A qualitative study of emergency physicians' perspectives on PROMS in the emergency department

Nurses' perspectives on patient involvement in an emergency department - An interview study

BACKGROUND

Patient involvement in healthcare decisions is key to patient-centred care, and it is an area subject to continuous political focus. However, patient-centred care and patient involvement are challenging to implement in an emergency department (ED) setting, as EDs tend to focus on structures, processes, and outcomes. This study explored nurses' perspectives on patient involvement in an ED setting.

METHOD

This study applied an explorative design and conducted focus group interviews to generate data; abductive reasoning was chosen as the analytical method. Two focus groups were held in February 2021, each including six ED nurses.

RESULTS

Four themes were generated: notions of patient involvement, significant factors, ED culture, and management. Nurses considered patient involvement an optional add-on and, to some extent, a matter of tokenism carried forward by managers who are afraid of complaints and bad media coverage. Patient involvement in the form of providing information to patients was considered important yet less critical than life-saving and technical tasks.

CONCLUSION

ED nurses' perspectives on patient involvement are particularly influenced by the technical and life-saving culture in an ED. Information provision is considered patient involvement and is decided and administered by nurses.

'Why should I fill out this questionnaire?' A qualitative study of cancer patients' perspectives on the integration of e-PROMs in routine clinical care

PURPOSE

There is increasing interest in integrating electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PROs) into clinical routines in cancer settings. However, little is known about patients' experiences with and perceptions of e-PRO measures (e-PROMs). This study examines patients' experiences with e-PROMS, particularly their perspectives about its usefulness and its implications for the clinical encounter with their doctors.

METHOD

A total of 19 individual in-person interviews with cancer patients at a Comprehensive Cancer Center in northern Italy conducted in 2021 inform this study.

RESULTS

The findings suggested that, overall, patients had positive attitudes towards data collection using e-PROMs. On the one hand, most patients found the integration of e-PROMs into routine clinical practice as beneficial in treating patients with cancer. The main benefits of e-PROMs according to this group of patients were that: they promoted patient-centred care; could be used to tailor and improve the quality of care through a holistic approach; supported early detection of problematic symptoms; increased patient self-awareness; and contributed to clinical research. On the other hand, many patients did not fully understand the purpose of e-PROMs and some patients were also sceptical about their usefulness in routine clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings have several practical implications for ensuring the successful implementation of e-PROMs in routine clinical practice. These include the following preconditions: patients are informed about the purposes of data collection; physicians provide feedback to patients about the e-PROMs' results; and that hospital administrators allocate sufficient time for clinical interactions to integrate e-PROMs into routine clinical practice.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences Assessment in Women with Breast Cancer: Portuguese Case Study

In 2020, female breast cancer was the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, representing the type of cancer with the highest incidence among women and the second most common cause of cancer death among women in all OECD countries. The conventional measures addressing the burden of breast cancer by measuring mortality, incidence, and survival do not entirely reflect the quality of life and patients experience when receiving breast cancer care. The main objective of this study is to capture patient-reported outcomes and experiences in women with breast cancer in Portugal using methods developed for international benchmarking purposes, such as the OECD Patient-reported Indicators Surveys. The study included 378 women with breast cancer, with the age distribution being 19.8% aged 15 to 49 years and 80.2% aged 50 years and over. The data collection procedure and analysis followed the "OECD Breast Cancer Patient Reported Outcomes Working Group" protocol, allowing subsequent comparability with data from other OECD member countries. Most women were satisfied with the treatment outcome regarding the shape of their lumpectomy breast when wearing a bra (96.1%) and with the equal size of both breasts (78.3%). Findings on the WHO QOL-BREF showed that women manifest a lower score in well-being when compared with the general population or populations living with chronic diseases. This study shows the feasibility of implementing and using patient-reported metrics (PROM and PREM) in breast cancer services in Portugal. Measuring PROMs and PREMs from Portuguese women receiving breast cancer care provides insightful evidence into the quality and value of cancer care.

Determinants of regulatory compliance in health and social care services: A systematic review using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research

BACKGROUND

The delivery of high quality care is a fundamental goal for health systems worldwide. One policy tool to ensure quality is the regulation of services by an independent public authority. This systematic review seeks to identify determinants of compliance with such regulation in health and social care services.

METHODS

Searches were carried out on five electronic databases and grey literature sources. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies were eligible for inclusion. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers independently. Determinants were identified from the included studies, extracted and allocated to constructs in the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The quality of included studies was appraised by two reviewers independently. The results were synthesised in a narrative review using the constructs of the CFIR as grouping themes.

RESULTS

The search yielded 7,500 articles for screening, of which 157 were included. Most studies were quantitative designs in nursing home settings and were conducted in the United States. Determinants were largely structural in nature and allocated most frequently to the inner and outer setting domains of the CFIR. The following structural characteristics and compliance were found to be positively associated: smaller facilities (measured by bed capacity); higher nurse-staffing levels; and lower staff turnover. A facility's geographic location and compliance was also associated. It was difficult to make findings in respect of process determinants as qualitative studies were sparse, limiting investigation of the processes underlying regulatory compliance.

CONCLUSION

The literature in this field has focused to date on structural attributes of compliant providers, perhaps because these are easier to measure, and has neglected more complex processes around the implementation of regulatory standards. A number of gaps, particularly in terms of qualitative work, are evident in the literature and further research in this area is needed to provide a clearer picture.

Identification of elderly patients at risk for 30-day readmission: Clinical insight beyond big data prediction

AIM

This study explores the potential benefit of combining clinicians' risk assessments and the automated 30-day readmission prediction model.

BACKGROUND

Automated readmission prediction models based on electronic health records are increasingly applied as part of prevention efforts, but their accuracy is moderate.

METHODS

This prospective multisource study was based on self-reported surveys of clinicians and data from electronic health records. The survey was performed at 15 internal medicine wards of three general Clalit hospitals between May 2016 and June 2017. We examined the degree of concordance between the Preadmission Readmission Detection Model, clinicians' readmission risk classification and the likelihood of actual readmission. Decision trees were developed to classify patients by readmission risk.

RESULTS

A total of 694 surveys were collected for 371 patients. The disagreement between clinicians' risk assessment and the model was 34.5% for nurses and 33.5% for physicians. The decision tree algorithms identified 22% and 9% (based on nurses and physicians, respectively) of the model's low-medium-risk patients as high risk (accuracy 0.8 and 0.76, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining the Readmission Model with clinical insight improves the ability to identify high-risk elderly patients.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT

This study provides algorithms for the decision-making process for selecting high-risk readmission patients based on nurses' evaluations.

Use of Patient-Reported Data within the Acute Healthcare Context: A Scoping Review

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) and patient satisfaction surveys provide important information on how care can be improved. However, data collection does not always translate to changes in practice or service delivery. This scoping review aimed to collect, map and report on the use of collected patient-reported data used within acute healthcare contexts for improvement to care or processes. Using JBI methods, an extensive search was undertaken of multiple health databases and trial registries for published and unpublished studies. The concepts of interest included the types and characteristics of published patient experience and PROMs research, with a specific focus on the ways in which data have been applied to clinical practice. Barriers and facilitators to the use of collected data were also explored. From 4057 records, 86 papers were included. Most research was undertaken in North America, Canada or the UK. The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems tool (HCAHPS) was used most frequently for measuring patient satisfaction. Where reported, data were applied to improve patient-centred care and utilization of health resources. Gaps in the use of patient data within hospital services are noticeable. Engaging management and improving staff capability are needed to overcome barriers to implementation.

Patient values and preferences in pulmonary embolism testing in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Patient-centered care is concordant with patient values and preferences. There is a lack of research on patient values and preferences for pulmonary embolism (PE) testing in the emergency department (ED), and a poor physician understanding of patient-specific goals. Our aim was to map patient-specific values, preferences, and expectations regarding PE testing in the ED.

METHOD

This qualitative study used constructivist grounded theory to identify patient values and expectations around PE testing in the ED. We conducted semi-structured interviews with ED patients who were being tested for PE in two EDs. Patients who were waiting for PE imaging or D-dimer results were approached and consented to take part in a 30-minute audio-recorded interview. Each interview was transcribed verbatim and analyzed using constant comparative coding. The interview script was modified to maximize information on emerging themes. Major themes and subthemes were derived, each representing an opportunity, barrier, or value to address with patient-centered PE testing.

RESULTS

From 30 patient interviews, we mapped four major themes: patient satisfaction comes from addressing the patient's primary concern (for example, their pain); patients expect individualized care; patients prefer imaging over clinical examination for PE testing; and patients expect 100% confidence from their emergency physician when given a diagnosis. Subthemes included symptomatic relief, finding a diagnosis, receiving tests, rapid progression through their care, perception of highly accurate CT scans, willingness to seek a second opinion, direct physician communication, and expectation of case-specific testing with cognitive reassurance.

CONCLUSION

Addressing each of these four themes by realigning ED processes could provide patient-centered PE testing.

Appropriateness of imaging decisions for low back pain presenting to the emergency department: a retrospective chart review study

BACKGROUND

Imaging for low back pain is widely regarded as a target for efforts to reduce low-value care.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate the prevalence of the overuse and underuse of lumbar imaging in patients presenting with low back pain to the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review study of five public hospital EDs in Sydney, Australia, in 2019-20. We reviewed the clinical charts of consecutive adult patients who presented with a complaint of low back pain and extracted clinical features relevant to a decision to request lumbar imaging. We estimated the proportion of encounters where a decision to request lumbar imaging was inappropriate (overuse) or where a clinician did not request an appropriate and informative lumbar imaging test when indicated (underuse).

RESULTS

Six hundred and forty-nine patients presented with a complaint of low back pain, of which 158 (24.3%) were referred for imaging. Seventy-nine (12.2%) had a combination of features suggesting that lumbar imaging was indicated according to clinical guidelines. The prevalence of overuse and underuse of lumbar imaging was 8.8% (57 of 649 cases, 95% CI 6.8-11.2%) and 4.3% (28 of 649 cases, 95% CI 3.0-6.1%), respectively. Thirteen cases were classified as underuse because the patients were referred for uninformative imaging modalities (e.g. referred for radiography for suspected cauda equina syndrome).

CONCLUSION

In this study of emergency care, there was evidence of not only overuse of lumbar imaging but also underuse through failure to request lumbar imaging when indicated or referral for an uninformative imaging modality. These three issues seem more important targets for quality improvement than solely focusing on overuse.

Parents' and carers' impression of "quality" within a Paediatric Emergency Department

Background

Quality improvement systems are needed to overcome the ‘Quality Gap’ – difference between evidence-based guidelines and the care delivered. While there are a large array of potential quality assurance measures exists in the Paediatric Emergency Department, parent’s/carer’s perception of these is unknown. This study aimed to identify what ‘quality of care’ means to parents/carers of Paediatric Emergency Department (PED) patients, further determine which aspects of these are most important to them. Also, to identify which of the existing PED quality measures are most important to parents/carers, and their preferred method of providing feedback.

Methods

A Modified Rand-Delphi study was performed with parents/carers as the expert group and consensus was obtained from them via three web-based surveys. All parents/carers of children attending a tertiary paediatric hospital during six-week in winter were eligible– no exclusions. Quality measures scoring at least 7 on a 9-point Likert scale during the final survey were considered “very important”, while those scoring at least an 8 were considered “extremely important”.

Results

One hundred four parents/carers responded from a total of 1095 participants. Parents/carers generated 527 free text entries, to the initial survey on what ‘quality of care’ means. These were mapped to 48 quality measure which they ranked on subsequent surveys. Eighteen quality measures were considered very important by at least 90% of respondents. Of these, six were considered extremely important by at least 70% of respondents: ‘Thorough medical assessment’ (84%); ‘A triage system’ (84%); ‘Experienced and knowledgeable staff that are skilled in paediatrics’ (77%); ‘Resources and equipment available to provide care’ (72%); and ‘Clear follow up plans and reviews that are communicated and scheduled’ (72%). Parents/carers considered existing quality measures as important with ‘timely treatment of a critical condition’ as the most important. Most participants preferred to provide anonymous feedback (N = 69, 66%), online (N = 77, 72%) after discharge (N = 82, 70%).

Conclusion

We have elicited what ‘quality of care’ means to parents/carers, and which aspects are most important to them. Parents/carers consider commonly used PED quality measure as very important. However, they are less important than outcomes generated by themselves. Further parents/carers in this study preferred to provide feedback that was anonymous and electronically distributed after they leave the ED.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-021-02752-7.

An Evidence-Based Theory About PRO Use in Kidney Care: A Realist Synthesis

BACKGROUND

There is international interest on the use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in nephrology.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to develop a kidney-specific program theory about use of PROs in nephrology that may enhance person-centered care, both at individual and aggregated levels of care, and to test and refine this theory through a systematic review of the empirical literature. Together, these objectives articulate what works or does not work, for whom, and why.

METHODS

Realist synthesis methodology guided the electronic database and gray literature searches (in January 2017 and October 2018), screening, and extraction conducted independently by three reviewers. Sources included all nephrology patients and/or practitioners. Through a process of extraction and synthesis, each included source was examined to assess how contexts may trigger mechanisms to influence specific outcomes.

RESULTS

After screening 19,961 references, 84 theoretical and 34 empirical sources were used. PROs are proposed to be useful for providing nephrology care through three types of use. The first type is use of individual-level PRO data at point of care, receiving the majority of theoretical and empirical explorations. Clinician use to support person-centered care, and patient use to support patient engagement, are purported to improve satisfaction, health, and quality of life. Contextual factors specific to the kidney care setting that may influence the use of PRO data include the complexity of kidney disease symptom burden, symptoms that may be stigmatized, comorbidities, and time or administrative constraints in dialysis settings. Electronic collection of PROs may facilitate PRO use given these contexts. The second type is use of aggregated PRO data at point of care, including public reporting of PROs to inform decisions at point of care and improve quality of care, and use of PROs for treatment decisions. The third type is use of aggregated PRO data by organizations, including publicly available PRO data to compare centers. In single-payer systems, regular collection of PROs by dialysis centers can be achieved through economic incentives. Both the second and third types of PRO use include pressures that may trigger quality improvement processes.

CONCLUSION

The current state of the evidence is primarily theoretical. There is pressing need for empirical research to improve the evidence-base of PRO use at individual and aggregated levels of nephrology care.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements (PROMs) After Discharge From the Emergency Department: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) is to elicit the perspectives of patients and translate them into a reliable measurement questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this cross-sectional study was to detect a set of PROs and PRO measurements (PROMs) about patients with isolated trauma of the limbs receiving emergency department (ED) care.

METHODS

A survey was performed in the ED using a questionnaire among the enrolled patients to identify which proposed outcomes were perceived as important by the patients according to their expectations.

RESULTS

Ninety-six consecutive patients were conveniently enrolled. For each item of the questionnaire, the percentage of patients who agreed to perceive it important were calculated. Three items were perceived important by almost 85% of the patients: getting an x-ray (91%; 95% CI: 88%-98%), obtaining a written therapy (94%; 95% CI: 87%-97%), and feeling the physicians' and nurses' empathy (97%; 95% CI: 91%-99%). The ED system was able to satisfy 2 of the 3 agreed PROs in at least 85% of the cases: getting an x-ray (97%; 95% CI: 91%-99%) and obtaining a written therapy (97%; 95% CI: 91%-99%). Moreover, in 30/96 patients (31%; 95% CI: 22%-41%), all the PROs were satisfied, and in 75/96 patients (78%; 95% CI: 69%-85%), all agreed PROs were satisfied.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows an example of core of PROs proposed by the ED physicians and agreed by the patients. Moreover, we presented a set of PROMs which could be used to measure the quality of an ED.

A Value-Based Comparison of the Management of Ambulatory Respiratory Diseases in Walk-in Clinics, Primary Care Practices, and Emergency Departments: Protocol for a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

In Canada, 30%-60% of patients presenting to emergency departments are ambulatory. This category has been labeled as a source of emergency department overuse. Acting on the presumption that primary care practices and walk-in clinics offer equivalent care at a lower cost, governments have invested massively in improving access to these alternative settings in the hope that patients would present there instead when possible, thereby reducing the load on emergency departments. Data in support of this approach remain scarce and equivocal.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the value of care received in emergency departments, walk-in clinics, and primary care practices by ambulatory patients with upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, otitis media, tonsillitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis, influenza-like illness, pneumonia, acute asthma, or acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

METHODS

A multicenter prospective cohort study will be performed in Ontario and Québec. In phase 1, a time-driven activity-based costing method will be applied at each of the 15 study sites. This method uses time as a cost driver to allocate direct costs (eg, medication), consumable expenditures (eg, needles), overhead costs (eg, building maintenance), and physician charges to patient care. Thus, the cost of a care episode will be proportional to the time spent receiving the care. At the end of this phase, a list of care process costs will be generated and used to calculate the cost of each consultation during phase 2, in which a prospective cohort of patients will be monitored to compare the care received in each setting. Patients aged 18 years and older, ambulatory throughout the care episode, and discharged to home with one of the aforementioned targeted diagnoses will be considered. The estimated sample size is 1485 patients. The 3 types of care settings will be compared on the basis of primary outcomes in terms of the proportion of return visits to any site 3 and 7 days after the initial visit and the mean cost of care. The secondary outcomes measured will include scores on patient-reported outcome and experience measures and mean costs borne wholly by patients. We will use multilevel generalized linear models to compare the care settings and an overlap weights approach to adjust for confounding factors related to age, sex, gender, ethnicity, comorbidities, registration with a family physician, socioeconomic status, and severity of illness.

RESULTS

Phase 1 will begin in 2021 and phase 2, in 2023. The results will be available in 2025.

CONCLUSIONS

The end point of our program will be for deciders, patients, and care providers to be able to determine the most appropriate care setting for the management of ambulatory emergency respiratory conditions, based on the quality and cost of care associated with each alternative.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/25619.

PROM-ED: Development and Testing of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure for Emergency Department Patients Who Are Discharged Home

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Common outcomes of care valued by emergency department (ED) patients who are not hospitalized have been characterized, but no measurement instrument has been developed to date. We developed and validated a patient-reported outcome measure for use with adult ED patients who are discharged home (PROM-ED).

METHODS

In previous research, 4 main outcomes of importance to ED patients were defined: symptom relief, understanding, reassurance, and having a plan. We developed a bank of potential questions (phase 1) that were first tested for suitability through cognitive debriefing with patients (phase 2). Revised questions were then tested quantitatively with a large panel of participants who had recently received ED care (phase 3). Informed by these results, a panel of experts used a modified Delphi process to make decisions on item reduction. The resulting instrument (PROM-ED 1.0) was then evaluated for its measurement properties (structural validity, hypothesis testing, and reliability).

RESULTS

Sixty-seven questions divided among 4 scales (1 for each outcome domain) were assembled. In accordance with cognitive debriefing with 8 patients (phase 2), 15 questions were modified and 13 removed. Testing of these questions with 444 participants (phase 3) identified problematic floor or ceiling effects (n=10), excessive correlations between items (n=11), and low item-total correlations (n=7). The expert panel (22 participants, phase 4) made decisions using this information on the exclusion of items, resulting in 22 questions across 4 scales that together constitute the PROM-ED 1.0. Testing provided good evidence of validity and test-retest reliability (n=200).

CONCLUSION

The PROM-ED enables the measurement of patient-centered outcomes of importance to patients receiving care in the ED who are not hospitalized. These data could have important applications in research and care improvement.

Implementing successful systematic Patient Reported Outcome and Experience Measures (PROMs and PREMs) in robotic oncological surgery-The role of physicians

Patient Reported Outcome and Experience Measures (PROMs and PREMs) play an increasingly important role in monitoring the quality of the oncological pathway. The aim of this study is to describe the case of five hospitals a year after the adoption of PROMs and PREMs for robotic oncological colorectal surgery in Tuscany and to investigate how the clinicians can impact the process of implementation and the efficacy of such measures. We used 14 months of data from the five robotic centers in Tuscany. Above all, the physician's personal motivation to improve the treatment of patients, the teamwork, and the possibility to use data for research purposes proved to be the essential factors for their engagement and the successful implementation of patient reported measures. Physicians play a key role in the adoption of systematic PROMs and PREMs. The higher their level of engagement, the higher the collection success, both in terms of number of patients enrolled and response rates. Moreover, the collection of patient reported measures may become part of physicians' daily practice and may lead to a change in their relationship and communication with patients, as clinicians accept to have their job reviewed and are not afraid to be evaluated by their patients.

The facilitators and barriers to implementing patient reported outcome measures in organisations delivering health related services: a systematic review of reviews

Background

There is increasing interest in using Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) within organisations delivering health related services. However, organisations have had mixed success in implementing PROMs and there is little understanding about why this may be. Thus, the purpose of this study was to identify the facilitators and barriers to implementing PROMs in organisations.

Method

A systematic review of reviews was undertaken. Searches were conducted of five electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, during the week of the 20th February 2017. Additional search methods included website searching and reference checking. To be included, a publication had to be a review of the literature, describe its methods and include information related to implementing PROMs. The reviews were extracted using a standardised form and assessed for their risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool. The findings were synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. The protocol was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (PROSPERO) (CRD42017057491).

Results

Initially 2047 records were identified. After assessing eligibility, six reviews were included. These reviews varied in their review type and focus. Different issues arose at distinct stages of the implementation process. Organisations needed to invest time and resources in two key stages early in the implementation process: ‘designing’ the processes for using PROMs within an organisation; and ‘preparing’ an organisation and its staff. The ‘designing’ stage involved organisations planning not just which PROMs to use and how to administer them, but also how the data would be used for clinical purposes. The ‘preparing’ stage involved getting an organisation and its staff ready to use PROMs, particularly persuading clinicians of the validity and value of PROMs, delivering training, and developing electronic systems. Having an implementation lead overseeing the process and developing the process based on feedback were also identified as facilitating implementation.

Conclusion

Organisations implementing PROMs need to invest time and resources in ‘designing’ the PROMs strategy and ‘preparing’ the organisation to use PROMs. Focusing on these earlier stages may prevent problems arising when PROMs are used in practice.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41687-018-0072-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Quality improvement primer part 2: executing a quality improvement project in the emergency department

The topics of quality improvement (QI) and patient safety have become important themes in health care in recent years, particularly in the emergency department setting, which is a frequent point of contact with the health care system for patients. In the first of three articles in this series meant as a QI primer for emergency medicine clinicians, we introduced the strategic planning required to develop an effective QI project using a fictional case study as an example. In this second article we continue with our example of improving time to antibiotics for patients with sepsis, and introduce the Model for Improvement. We will review what makes a good aim statement, the various categories of measures that can be tracked during a QI project, and the relative merits and challenges of potential change concepts and ideas. We will also present the Model for Improvement’s rapid-cycle change methodology, the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle. The final article in this series will focus on the evaluation and sustainability of QI projects.

Patients' Perspectives on Outcomes of Care After Discharge From the Emergency Department: A Qualitative Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Much effort has been expended to understand what care experiences patients value in the emergency department (ED), yet little is known about which outcomes patients value after ED care. Our goal is to define outcomes of ED care that are valued by patients discharged from the ED, with the goal of informing the development of a patient-reported outcome measure for ED care.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative semistructured interviews with patients recruited during their care at 1 of 2 EDs and interviewed in either English or French 1 to 9 days after their visit. Patients who were hospitalized were excluded. Interviews focused on perceived outcomes of care since the ED visit and expectations of care before the ED visit. We identified themes with standard descriptive content analysis techniques and a modified version of the constant comparative method, drawing on grounded theory methods.

RESULTS

We interviewed 46 patients in English (n=38) or French (n=8). Participants with diverse reasons for seeking care appeared to value common outcomes from ED care that centered around 4 themes: understanding the cause and expected trajectory of their symptoms; reassurance; symptom relief; and having a plan to manage their symptoms, resolve their issue, or pursue further medical care. These themes were also reflected in the expectations participants recalled having when they decided to seek care in the ED.

CONCLUSION

The 4 outcomes defined constitute areas for improvement and will inform the development of an ED patient-reported outcome questionnaire. Consideration should be given to measuring patient-reported outcomes separately from patient experience.