Identifying Canadian patient-centred care measurement practices and quality indicators: a survey

Parent and healthcare provider views of live varicella vaccination of pediatric solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Live attenuated varicella vaccine (LAVV) has historically been contraindicated in children who are immunocompromised due to solid organ transplant (SOT) because of safety concerns. Recently, clinical guidelines were developed that support post-transplant varicella vaccination in selected SOT recipients based on emerging evidence of LAVV safety. This qualitative study sought to explore barriers and facilitators to implementing the new guidelines, as well as acceptability of LAVV among healthcare providers (HCPs) and parents.

METHODS

HCPs and parents of transplant recipients were recruited from four sites using purposive sampling. Data from semi-structured interviews were analyzed using an Interpretive Description approach that incorporated data from the interviews, academic knowledge and clinical experience, and drew from Grounded Theory and Thematic Analysis. The theoretical framework used was Adaptive Leadership.

RESULTS

Thirty-four participants (16 HCPs and 18 parents) were included in the analysis. Parents developed skills in adaptive leadership that included strategies to protect their child against infectious diseases. Foundational information that live vaccines were absolutely contraindicated post-transplant "stuck" with parents and led them to develop strategies other than vaccination to keep their child safe. Some parents struggled to understand that information previously presented as a certainty (contraindication of LAVV) could change. Their approach to adaptive leadership informed their appraisal of the new vaccination guidelines and willingness to accept vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

HCPs should adopt a family-centered approach to communicating changing guidelines that considers parents' approach to adaptive leadership and discusses the changing nature of medical evidence. Trust between HCPs and parents can facilitate these conversations.

Co-designing person-centred quality indicator implementation for primary care in Alberta: a consensus study

BACKGROUND

We aimed to contribute to developing practical guidance for implementing person-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs) for primary care in Alberta, Canada. As a first step in this process, we conducted stakeholder-guided prioritization of PC-QIs and implementation strategies. Stakeholder engagement is necessary to ensure PC-QI implementation is adapted to the context and local needs.

METHODS

We used an adapted nominal group technique (NGT) consensus process. Panelists were presented with 26 PC-QIs, and implementation strategies. Both PC-QIs and strategies were identified from our extensive previous engagement of patients, caregivers, healthcare providers, and quality improvement leaders. The NGT objectives were to: 1. Prioritize PC-QIs and implementation strategies; and 2. Facilitate the participation of diverse primary care stakeholders in Alberta, including patients, healthcare providers, and quality improvement staff. Panelists participated in three rounds of activities. In the first, panelists individually ranked and commented on the PC-QIs and strategies. The summarized results were discussed in the second-round face-to-face group meeting. For the last round, panelists provided their final individual rankings, informed by the group discussion. Finally, we conducted an evaluation of the consensus process from the panelists' perspectives.

RESULTS

Eleven primary care providers, patient partners, and quality improvement staff from across Alberta participated. The panelists prioritized the following PC-QIs: 'Patient and caregiver involvement in decisions about their care and treatment'; 'Trusting relationship with healthcare provider'; 'Health information technology to support person-centred care'; 'Co-designing care in partnership with communities'; and 'Overall experience'. Implementation strategies prioritized included: 'Develop partnerships'; 'Obtain quality improvement resources'; 'Needs assessment (stakeholders are engaged about their needs/priorities for person-centred measurement)'; 'Align measurement efforts'; and 'Engage champions'. Our evaluation suggests that panelists felt that the process was valuable for planning the implementation and obtaining feedback, that their input was valued, and that most would continue to collaborate with other stakeholders to implement the PC-QIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates the value of co-design and participatory approaches for engaging stakeholders in adapting PC-QI implementation for the primary care context in Alberta, Canada. Collaboration with stakeholders can promote buy-in for ongoing engagement and ensure implementation will lead to meaningful improvements that matter to patients and providers.

Informing the implementation and use of person-centred quality indicators: a mixed methods study on the readiness, barriers and facilitators to implementation in Canada

OBJECTIVES

To ensure optimal implementation of person-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs), we assessed the readiness of Canadian healthcare organisations and explored their perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing and using PC-QIs.

DESIGN

Mixed methods.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Representatives of Canadian healthcare delivery and coordinating organisations that guide the development and/or implementation of person-centred care (PCC) measurement. Representatives from primary care clinics and organisations from the province of Alberta, Canada also participated.

METHODS

We conducted a survey with representatives of Canadian healthcare organisations. The survey comprised two sections that: (1) assessed readiness for using PC-QIs, and (2) were based on the Organizational Readiness for Change Assessment tool. We summarised the survey results using descriptive statistics. We then conducted follow-up interviews with organisations representing system and clinical-level perspectives to further explore barriers and facilitators to implementing PC-QIs. The interviews were informed by and analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Thirty-three Canadian regional healthcare organisations across all 13 provinces/territories participated in the survey. Only 5 of 26 PC-QIs were considered highly feasible to implement for 75% of organisations and included: coordination of care, communication, structures to report performance, engaging patients and caregivers and overall experience. A representative sample of 10 system-level organisations and 11 primary care organisations/clinics participated in the interviews. Key barriers identified were: resources and staff capacity for quality improvement, a shift in focus to COVID-19 and health provider motivation. Facilitators included: prioritisation of PCC measurement, leadership and champion engagement, alignment with ongoing provincial strategic direction and measurement efforts, and the use of technology for data collection, management and reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite high interest and policy alignment to use PC-QI 'readiness' to implement them effectively remains a challenge. Organisations need to be supported to collect, use and report PCC data to make the needed improvements that matter to patients.

Codesigning person-centred quality indicators with diverse communities: A qualitative patient engagement study

Introduction

Effective engagement of underrepresented communities in health research and policy remains a challenge due to barriers that hinder participation. Our study had two objectives: (1) identify themes of person‐centred care (PCC) from perspectives of diverse patients/caregivers that would inform the development of person‐centred quality indicators (PC‐QIs) for evaluating the quality of PCC and initiatives to improve PCC and (2) explore innovative participatory approaches to engage ethnocultural communities in qualitative research.

Methods

Drawing on participatory action research methods, we partnered with a community‐based organization to train six ‘Community Brokers’ from the Chinese, Filipino, South Asian, Latino‐Hispanic, East African and Syrian communities, who were engaged throughout the study. We also partnered with the provincial health organization to engage their Patient and Family Advisory, who represented further aspects of diversity. We conducted focus group discussions with patients/caregivers to obtain their perspectives on their values, preferences and needs regarding PCC. We identified themes through our study and engaged provincial stakeholders to prioritize these themes for informing the development of PC‐QIs and codesign initiatives for improving PCC.

Results

Eight focus groups were conducted with 66 diverse participants. Ethnocultural communities highlighted themes related to access and cost of care, language barriers and culture, while the Patient and Family Advisory emphasized patient and caregiver engagement. Together with provincial stakeholders, initiatives were identified to improve PCC, such as codesigning innovative models of training and evaluation of healthcare providers.

Conclusion

Incorporating patient and community voices requires addressing issues related to equity and understanding barriers to effective and meaningful engagement.

Patient or Public Contribution

Patient and public engagement was central to our research study. This included partnership with a community‐based organization, with a broad network of ethnocultural communities, as well as the provincial health service delivery organization, who both facilitated the ongoing engagement of diverse patients/caregiver communities throughout our study including designing the study, recruiting participants, collecting and organizing data, interpreting findings and mobilizing knowledge. Drawing from participatory action research methods, patients and the public were involved in the codesign of the PC‐QIs and initiatives to improve PCC in the province based on the findings from our study.

Patient healthcare experiences in the Northwest Territories, Canada: an analysis of news media articles

The factors that influence patient healthcare experiences are complex and connected to place. In northern Canada, the socio-historical context and the inequitable distribution of health services are unique influences on patients. The objective of this study was to examine the characteristics of patient healthcare experiences as reported through news media in the Northwest Territories. We used a case series design to examine patient healthcare experiences reported in news media articles. We conducted a systematic search for articles published between 2008 and 2017 in the online database of a media outlet in the Northwest Territories. We used descriptive statistics to summarise the article characteristics and thematic analysis to understand patient experiences in 128 articles related to 71 cases. Most often, cases involved women, concerned mental health, suicidality, or chronic diseases, and were predominantly negative. Patient experiences included problems associated with medical travel, communication difficulties with providers, lack of cultural safety, and barriers in accessing care resulting in poor-quality care, particularly for Indigenous patients. Broadly, these experiences are rooted in the colonial history in the North. Understanding patient experiences and including Indigenous patients in health system decision-making can help focus policies and clinical care on cultural safety and equity.

Openness to new perspectives created by patient participation at the morbidity and mortality meeting

OBJECTIVES

Morbidity and mortality meetings (M&MMs) at surgical departments may improve when patients participate, leading to different learning points. A gynecological oncology department invited patients to join their M&MMs. The practical constraints and experiences important from the perspective of patients and their healthcare professionals were evaluated.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and professionals who attended M&MMs at a gynecological oncology department between 2016 and 2018. The interviews were transcribed and coded and thematic content analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Eight patients and 17 healthcare professionals participated. Eleven themes related to interpersonal dynamics. The five shared themes are: patient-doctor relationship, language, openness of communication, learning and personal impact. All participants suggested maintaining the new practical design of the M&MMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and healthcare professionals valued patient participation in the M&MMs. Patient participation is possible when professionals are open to discussing and learning from adverse events (AEs). In this setting, patients feel that they are taken seriously and gain a better understanding of the course of an AE.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Involving patients in M&MMs led to new insights, better understanding, and improved processing of AEs. Collaborating with patients and using their feedback seems to be effective when developing innovations in healthcare.

Improving the quality of person-centred healthcare from the patient perspective: development of person-centred quality indicators

IMPORTANCE

International efforts are being made towards a person-centred care (PCC) model, but there are currently no standardised mechanisms to measure and monitor PCC at a healthcare system level. The use of metrics to measure PCC can help to drive the changes needed to improve the quality of healthcare that is person centred.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate person-centred care quality indicators (PC-QIs) measuring PCC at a healthcare system level through a synthesis of the evidence and a person-centred consensus approach to ensure the PC-QIs reflect what matters most to people in their care.

METHODS

Existing indicators were first identified through a scoping review of the literature and an international environmental scan. Focus group discussions with diverse patients and caregivers and interviews with clinicians and experts in quality improvement allowed us to identify gaps in current measurement of PCC and inform the development of new PC-QIs. A set of identified and newly developed PC-QIs were subsequently refined by Delphi consensus process using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. The international consensus panel consisted of patients, family members, community representatives, clinicians, researchers and healthcare quality experts.

RESULTS

From an initial 39 unique evidence-based PC-QIs identified and developed, the consensus process yielded 26 final PC-QIs. These included 7 related to structure, 16 related to process, 2 related to outcome and 1 overall global PC-QI.

CONCLUSIONS

The final 26 evidence-based and person-informed PC-QIs can be used to measure and evaluate quality incorporating patient perspectives, empowering jurisdictions to monitor healthcare system performance and evaluate policy and practice related to PCC.

Using implementation science to inform the integration of electronic patient-reported experience measures (ePREMs) into healthcare quality improvement: description of a theory-based application in primary care

BACKGROUND

Collecting and monitoring the information from patients through patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) about the quality of care they receive is important for tracking changes in healthcare quality, stimulate innovation, and enhance person-centred care. The objective of this theoretical paper is to discuss the use of implementation science theories, models, and frameworks to inform and evaluate the integration of the electronic collection of PREMs (ePREMs) in healthcare quality improvement for primary care in Canada.

METHODS

To assess potential knowledge-to-practice gaps in implementing ePREMs in primary care in Alberta, the overarching implementation model that will be used is the Knowledge to Action Cycle. An integrated knowledge translation approach will ensure ongoing engagement of key stakeholders (e.g. primary care providers, patients) throughout the study. ePREM implementation will be informed by the identification of barriers and facilitators to implementation using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The CFIR brings an organizational perspective providing an opportunity to explore the intervention characteristics, the context of implementation, individual factors, and the processes that influence implementation of ePREMs in healthcare. Identified barriers and facilitators to ePREM implementation will be mapped to evidence-based implementation strategies and prioritized by stakeholders. The RE-AIM framework will be used to guide the evaluation of ePREM implementation outcomes after six months of implementation by assessing Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (sustainability).

DISCUSSION

Consultations with stakeholders affirm the importance of using integrated knowledge translation approaches and the need to better understand how to integrate ePREMs in primary care. Using an implementations science approach, this study can provide guidance for mitigating important ePREM implementation challenges and promote the successful uptake and use of ePREMs for quality improvement in healthcare.