criteria, from which 244 distinct definitions were extracted for analysis. The most frequently defined terms were: "patient-centered" (30.5%), "patient engagement" (15.5%), and "patient participation" (13.4%). The majority of definitions were specific to the healthcare delivery setting (70.5%); 11.9% were specific to research. Among the definitions of "patient engagement," the most common themes were "active process," "patient involvement," and "patient as participant." In the research setting, the top themes were "patient as partner," "patient involvement," and "active process"; these did not appear in the top 3 themes of nonresearch definitions.

CONCLUSION

Distinct themes are associated with the term "patient engagement" and with engagement in the "research" setting. Based on an analysis of existing literature and review by patient, industry, and academic stakeholders, we propose a scalable consensus definition of "patient engagement in research."

Measuring next of kin satisfaction with hospital cancer care: Using a mixed-method approach as basis for improving quality and safety

AIM/S

To explore next of kin satisfaction with cancer care, map next of kin suggestions for involvement and combine this information to create a basis for improving quality and safety in hospitals.

DESIGN

Convergent parallel mixed-methods design applying the 20-item FAMCARE Scale survey instrument for quantitative measurement of satisfaction with care and with an open-ended question used for qualitative analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Responses from 238 next of kin (November 2016-November 2017).

METHODS

Exploratory factor analysis, regression analysis and qualitative content analysis were combined.

RESULTS

Both hospitals scored better in medical treatment (median, interquartile range: 1.5, 1.1-2.0), than in satisfaction with information and involvement of next of kin (1.9, 1.3-2.4), p < .001 (Wilcoxon signed ranks test). After adjusting for differences in demographical and clinical variables, the total FAMCARE scores were 13% higher (95% confidence interval: 1%-27%, Wald p = .029) at one of the hospitals. Qualitative findings support that the hospitals are not providing an equal offer to next of kin involvement in hospital cancer care that includes a proactive approach.

CONCLUSION

As a basis for quality and safety improvement, next of kin satisfaction and involvement in cancer care should be addressed in a two-sided perspective, balancing the next of kin's need for involvement in cancer treatment with the patient's perspective.

IMPACT

There is limited knowledge of next of kin satisfaction with hospital cancer care and how next of kin would like to be involved in this trajectory. Several aspects of satisfaction with cancer care can prompt change to improve service quality and safety (e.g. information, involvement, practical care), but this is an underused source of information. Next of kin are key in cancer care and our study demonstrates a potential large impact on future practical ways of improving cancer care service provision in an integrative perspective including next of kin.

Patient, Family, and Community Advisory Councils in Health Care and Research: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patient-centeredness is a characteristic of high-quality medical care and requires engaging community members in health systems' decision-making. One key patient engagement strategy is patient, family, and community advisory boards/councils (PFACs), yet the evidence to guide PFACs is lacking. Systematic reviews on patient engagement may benefit from patient input, but feasibility is unclear.

METHODS

A team of physicians, researchers, and a PFAC member conducted a systematic review to examine the impact of PFACs on health systems and describe optimal strategies for PFAC conduct. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, and Social Science Citation Index from inception through September 2016, as well as pre-identified websites. Two reviewers independently screened and abstracted data from studies, then assessed randomized studies for risk of bias and observational studies for quality using standardized measures. We performed a realist synthesis-which asks what works, for whom, under what circumstances-of abstracted data via 12 monthly meetings between investigators and two feedback sessions with a hospital-based PFAC.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles describing 16 studies met study criteria. Randomized studies demonstrated moderate to high risk of bias and observational studies demonstrated poor to fair quality. Studies engaged patients at multiple levels of the health care system and suggested that in-person deliberation with health system leadership was most effective. Studies involving patient engagement in research focused on increasing study participation. PFAC recruitment was by nomination (n = 11) or not described (n = 5). No common measure of patient, family, or community engagement was identified. Realist synthesis was enriched by feedback from PFAC members.

DISCUSSION

PFACs engage communities through individual projects but evidence of their impact on outcomes is lacking. A paucity of randomized controlled trials or high-quality observational studies guide strategies for engagement through PFACs. Standardized measurement tools for engagement are needed. Strategies for PFAC recruitment should be investigated and reported. PFAC members can feasibly contribute to systematic reviews.

REGISTRATION AND FUNDING SOURCE

A protocol for record eligibility was developed a priori and was registered in the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42016052817). The Department of Veterans Affairs' Office of Academic Affiliations, through the National Clinician Scholars Program, funded this study.

Capturing the experience of the hospital-stay journey from admission to discharge using diaries completed by patients in their own words: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To capture and better understand patients' experience during their healthcare journey from hospital admission to discharge, and to identify patient suggestions for improvement.

DESIGN

Prospective, exploratory, qualitative study. Patients were asked to complete an unstructured written diary expressed in their own words, recording negative and positive experiences or anything else they considered noteworthy.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Patients undergoing vascular surgery in a metropolitan hospital.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Complete diary transcripts underwent a general inductive thematic analysis, and opportunities to improve the experience of care were identified and collated.

RESULTS

We recruited 113 patients in order to collect 80 completed diaries from 78 participants (a participant response rate of 69%), recording patients' experiences of their hospital-stay journey. Participating patients were a median (range) age of 69 (21-99) years and diaries contained a median (range) of 197 (26-1672) words each. Study participants with a tertiary education wrote more in their diaries than those without-a median (range) of 353.5 (48-1672) vs 163 (26-1599) words, respectively (Mann-Whitney U test, p=0.001). Three primary and eight secondary themes emerged from analysis of diary transcripts-primary themes being: (1) communication as central to care; (2) importance of feeling cared for and (3) environmental factors shaping experiences. In the great majority, participants reported positive experiences on the hospital ward. However, a set of 12 patient suggestions for improvement were identified, the majority of which could be addressed with little cost but result in substantial improvements in patient experience. Half of the 12 suggestions for improvement fell into primary theme 1, concerning opportunities to improve communication between healthcare providers and patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Unstructured diaries completed in a patient's own words appear to be an effective and simple approach to capture the hospital-stay experience from the patient's own perspective, and to identify opportunities for improvement.

Expanding patient engagement in quality improvement and health system redesign: Three Canadian case studies

Healthcare organizations face growing pressures to increase patient-centred care and to involve patients more in organizational decisions. Yet many providers worry that such involvement requires additional time and resources and do not see patients as capable of contributing meaningfully to decisions. This article discusses three efforts in four organizations to engage patients in quality improvement efforts. McGill University Health Centre, Saskatoon Health Region, and Vancouver Coastal and Fraser Health Regions all engaged patients in quality improvement and system redesign initiatives that were successful in improving care processes, outcomes, and patient experience measures. Patient involvement in redesigning care may provide a way to demonstrate the value of patients' experiences and inputs into problem-solving, building support for their involvement in other areas. Further study of these cases and a broader survey of organizational experiences with patient involvement may help elucidate the factors that support greater patient engagement.

Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

To identify the strategies and contextual factors that enable optimal engagement of patients in the design, delivery, and evaluation of health services.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane, Scopus, PsychINFO, Social Science Abstracts, EBSCO, and ISI Web of Science from 1990 to 2016 for empirical studies addressing the active participation of patients, caregivers, or families in the design, delivery and evaluation of health services to improve quality of care. Thematic analysis was used to identify (1) strategies and contextual factors that enable optimal engagement of patients, (2) outcomes of patient engagement, and (3) patients' experiences of being engaged.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies were included. Strategies and contextual factors that enable patient engagement were thematically grouped and related to techniques to enhance design, recruitment, involvement and leadership action, and those aimed to creating a receptive context. Reported outcomes ranged from educational or tool development and informed policy or planning documents (discrete products) to enhanced care processes or service delivery and governance (care process or structural outcomes). The level of engagement appears to influence the outcomes of service redesign-discrete products largely derived from low-level engagement (consultative unidirectional feedback)-whereas care process or structural outcomes mainly derived from high-level engagement (co-design or partnership strategies). A minority of studies formally evaluated patients' experiences of the engagement process (n = 12; 25%). While most experiences were positive-increased self-esteem, feeling empowered, or independent-some patients sought greater involvement and felt that their involvement was important but tokenistic, especially when their requests were denied or decisions had already been made.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient engagement can inform patient and provider education and policies, as well as enhance service delivery and governance. Additional evidence is needed to understand patients' experiences of the engagement process and whether these outcomes translate into improved quality of care.

REGISTRATION

N/A (data extraction completed prior to registration on PROSPERO).

Patient engagement in hospital health service planning and improvement: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Patient engagement (PE) improves patient, organisation and health system outcomes, but most research is based on primary care. The primary purpose of this study was to describe the characteristics of published empirical research that evaluated PE in hospital health service improvement.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

Five databases were searched from 2006 to September 2016. English language studies that evaluated patient or provider beliefs, participation in PE, influencing factors or impact were eligible. Screening and data extraction were done in triplicate. PE characteristics, influencing factors and impact were extracted and summarised.

RESULTS

From a total of 3939 search results, 227 studies emerged as potentially relevant; of these, 217 were not eligible, and 10 studies were included in the review. None evaluated behavioural interventions to promote or support PE. While most studies examined involvement in standing committees or projects, patient input and influence on decisions were minimal. Lack of skill and negative beliefs among providers were PE barriers. PE facilitators included careful selection and joint training of patients and providers, formalising patient roles, informal interaction to build trust, involving patients early in projects, small team size, frequent meetings, active solicitation of patient input in meetings and debriefing after meetings. Asking patients to provide insight into problems rather than solutions and deploying provider champions may enhance patient influence on hospital services.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the important role of PE in improving hospital services and the paucity of research on this topic, future research should develop and evaluate behavioural interventions for PE directed at patients and providers informed by the PE barriers and facilitators identified here. Future studies should also assess the impact on various individual and organisational outcomes.

European hospital managers' perceptions of patient-centred care

PURPOSE

The spotlight has recently been placed on managers' responsibility for patient-centred care as a result of Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust failings. In previous research, clinicians reported that managers do not have an adequate structured plan for implementing patient-centred care. The purpose of this paper is to assess the perceptions of European hospital management with respect to factors affecting the implementation of a patient-centred approach.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

In total, 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital managers (n=10), expert country informants (n=2), patient organisations (n=2) and a user representative (n=1) from around Europe. Participants were purposively and snowball sampled. Interviews were analysed using framework analysis.

FINDINGS

Most participants felt that current levels of patient-centred care are inadequate, but accounted that there were a number of macro, meso and micro challenges they faced in implementing this approach. These included budget constraints, political and historical factors, the resistance of clinicians and other frontline staff. Organisational culture emerged as a central theme, shaped by these multi-level factors and influencing the way in which patient-centred care was borne out in the hospital. Participants proposed that the needs of patients might be better met through increasing advocacy by patient organisations and greater staff contact with patients.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

This study is the first of its kind to obtain management views from around Europe. It offers an insight into different models of how patient-centred care is realised by management. It indicates that managers see the value of a patient-centred approach but that they feel restricted by a number of factors at multiple levels.

High-quality Health Information Provision for Stroke Patients

OBJECTIVE

High-quality information provision can allow stroke patients to effectively participate in healthcare decision-making, better manage the stroke, and make a good recovery. In this study, we reviewed information needs of stroke patients, methods for providing information to patients, and considerations needed by the information providers.

DATA SOURCES

The literature concerning or including information provision for patients with stroke in English was collected from PubMed published from 1990 to 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all the relevant articles on information provision for stroke patients in English, with no limitation of study design.

RESULTS

Stroke is a major public health concern worldwide. High-quality and effective health information provision plays an essential role in helping patients to actively take part in decision-making and healthcare, and empowering them to effectively self-manage their long-standing chronic conditions. Different methods for providing information to patients have their relative merits and suitability, and as a result, the effective strategies taken by health professionals may include providing high-quality information, meeting patients' individual needs, using suitable methods in providing information, and maintaining active involvement of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

It is suggested that to enable stroke patients to access high-quality health information, greater efforts need to be made to ensure patients to receive accurate and current evidence-based information which meets their individual needs. Health professionals should use suitable information delivery methods, and actively involve stroke patients in information provision.

Strategies facilitating practice change in pediatric cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

By conducting a systematic review, we describe strategies to actively disseminate knowledge or facilitate practice change among healthcare providers caring for children with cancer and we evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Ovid Medline, EMBASE and PsychINFO.

STUDY SELECTION

Fully published primary studies were included if they evaluated one or more professional intervention strategies to actively disseminate knowledge or facilitate practice change in pediatric cancer or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data extracted included study characteristics and strategies evaluated. In studies with a quantitative analysis of patient outcomes, the relationship between study-level characteristics and statistically significant primary analyses was evaluated.

RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 20 644 titles and abstracts screened, 146 studies were retrieved in full and 60 were included. In 20 studies, quantitative evaluation of patient outcomes was examined and a primary outcome was stated. Eighteen studies were 'before and after' design; there were no randomized studies. All studies were at risk for bias. Interrupted time series was never the primary analytic approach. No specific strategy type was successful at improving patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Literature describing strategies to facilitate practice change in pediatric cancer is emerging. However, major methodological limitations exist. Studies with robust designs are required to identify effective strategies to effect practice change.

Patient involvement in quality management: rationale and current status

Purpose

– The purpose of this paper is to review how patient and public involvement (PPI) can contribute to quality improvement functions and describe the levels of PPI in quality improvement functions at hospital and departmental level in a sample of European hospitals.

Design/methodology/approach

– Literature review and cross-sectional study.

Findings

– PPI takes multiple forms in health care and there is not a single strategy or method that can be considered to reflect best practice. The literature reveals that PPI can serve important functions to support quality improvement efforts. In contrast, the assessment of actual PPI in quality improvement shows that PPI is low.

Research limitations/implications

– Findings are not representative of hospitals in the EU.

Practical implications

– A diverse set of methods and tools that can be employed to realize PPI. Service providers should consider PPI at all stages, in particular in setting quality standards and criteria and in evaluating the results.

Originality/value

– Contextualization of empirical findings with case studies from the literature that inform further practice and research on PPI.

Patient Experience Shows Little Relationship with Hospital Quality Management Strategies

OBJECTIVES

Patient-reported experience measures are increasingly being used to routinely monitor the quality of care. With the increasing attention on such measures, hospital managers seek ways to systematically improve patient experience across hospital departments, in particular where outcomes are used for public reporting or reimbursement. However, it is currently unclear whether hospitals with more mature quality management systems or stronger focus on patient involvement and patient-centered care strategies perform better on patient-reported experience. We assessed the effect of such strategies on a range of patient-reported experience measures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We employed a cross-sectional, multi-level study design randomly recruiting hospitals from the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Turkey between May 2011 and January 2012. Each hospital contributed patient level data for four conditions/pathways: acute myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture and deliveries. The outcome variables in this study were a set of patient-reported experience measures including a generic 6-item measure of patient experience (NORPEQ), a 3-item measure of patient-perceived discharge preparation (Health Care Transition Measure) and two single item measures of perceived involvement in care and hospital recommendation. Predictor variables included three hospital management strategies: maturity of the hospital quality management system, patient involvement in quality management functions and patient-centered care strategies. We used directed acyclic graphs to detail and guide the modeling of the complex relationships between predictor variables and outcome variables, and fitted multivariable linear mixed models with random intercept by hospital, and adjusted for fixed effects at the country level, hospital level and patient level.

RESULTS

Overall, 74 hospitals and 276 hospital departments contributed data on 6,536 patients to this study (acute myocardial infarction n = 1,379, hip fracture n = 1,503, deliveries n = 2,088, stroke n = 1,566). Patients admitted for hip fracture and stroke had the lowest scores across the four patient-reported experience measures throughout. Patients admitted after acute myocardial infarction reported highest scores on patient experience and hospital recommendation; women after delivery reported highest scores for patient involvement and health care transition. We found no substantial associations between hospital-wide quality management strategies, patient involvement in quality management, or patient-centered care strategies with any of the patient-reported experience measures.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest study so far to assess the complex relationship between quality management strategies and patient experience with care. Our findings suggest absence of and wide variations in the institutionalization of strategies to engage patients in quality management, or implement strategies to improve patient-centeredness of care. Seemingly counterintuitive inverse associations could be capturing a scenario where hospitals with poorer quality management were beginning to improve their patient experience. The former suggests that patient-centered care is not yet sufficiently integrated in quality management, while the latter warrants a nuanced assessment of the motivation and impact of involving patients in the design and assessment of services.

Developing patient-centred care: an ethnographic study of patient perceptions and influence on quality improvement

BACKGROUND

Understanding quality improvement from a patient perspective is important for delivering patient-centred care. Yet the ways patients define quality improvement remains unexplored with patients often excluded from improvement work. We examine how patients construct ideas of 'quality improvement' when collaborating with healthcare professionals in improvement work, and how they use these understandings when attempting to improve the quality of their local services.

METHODS

We used in-depth interviews with 23 'patient participants' (patients involved in quality improvement work) and observations in several sites in London as part of a four-year ethnographic study of patient and public involvement (PPI) activities run by Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Northwest London. We took an iterative, thematic and discursive analytical approach.

RESULTS

When patient participants tried to influence quality improvement or discussed different dimensions of quality improvement their accounts and actions frequently started with talk about improvement as dependent on collective action (e.g. multidisciplinary healthcare professionals and the public), but usually quickly shifted away from that towards a neoliberal discourse emphasising the role of individual patients. Neoliberal ideals about individual responsibility were taken up in their accounts moving them away from the idea of state and healthcare providers being held accountable for upholding patients' rights to quality care, and towards the idea of citizens needing to work on self-improvement. Participants portrayed themselves as governed by self-discipline and personal effort in their PPI work, and in doing so provided examples of how neoliberal appeals for self-regulation and self-determination also permeated their own identity positions.

CONCLUSIONS

When including patient voices in measuring and defining 'quality', governments and public health practitioners should be aware of how neoliberal rationalities at the heart of policy and services may discourage consumers from claiming rights to quality care by contributing to public unwillingness to challenge the status quo in service provision. If the democratic potential of patient and public involvement initiatives is to be realised, it will be crucial to help citizens to engage critically with how neoliberal rationalities can undermine their abilities to demand quality care.

Implementation of patient safety and patient-centeredness strategies in Iranian hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To examine the extent of implementation for patient safety (PS) and patient-centeredness (PC) strategies and their association with hospital characteristics (type, ownership, teaching status, annual evaluation grade) in Iran.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study through an adapted version of the MARQuIS questionnaire, eliciting information from hospital and nursing managers in 84 Iranian hospitals on the implementation of PS and PC strategies in 2009-2010.

RESULTS

The majority of hospitals reported to have implemented 84% of the PS and 72% of the PC strategies. In general, implementation of PS strategies was unrelated to the type of hospital, with the exception of health promotion reports, which were more common in the Social Security Organization (SSO), and MRSA testing, which was reported more often in nonprofit hospitals. MRSA testing was also more common among teaching hospitals compared to non-teaching hospitals. The higher grade hospitals reported PS strategies significantly more frequently than lower grade hospitals. Overall, there was no significant difference in the reported implementation of PC strategies across general and specialized hospitals; except for the provision of information in different languages and recording of patient's diet which were reported significantly more often by general than specialized hospitals. Moreover, patient hotel services were more common in private compared to public hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite substantial reporting of PS and PC strategies, there is still room for strengthening standard setting on safety, patient services and patient-centered information strategies in Iranian hospitals. To assure effective implementation of PS and PC strategies, enforcing standards, creating a PS and PC culture, increasing organizational responsiveness, and partnering with patients and their families need more attention.

Deepening our understanding of quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE): overview of a study of hospital quality management in seven countries

Introduction and Objective

This paper provides an overview of the DUQuE (Deepening our Understanding of Quality Improvement in Europe) project, the first study across multiple countries of the European Union (EU) to assess relationships between quality management and patient outcomes at EU level. The paper describes the conceptual framework and methods applied, highlighting the novel features of this study.

Design

DUQuE was designed as a multi-level cross-sectional study with data collection at hospital, pathway, professional and patient level in eight countries.

Setting and Participants

We aimed to collect data for the assessment of hospital-wide constructs from up to 30 randomly selected hospitals in each country, and additional data at pathway and patient level in 12 of these 30.

Main outcome measures

A comprehensive conceptual framework was developed to account for the multiple levels that influence hospital performance and patient outcomes. We assessed hospital-specific constructs (organizational culture and professional involvement), clinical pathway constructs (the organization of care processes for acute myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture and deliveries), patient-specific processes and outcomes (clinical effectiveness, patient safety and patient experience) and external constructs that could modify hospital quality (external assessment and perceived external pressure).

Results

Data was gathered from 188 hospitals in 7 participating countries. The overall participation and response rate were between 75% and 100% for the assessed measures.

Conclusions

This is the first study assessing relation between quality management and patient outcomes at EU level. The study involved a large number of respondents and achieved high response rates. This work will serve to develop guidance in how to assess quality management and makes recommendations on the best ways to improve quality in healthcare for hospital stakeholders, payers, researchers, and policy makers throughout the EU.