Does a Question Prompt List Improve Perceived Involvement in Care in Orthopaedic Surgery Compared with the AskShareKnow Questions? A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

Development and initial evaluation of the usefulness of a question prompt list to promote patients' level of information about work-related medical rehabilitation: a pilot study

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to develop a question prompt list (QPL) to support patients undergoing work-related medical rehabilitation in obtaining relevant information and to explore how patients and physicians rate the QPL regarding its usefulness, practicability, and perceived (additional) effort.

Methods

An initial item pool was assessed by rehabilitation patients (N = 3) in cognitive interviews, rated by physicians and other health professionals (N = 11), and then further modified. The final QPL version (16 items) was used by patients (N = 36) in medical admission interviews in an inpatient medical rehabilitation facility and then evaluated. Physicians evaluated the QPL after each interview with a study participant (N = 6; k = 39 interviews).

Results

The QPL was used by 50% of patients who rated its usefulness and comprehensibility positively. Neither the need for information nor satisfaction with the information received was correlated with QPL use. The physicians' assessment showed a positive evaluation regarding the provision of information and structuring of the conversation, but also a higher perceived time expenditure.

Discussion

While initial testing of the QPL in work-related medical rehabilitation as a tool to support patient-provider communication generally showed a favorable evaluation by patients using it and physicians, future research should address its validity and effectiveness.

Development of a conceptual model of the capacity for patients to engage in their health care: a group concept mapping study

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement is seen as a necessary component in achieving the triple aim of improved population health, improved experience of care, and lower per capita health care costs. While there has been a substantial increase in the number of tools and patient-centered initiatives designed to help patients participate in health decisions, there remains a limited understanding of engagement from the perspective of patients and a lack of measures designed to capture the multi-faceted nature of the concept.

METHODS

Development of a concept map of patient engagement followed a five-step modified Group Concept Mapping (GCM) methodology of preparation, generation, structuring, analysis and interpretation. We engaged a Project Advisory Committee at each step, along with three rounds of survey collection from clinicians and patients for element generation (272 clinicians, 61 patients), statement sorting (30 clinicians, 15 patients), and ranking and rating of statements (159 clinicians, 67 patients). The survey of three separate samples, as opposed to focus groups of 'experts,' was an intentional decision to gain a broad perspective about the concept of patient engagement. We conducted the structure and analysis steps within the groupwisdom concept mapping software.

RESULTS

The final concept map comprised 47 elements organized into 5 clusters: Relationship with Provider, Patient Attitudes and Behaviors, Access, Internal Resources and External Resources. There was considerable agreement in the way elements in each cluster were rated by patients and clinicians. An analysis of the importance of the constitutive elements of patient engagement relative to their addressability highlighted actionable items in the domain of Relationship with Provider, aimed at building trust and enabling patients to ask questions. At the same time, the analysis also identified elements traditionally considered barriers to engagement, like personal access to the internet and the patient's level of digital literacy, as difficult to address by the healthcare system, but also relatively less important for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Through our GCM approach, incorporating perspectives of both patients and clinicians, we identified items that can be used to assess patient engagement efforts by healthcare systems. As a result, our study offers specific insight into areas that can be targeted for intervention by healthcare systems to improve patient engagement.

Optimizing the design and implementation of question prompt lists to support person-centred care: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Question prompt lists (QPLs) are lists of questions that patients may want to discuss with clinicians. QPLs support person-centred care and have been associated with many beneficial outcomes including improved patient question-asking, and the amount and quality of the information provided by clinicians. The purpose of this study was to review published research on QPLs to explore how QPL design and implementation can be optimized.

METHODS

We performed a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Database from inception to 8 May 2022, for English language studies of any design that evaluated QPLs. We used summary statistics and text to report study characteristics, and QPL design and implementation.

RESULTS

We included 57 studies published from 1988 to 2022 by authors in 12 countries on a range of clinical topics. Of those, 56% provided the QPL, but few described how QPLs were developed. The number of questions varied widely (range 9-191). Most QPLs were single-page handouts (44%) but others ranged from 2 to 33 pages. Most studies implemented a QPL alone with no other accompanying strategy; most often in a print format before consultations by mail (18%) or in the waiting room (66%). Both patients and clinicians identified numerous benefits to patients of QPLs (e.g., increased patient confidence to ask questions, and patient satisfaction with communication or care received; and reduced anxiety about health status or treatment). To support use, patients desired access to QPLs in advance of clinician visits, and clinicians desired information/training on how to use the QPL and answer questions. Most (88%) studies reported at least one beneficial impact of QPLs. This was true even for single-page QPLs with few questions unaccompanied by other implementation strategies. Despite favourable views of QPLs, few studies assessed outcomes amongst clinicians.

CONCLUSION

This review identified QPL characteristics and implementation strategies that may be associated with beneficial outcomes. Future research should confirm these findings via systematic review and explore the benefits of QPLs from the clinician's perspective.

PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Following this review, we used the findings to develop a QPL on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and interviewed women and clinicians about QPL design including content, format, enablers and barriers of use, and potential outcomes including beneficial impacts and possible harms (will be published elsewhere).

Question prompt lists and caregiver question asking in pediatric specialty appointments: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Question prompt lists (QPLs) have been effective at increasing patient involvement and question asking in medical appointments, which is critical for shared decision making. We investigated whether pre-visit preparation (PVP), including a QPL, would increase question asking among caregivers of pediatric patients with undiagnosed, suspected genetic conditions.

METHODS

Caregivers were randomized to receive the PVP before their appointment (n = 59) or not (control, n = 53). Appointments were audio-recorded. Transcripts were analyzed to determine questions asked.

RESULTS

Caregivers in the PVP group asked more questions (MeanPVP = 4.36, SDPVP = 4.66 vs. Meancontrol = 2.83, SDcontrol = 3.03, p = 0.045), including QPL questions (MeanPVP = 1.05, SDPVP = 1.39 vs. Meancontrol = 0.36, SDcontrol = 0.81, p = 0.002). Caregivers whose child had insurance other than Medicaid in the PVP group asked more total and QPL questions than their counterparts in the control group (ps = 0.005 and 0.002); there was no intervention effect among caregivers of children with Medicaid or no insurance (ps = 0.775 and 0.166).

CONCLUSION

The PVP increased question asking but worked less effectively among traditionally underserved groups. Additional interventions, including provider-focused efforts, may be needed to promote engagement of underserved patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Patient/family-focused interventions may not be beneficial for all populations. Providers should be aware of potential implicit and explicit biases and encourage question asking to promote patient/family engagement.

Evidence Review for Preventing Osteoarthritis After an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: An Osteoarthritis Action Alliance Consensus Statement

CONTEXT

The Osteoarthritis Action Alliance formed a secondary prevention task group to develop a consensus on secondary prevention recommendations to reduce the risk of osteoarthritis after a knee injury.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to provide clinicians with secondary prevention recommendations that are intended to reduce the risk of osteoarthritis after a person has sustained an anterior cruciate ligament injury. Specifically, this manuscript describes our methods, literature reviews, and dissenting opinions to elaborate on the rationale for our recommendations and to identify critical gaps.

DESIGN

Consensus process.

SETTING

Virtual video conference calls and online voting.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

The Secondary Prevention Task Group consisted of 29 members from various clinical backgrounds.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The group initially convened online in August 2020 to discuss the target population, goals, and key topics. After a second call, the task group divided into 9 subgroups to draft the recommendations and supportive text for crucial content areas. Twenty-one members completed 2 rounds of voting and revising the recommendations and supportive text between February and April 2021. A virtual meeting was held to review the wording of the recommendations and obtain final votes. We defined consensus as >80% of voting members supporting a proposed recommendation.

RESULTS

The group achieved consensus on 15 of 16 recommendations. The recommendations address patient education, exercise and rehabilitation, psychological skills training, graded-exposure therapy, cognitive-behavioral counseling (lacked consensus), outcomes to monitor, secondary injury prevention, system-level social support, leveraging technology, and coordinated care models.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus statement reflects information synthesized from an interdisciplinary group of experts based on the best available evidence from the literature or personal experience. We hope this document raises awareness among clinicians and researchers to take steps to mitigate the risk of osteoarthritis after an anterior cruciate ligament injury.

Patient focused interventions and communication in the surgical clinic: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Communication is the foundation of a strong doctor-patient relationship. Holistic care of the patient involves good communication and empathy. There are various tools and interventions aimed at increasing the Surgeon's performance, but these have the drawback of heavy cost and time commitments. In contrast, patient focused interventions are often simple and cheap. In surgery this is an evolving field, and little is known about the impact these interventions have on clinical encounters. The aim of this review is to determine how patient focussed interventions impact communication in the Surgical Outpatient Consultation.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, two reviewers independently searched MEDLINE (incl. PubMed), EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library for the period starting 01 February 1990 to 01 February 2022. Filtration and screening was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Conflicts were resolved by discussion. Risk of Bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tool. Meta-analyses were conducted by an independent statistician using Stata Statistical Software. This systematic review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (ID CRD42022311112).

FINDINGS

After screening, 38 papers were included in the final analysis. These involved 6392 patients consisting of 32 randomised controlled trials (RCT), one crossover RCT, three non-randomised experimental studies, and three cohort studies. All articles were published between 1999 and 2022. Four types of intervention were identified: Patient Decision Aids, Educational Materials, Question Prompt Lists and Patient Reported Outcome Measures. There was much heterogeneity in the reported results but ultimately four recurring domains for assessing quality of communication were identified: Patient knowledge; decisional conflict; satisfaction; and anxiety. Meta-analyses showed that patient focussed interventions increased patient knowledge and reduced decisional conflict. Meta-regression demonstrated significant knowledge increases in females compared with males. Results regarding satisfaction and anxiety were not statistically significant.

INTERPRETATION

Our study suggested that patient focused interventions demonstrate promising results for increasing patient engagement and improving communication. Further multicentre randomised controlled trials with consistent validated endpoints should be conducted to evaluate this evolving field.

FUNDING

There was no funding source for this study.

Patient prompts in surgical consultations: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Quality communication has been found to improve patient outcomes. Despite good communication, information may still be forgotten or misunderstood by patients. A question prompt list is a document to help patients ask questions. Question prompt lists are well perceived by various stakeholders and have been found of benefit to patients. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of patient question prompting documents in surgical outpatient consultations.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychINFO were searched on September 13, 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were performed in duplicate. We included English studies that investigated the use of question prompt lists and their influence on patient outcomes. We excluded studies that did not have a comparator group. Because of heterogeneity of outcome measures, meta-analysis was precluded. This study was registered with PROSPERO (identification number: CRD42021279058).

RESULTS

Searches identified 107 suitable studies; however, only 7 studies met eligibility criteria. All included studies were randomized controlled trials, but the designs of studies were heterogenous. Three out of 7 included studies were at a high risk of bias. The included studies investigated different outcomes that could be broadly categorized into 5 themes: consultation characteristics, patient engagement, patient well-being, information exchange, and patient satisfaction. None of the studies looked at patient recall of information. Aside from length of consultation, the overall results for each category were mixed.

CONCLUSION

Current literature has suggested that question prompt lists are a low-risk intervention that could improve patient engagement and patient-doctor communication; however, there is limited evidence at present to conclusively promote their usage in perioperative surgical consultations.

Patient-Derived Framework for Quality in Hand Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis

PURPOSE

Despite the growing attention to evaluating care from the patient perspective, the most common definitions and measurements of quality are currently defined by physicians and health systems. Studies have demonstrated how a lack of patient input can lead to discrepancies between patients' and physicians' assessments of quality and, subsequently, worse patient outcomes. Although quality measures are increasingly used in hand surgery, insufficient work has examined whether these quality measures align with what matters to patients. We completed a qualitative study to assess how patients define high-quality care through the pre-, peri-, and postoperative phases of care in hand surgery.

METHODS

Based on our prior work, we created an open-ended interview guide and conducted semistructured interviews with 43 hand surgery patients at 5 tertiary-care institutions during various phases of care. We completed a thematic analysis to generate subcodes and open codes, to identify themes in high-quality care from the patient perspective.

RESULTS

Patients defined high-quality care as a process of (1) setting and meeting clear expectations; (2) achieving functional goals after surgery; and (3) feeling comfortable with and cared for by the care team. We identified the following 4 patient-centered themes that contributed to high-quality care: (1) communication between the patient and care team through all phases of care; (2) efficient and accurate diagnosis and treatment; (3) satisfactory treatment outcomes and postsurgical experience; and (4) acceptable systemic aspects of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Efforts to improve health care delivery should include areas of care that are important to patients. Our results suggest that measuring aspects of care that often go without assessments, such as communication, can maximize care quality as defined by patients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The themes identified in this study can inform efforts towards patient-centered quality measure development.

Effectiveness of question prompt lists in patients with breast cancer: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of a question prompt list (QPL) in decision self-efficacy, decision-making participation, patient-physician communication, decisional conflict or regret, and health status in patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

A total of 240 patients with breast cancer were randomly assigned to a QPL group or control group (n = 120 each). The intervention and control groups received an additional educational QPL booklet and routine care, respectively.

RESULTS

The intervention group exhibited significant improvements in decision self-efficacy, perceived patient-physician interactions, and patient-physician communication compared with the control group. Multilevel modeling analyses revealed significant group-time interaction effects on decision self-efficacy (β = 9.99, P < 0.01), perceived patient-physician interactions (β = 8.10, P < 0.01), patient-physician communication (β = 5.02, P < 0.01), and anxiety status (β = -3.78, P < 0.05). The QPL intervention exerted more favorable effects than routine care, with repeated measurements of the same patients and the data of patients under the care of the same surgeons accounted for.

CONCLUSIONS

The QPL intervention exerted multidimensional effects on decision-making outcomes among patients with breast cancer.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians can integrate a QPL into routine care for patients with breast cancer.