The participation of mental health service users in Ontario, Canada: a Canadian Application of the Consumer Participation Questionnaire

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.

Patient Engagement and its Evaluation Tools- Current Challenges and Future Directions Comment on "Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review"

Considering the growing recognition of the importance of patient engagement in healthcare decisions, research and delivery systems, it is important to ensure high quality and efficient patient engagement evaluation tools. In this commentary, we will first highlight the definition and importance of patient engagement. Then we discuss the psychometric properties of the patient engagement evaluation tools identified in a recent review on patient engagement in healthcare organization- and system-level decision-making. Lastly, we suggest future directions for patient engagement and its evaluation tools.

Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Patient, public, consumer, and community (P2C2) engagement in organization-, community-, and systemlevel healthcare decision-making is increasing globally, but its formal evaluation remains challenging. To define a taxonomy of possible P2C2 engagement metrics and compare existing evaluation tools against this taxonomy, we conducted a systematic review.

METHODS

A broad search strategy was developed for English language publications available from January 1962 through April 2015 in PubMed, Embase, Sociological Abstracts, PsycINFO, EconLit, and the gray literature. A publication was excluded if: (1) the setting was not healthcare delivery (ie, we excluded non-health sectors, such as urban planning; research settings; and public health settings not involving clinical care delivery); (2) the P2C2 engagement was episodic; or (3) the concept of evaluation or possible evaluation metrics were absent. To be included as an evaluation tool, publications had to contain an evaluative instrument that could be employed with minimal modification by a healthcare organization.

RESULTS

A total of 199 out of 3953 publications met exclusion and inclusion criteria. These were qualitatively analyzed using inductive content analysis to create a comprehensive taxonomy of 116 possible metrics for evaluating P2C2 engagement. 44 outcome metrics were grouped into three domains (internal, external, and aggregate outcomes) that included six subdomains: impact on engagement participants, impact on services provided by the healthcare organization, impact on the organization itself, influence on the broader public, influence on population health, and engagement cost-effectiveness. The 72 process metrics formed four domains (direct process metrics; surrogate process metrics; aggregate process metrics; and preconditions for engagement) that comprised sixteen subdomains. We identified 23 potential tools for evaluating P2C2 engagement. The identified tools were published between 1973-2015 and varied in their coverage of the taxonomy, methodology used (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed), and intended evaluators (organizational leaders, P2C2 participants, external evaluators, or some combination). Parts of the metric taxonomy were absent from all tools.

CONCLUSION

By comprehensively mapping potential outcome and process metrics as well as existing P2C2 engagement tools, this review supports high-quality P2C2 engagement globally by informing the selection of existing evaluation tools and identifying gaps where new tools are needed.

Consumers or Citizens? Whose Voice Will Healthwatch Represent and Will It Matter? Comment on "Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England"

Efforts to achieve effective and meaningful patient and public involvement (PPI) in healthcare have existed for nearly a century, albeit with limited success. This brief commentary discusses a recent paper by Carter and Martin exploring the "Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England," and places these challenges in the context of the broader struggle to give a voice to healthcare consumers and citizens. With an overview of what can go right and—perhaps more importantly—what can go wrong, the question remains: will Healthwatch—and other PPI efforts in healthcare—represent the voice of consumers or citizens and will it matter?

Mission, margin, and the role of consumer governance in decision-making at community health centers

OBJECTIVE

We explore the role of consumer trustees in decision-making as community health centers (CHCs) work to navigate the tension between pursuing their mission to provide primary care to all regardless of ability to pay and maintaining their limited finances.

METHODS

We interviewed 30 trustees from 16 CHCs in 14 different states, asking extensively about decision-making processes at their CHC related to services and finances, as well as perceived advantages and disadvantages of consumer governance.

RESULTS

Respondents described mission-dominant, margin-dominant, and balanced decision-making philosophies, and different decision-making pathways for service provision and finances. Consumer trustees were lauded for their role in informing the board of service quality and community needs, but criticized for being professionally unskilled and exhibiting a lack of objective decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

While CHC boards do play a role in navigating the tension between mission and margin, executive directors and staff appear to be more influential.

Long Term Effect on Professionals' Knowledge, Practice and Attitudes towards User Involvement Four Years after Implementing an Organisational Development Plan: A Controlled Study

Background

Health service organisations are increasingly implementing user involvement initiatives according to requirements from governments, such as user representation in administrational boards, better information to users, and more involvement of the users during treatment. Professionals are vital in all initiatives to enhance user involvement, and initiatives to increase involvement should influence the professionals’ practice and attitudes. The implementation of a development plan intending to enhance user involvement in a mental health hospital in Central Norway had no effect on the professionals after 16 months. The objective was therefore to investigate the long term effect on the professionals’ knowledge, practice and attitudes towards user involvement after four years.

Methods

This was a non-randomized controlled study including professionals from three mental health hospitals in Central Norway. A development plan intended to enhance user participation was implemented in one of the hospitals, including establishing a patient education centre and a user office, purchasing of user expertise, appointing contact professionals for next of kin, and improving of the centre’s information and the professional culture. The professionals at two other hospitals constituted the control group. All professionals were invited to answer the Consumer Participation Questionnaire (CPQ) and additional questions, at a four year interval.

Results

A total of 399 professionals participated (43% response rate). Comparing the changes in the intervention group with the changes in the control group, the results showed that the plan had improved some aspects of the professionals’ knowledge about the user involvement taking place in the hospital. In addition, some parts of the professionals’ practice of providing information to the service users was improved, and the development plan might have raised their awareness about insufficient involvement of next of kin.

Conclusions

This is the first controlled study on the long term effect on professionals from implementing a development plan to enhance user participation in a mental health hospital. Since there was more effect after four years than after 16 months, this study indicates that it takes time before the effect of complex interventions to enhance patient participation in organisations can be detected among the professionals. More long-term studies are thus warranted.

Rural-urban differences in consumer governance at community health centers

CONTEXT

Community health centers (CHCs) are primary care clinics that serve mostly low-income patients in rural and urban areas. They are required to be governed by a consumer majority. What little is known about the structure and function of these boards in practice suggests that CHC boards in rural areas may look and act differently from CHC boards in urban areas.

PURPOSE

To identify differences in the structure and function of consumer governance at CHCs in rural and urban areas.

METHODS

Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 30 CHC board members from 14 different states. Questions focused on board members' perceptions of board composition and the role of consumers on the board.

FINDINGS

CHCs in rural areas are more likely to have representative boards, are better able to convey confidence in the organization, and are better able to assess community needs than CHCs in urban areas. However, CHCs in rural areas often have problems achieving objective decision-making, and they may have fewer means for objectively evaluating quality of care due to the lack of patient board member anonymity.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumer governance is implemented differently in rural and urban communities, and the advantages and disadvantages in each setting are unique.

Consumer governance may harm health center financial performance

INTRODUCTION

Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs), which must be governed by a patient majority, have historically struggled to remain financially viable while caring for a disproportionately low-income and uninsured population. Consumer governance is credited with making FQHCs responsive to community needs, but to the extent that patient trustees resemble the typical low-income FQHC patient, patient trustees might lack the capacity to govern, harming financial performance as a result. Thus, this study sought to empirically evaluate the relationship between FQHC board composition and financial performance.

METHODS

Using data from years 2002-2007 of the Uniform Data System and the Area Resource File, and years 2003-2006 of FQHC grant applications, FQHC operating margin was modeled as a function of board and executive committee composition, the interaction between them, general time trends, other FQHC and county-level factors, and FQHC-level fixed effects. Trustees were classified as representative (ie, low-income) consumers, nonrepresentative (ie, high-income) consumers, and nonconsumers on the basis of their self-reported patient status and occupation.

RESULTS

Each 10 percentage point increase in the proportion of representative consumers on the board is associated with a 1.7 percentage point decrease in operating margin. This effect becomes insignificant if any consumers serve on the executive committee. There is no significant relationship between the proportion of nonrepresentative consumers and operating margin.

CONCLUSIONS

If consumers are given leadership roles on the board, consumer governance does not harm financial performance and may be beneficial enough in other respects to justify its being required as a condition of federal FQHC funding. Without such strengthening of the provision, consumer governance appears to harm financial performance and it is unclear from this study whether it offers other benefits that are significant enough to justify this financial risk.

Consumer governance and the provision of enabling services that facilitate access to care at community health centers

BACKGROUND

Federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) are primary care clinics, governed by a consumer majority, which accept patients regardless of ability to pay and provide nonclinical enabling services that facilitate patients' access to care. Understanding how FQHCs decide which services to provide is important, because enabling services are not typically reimbursed.

OBJECTIVE

To model enabling service provision as a function of FQHC board composition.

METHODS

FQHC-level data were drawn from multiple years of the Uniform Data System (UDS) (2002-2007), and merged with county-level data from the Area Resource File (ARF) (2002-2007) and board data from FQHC grant applications (2003-2006). The scope and volume of enabling services an FQHC provides are modeled as a function of board composition, executive committee composition, the interaction between them, general time trends, and other FQHC and county-level controls.

RESULTS

The proportion of consumers on the board does not affect the scope of enabling services, but the proportion of descriptive consumers (who resemble typical FQHC patients) on the executive committee is associated with a significant increase in the scope of enabling services a health center provides. Neither the proportion of consumers on the board nor the proportion of consumers on the executive committee affected the volume of enabling services provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumer governance, specifically on the executive committee, plays a small role in determining which enabling services an FQHC provides, but more work is needed to identify factors associated with variation in the scope and volume of enabling services across FQHCs.

Recovery in Canada: toward social equality

This article reviews evolution of the recovery paradigm in Canadian mental health. We first trace the origins and development of the recovery concept through the literature, followed by an examination of how the recovery concept has been implemented in national and provincial mental health policy since publication of the 2006 Kirby Commission Report. Based on consultations with Canadian policymakers, and an examination of available policy documents, we explore how the dual theme of 'recovery' and 'well-being', adopted by the Mental Health Commission of Canada in its 2009 strategy: Toward Recovery and Well-being - A Framework For a Mental Health Strategy has subsequently played out in mental health policymaking at the provincial level. Findings reveal mixed support for recovery as a guiding principle for mental health reform in Canada. While policies in some provinces reflect widespread support for recovery, and strong identification with the aspirations of the consumer movement; other provinces have shifted to population-based, wellness paradigms that privilege evidence-based services and professional expertise. The recognition of social equality for people who experience mental illness emerges as an important value in Canadian mental health policy, cutting across the conceptual divide between recovery and well-being.

Effect of an institutional development plan for user participation on professionals' knowledge, practice, and attitudes. A controlled study

BACKGROUND

Governments in several countries attempt to strengthen user participation through instructing health care organisations to plan and implement activities such as user representation in administrational boards, improved information to users, and more individual user participation in clinical work. The professionals are central in implementing initiatives to enhance user participation in organisations, but no controlled studies have been conducted on the effect on professionals from implementing institutional development plans. The objective was to investigate whether implementing a development plan intending to enhance user participation in a mental health hospital had any effect on the professionals' knowledge, practice, or attitudes towards user participation.

METHODS

This was a non-randomized controlled study including professionals from three mental health hospitals in Central Norway. A development plan intended to enhance user participation was implemented in one of the hospitals as a part of a larger re-organizational process. The plan included i.e. establishing a patient education centre and a user office, purchasing of user expertise, appointing contact professionals for next of kin, and improving of the centre's information and the professional culture. The professionals at the intervention hospital thus constituted the intervention group, while the professionals at two other hospitals participated as control group. All professionals were invited to answer the Consumer Participation Questionnaire (CPQ) and additional questions, focusing on knowledge, practice, and attitudes towards user participation, two times with a 16 months interval.

RESULTS

A total of 438 professionals participated (55% response rate). Comparing the changes in the intervention group with the changes in the control group revealed no statistically significant differences at a 0.05 level. The implementation of the development plan thus had no measurable effect on the professionals' knowledge, practice, or attitudes at the intervention hospital, compared to the control hospitals.

CONCLUSION

This is the first controlled study on the effect on professionals from implementing a development plan to enhance user participation in a mental health hospital. The plan had no effect on professionals' knowledge, practice, or attitudes. This can be due to the quality of the development plan, the implementation process, and/or the suitability of the outcome measures.