To Improve the Inpatient Experience, Invest in the Human Side of Health Care

Typology of solutions addressing diagnostic disparities: gaps and opportunities

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic disparities are preventable differences in diagnostic errors or opportunities to achieve diagnostic excellence. There is a need to summarize solutions with explicit considerations for addressing diagnostic disparities. We aimed to describe potential solutions to diagnostic disparities, organize them into an action-oriented typology with illustrative examples, and characterize these solutions to identify gaps for their further development.

METHODS

During four human-centered design workshops composed of diverse expertise, participants ideated and clarified potential solutions to diagnostic disparities and were supported by environmental literature scan inputs. Nineteen individual semi-structured interviews with workshop participants validated identified solution examples and solution type characterizations, refining the typology.

RESULTS

Our typology organizes 21 various types of potential diagnostic disparities solutions into four primary expertise categories needed for implementation: healthcare systems' internal expertise, educator-, multidisciplinary patient safety researcher-, and health IT-expertise. We provide descriptions of potential solution types ideated as focused on disparities and compare those to existing examples. Six types were characterized as having diagnostic-disparity-focused examples, five as having diagnostic-focused examples, and 10 as only having general healthcare examples. Only three solution types had widespread implementation. Twelve had implementation on limited scope, and six were mostly hypothetical. We describe gaps that inform the progress needed for each of the suggested solution types to specifically address diagnostic disparities and be suitable for the implementation in routine practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous opportunities exist to tailor existing solutions and promote their implementation. Likely enablers include new perspectives, more evidence, multidisciplinary collaborations, system redesign, meaningful patient engagement, and action-oriented coalitions.

Informal carers' experiences with their children's care during hospitalization in Italy: Child HCAHPS results from RN4CAST@IT-Ped cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

To examine informal carers' experiences during their child's hospitalization and evaluate the associations with care received and care context.

DESIGN AND METHODS

What is described in this article is only a part of the larger study, RN4CAST@IT-Ped, a multicenter cross-sectional study, with multi-level data collection through convenience sampling, the Child Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey was used to collect data from informal carers of pediatric patients, applying the "top box" approach.

RESULTS

Nine hospitals, 1472 nurses, and 635 children's parents were involved. A correlation was found between patient safety and satisfaction outcomes and nursing staff characteristics. Adequate workloads for nurses improved carers' assessment of their experience in the hospital.

CONCLUSION

Adequate staffing management could significantly improve informal carers' satisfaction with the care provided to their children during hospitalization.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Children's informal carers greatly value the care they receive in pediatric hospitals. Adequate workloads for nurses improve carers' overall evaluation of the care their children receive during hospitalization. Nursing management should consider improving these aspects to ensure high-quality care in children's hospitals.

Human centered design workshops as a meta-solution to diagnostic disparities

OBJECTIVES

Diagnostic errors - inaccurate or untimely diagnoses or failures to communicate diagnoses - are harmful and costly for patients and health systems. Diagnostic disparities occur when diagnostic errors are experienced at disproportionate rates by certain patient subgroups based, for example, on patients' age, sex/gender, or race/ethnicity. We aimed to develop and test the feasibility of a human centered design workshop series that engages diverse stakeholders to develop solutions for mitigating diagnostic disparities.

METHODS

We employed a series of human centered design workshops supplemented by semi-structured interviews and literature evidence scans. Co-creation sessions and rapid prototyping by patient, clinician, and researcher stakeholders were used to generate design challenges, solution concepts, and prototypes.

RESULTS

A series of four workshops attended by 25 unique participants was convened in 2019-2021. Workshops generated eight design challenges, envisioned 29 solutions, and formulated principles for developing solutions in an equitable, patient-centered manner. Workshops further resulted in the conceptualization of 37 solutions for addressing diagnostic disparities and prototypes for two of the solutions. Participants agreed that the workshop processes were replicable and could be implemented in other settings to allow stakeholders to generate context-specific solutions.

CONCLUSIONS

The incorporation of human centered design through a series of workshops promises to be a productive way of engaging patient-researcher stakeholders to mitigate and prevent further exacerbation of diagnostic disparities. Healthcare stakeholders can apply human centered design principles to guide thinking about improving diagnostic performance and to center diverse patients' needs and experiences when implementing quality and safety improvements.