Ask us! Adjusting experience-based codesign to be responsive to people with intellectual disabilities, serious mental illness or older persons receiving support with independent living

The Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals and Managers on Patient Involvement in Care Pathway Development: A Discourse Analysis

BACKGROUND

The WHO advocates patient and public involvement as an ethical imperative, due to the value of the lived experience of patients. A deeper understanding of the shared meanings and underlying beliefs of healthcare professionals and managers for and against including patients in care pathway development.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the considerations of healthcare professionals and managers on the involvement of patients and public in care pathway development.

METHODS

In a medical rehabilitation centre we conducted a single case study that was part of a 2-year action research programme on blended care pathway development. Following 14 semistructured interviews with healthcare professionals and managers, we analysed their discourses on the value of patient involvement as well as the potential threats and opportunities.

RESULTS

We identified four discourses. Patient as expert frames involvement as relevant, as adding new perspectives and as required to fully understand the patient's needs. Skills and representation is based on the construct that obtaining valuable insights from patients requires certain skills and competences. Self-protection focusses on personal, interprofessional objections to patient involvement. Professional knows best reveals expertise-related reasons for avoiding or postponing involvement.

CONCLUSION

These discourses explain why patient and public involvement in care pathway development is sometimes postponed, limited in scope and level of participation, and/or avoided. The following strategies might minimise the paralysing effect of these discourses: strengthen the capabilities of all stakeholders involved; use a mix of complementary techniques to gain involvement in distinct phases of care pathway development; and create/facilitate a safe environment. Put together, these strategies would foster ongoing, reciprocal learning that could enhance patient involvement.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study belonged to an action research programme on blended care pathway development (developing an integrated, coordinated patient care plan that combines remote, digital telehealth applications, self-management tools and face-to-face care). Multidisciplinary teams took a quality collaborative approach to quality improvement (considering patients as stakeholders) to develop 11 blended care pathways. Although professionals and managers were instructed to invite patients onto their teams and to attend care pathway design workshops, few teams (3/11) actually did. Unravelling why this happened will help improve patient and public involvement in care pathway development.

How Stories Can Contribute Toward Quality Improvement in Long-Term Care

It is important to evaluate how residents, their significant others, and professional caregivers experience life in a nursing home to improve quality of care based on their needs and wishes. Narratives are a promising method to assess this experienced quality of care as they enable a rich understanding, reflection, and learning. In the Netherlands, narratives are becoming a more substantial element within the quality improvement cycle of nursing homes. The added value of using narrative methods is that they provide space to share experiences, identify dilemmas in care provision, and provide rich information for quality improvements. The use of narratives in practice, however, can also be challenging as this requires effective guidance on how to learn from this data, incorporation of the narrative method in the organizational structure, and national recognition that narrative data can also be used for accountability. In this article, 5 Dutch research institutes reflect on the importance, value, and challenges of using narratives in nursing homes.

What are the evidence bases for developing models of rehabilitation for older people with mental illness in Australia?

OBJECTIVE

This paper updates clinicians and service leaders on evidence bases relevant to rehabilitation for older Australians with mental illness.

METHODS

Narrative review of literature and relevant public domain data supported by reflections on NSW service development.

RESULTS

There is a paucity of high-quality evidence regarding mental health rehabilitation in older people. Available evidence supports integrating lessons from physical healthcare with adaptations of 'adult' mental health rehabilitation. Adaptation is required to respond to the specific needs, strengths and service use of older people with mental illness. Challenges for older people include ageism, increased physical and cognitive comorbidities, lower access to mental health services and earlier residential aged care entry. Strengths of older people include an ongoing desire for recovery, ongoing developmental change and often closer connections with carers and GPs. Evidence is consistent with evaluation of relevant NSW service models and initiatives including the Pathways to Community Living Initiative. Integration of recovery-oriented practice and wellness models may provide a framework for future innovative inpatient and community-based models.

CONCLUSIONS

There is sufficient evidence to guide development of models of rehabilitation with older people, but innovation and evaluation are essential if older people are to have equal opportunities in their recovery journeys.

Bedtime negotiations: Unravelling normative complexity in hospital-based prevention

This study explores how actors deal with normative complexity in the design and implementation of practices of preventative care. Previous studies have identified conflicting (e)valuations of prevention within health care at large, but little empirical research describes how these conflicts are resolved in day-to-day interactions. Zooming in on the work of a single actor, our ethnographic study describes a Dutch psychiatrist developing a novel type of hospital bed that provides preventative psychiatric care for women in the post-partum period. Drawing on pragmatic sociology of justification, we construe 'beds'-and the time, people and resources they represent-as points of convergence between conflicting valuations of care. The results show that embedded modes of valuation in a curative hospital setting generate significant normative complexity during implementation. We identify three main strategies through which normative complexity is managed: (a) translating between different modes of valuing prevention, (b) compromising in (material) design of care beds and (c) transcending embedded valuations through moral appeals. By showing the normative complexity of prevention in practice, our study highlights the need for a diverse and situated accounting for preventative care.

The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature

Objective

To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities.

Design

Scoping Review.

Data sources

Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest), website searches (e.g. Beryl Institute), snowballing, and key-informant recommendations.

Methods

Two independent reviewers performed title and abstract screenings and full-text reviews. Eligibility focused on English-language, peer-reviewed (all time) and gray literature (last five years) that used patient experience feedback in rehabilitation improvement activities. The aims, settings, methods, findings, implications, and reported limitations were extracted, followed by content analyses identifying reported enablers and gaps.

Results

Among the 901 unique references and 52 full texts reviewed, ten were included: four used patient experience surveys for improving patient experiences; six used codesign methodologies to engage patient feedback in service improvement activities. Implementation enablers included securing managerial support, having a structured methodology and facilitator, using efficient processes, engaging staff experiences, and using appreciative inquiry. Reported study gaps included limited follow-up, low sample sizes, analytical limitations, lack of reported limitations, or narrow range of perspectives (e.g. not from people with severe impairments).

Conclusion

Few examples of the use of patient experience feedback in quality improvement or codesign activities were found in the rehabilitation literature. Patient experience improvement activities relied exclusively on retrospective survey data, which were not combined with often more actionable forms (e.g. qualitative, real time) of patient experience feedback. Further research might consider design of activities that collect and use patient experience feedback for rehabilitation service improvements.