11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reflection in practice: How can patient experience feedback trigger staff reflection in hospital acute care settings?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Patient and staff experiences provide important insights into care quality, but health systems have difficulty using these data to improve care. Little attention has been paid to understanding how patient experience feedback can act as a prompt to reflection in practice in the clinical setting.

          Objective

          We aimed to identify the ways in which different types of patient experience feedback act as a trigger or prompt for engagement in reflection in clinical practice in acute hospital settings and identify important considerations for enhancing the value of patient experience data for reflective learning.

          Methods

          We conducted an ethnographic study in eight acute care units in three NHS hospital trusts in England, including 140 hours of observations and 45 semi‐structured interviews with nursing, medical and managerial staff working in acute medical units and intensive care units. The data were analysed thematically.

          Findings

          We distinguished between formal patient experience data sources: data purposively collected and collated to capture the patient experience of care, generally at organizational level, including surveys, complaints and comments; and informal sources of feedback on the patient experience recognized by staff alongside the formal data. We also identified patient narratives as an ‘in between’ source of data. The impact of different types of patient feedback in triggering reflection primarily depended on the extent to which the feedback was experienced as personally relevant, meaningful and emotionally salient.

          Discussion

          Patient experience feedback is multi‐faceted, but our study suggests that all types of feedback could be harnessed more effectively to prompt reflection.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Systematic review of approaches to using patient experience data for quality improvement in healthcare settings

          Objectives Explore how patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are collected, communicated and used to inform quality improvement (QI) across healthcare settings. Design Systematic review. Setting Various primary and secondary care settings, including general practice, and acute and chronic care hospitals. Participants A full range of patient populations from (children through to the elderly) and staff (from healthcare practitioners to senior managers). Methods Scientific databases were searched (CINAHL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Cochrane Libraries) as was grey literature. Qualitative and quantitative studies describing collection of PREM data and subsequent QI actions in any healthcare setting were included. Risk of bias was assessed using established criteria. Of 5312 initial hits, 32 full texts were screened, and 11 were included. Results Patient experience data were most commonly collected through surveys and used to identify small areas of incremental change to services that do not require a change to clinician behaviour (eg, changes to admission processes and producing educational materials). While staff in most studies reported having made effective improvements, authors struggled to identify what those changes were or the impact they had. Conclusions Findings suggest there is no single best way to collect or use PREM data for QI, but they do suggest some key points to consider when planning such an approach. For instance, formal training is recommended, as a lack of expertise in QI and confidence in interpreting patient experience data effectively may continue to be a barrier to a successful shift towards a more patient-centred healthcare service. In the context of QI, more attention is required on how patient experience data will be used to inform changes to practice and, in turn, measure any impact these changes may have on patient experience.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Can patient involvement improve patient safety? A cluster randomised control trial of the Patient Reporting and Action for a Safe Environment (PRASE) intervention

            Objective To evaluate the efficacy of the Patient Reporting and Action for a Safe Environment intervention. Design A multicentre cluster randomised controlled trial. Setting Clusters were 33 hospital wards within five hospitals in the UK. Participants All patients able to give informed consent were eligible to take part. Wards were allocated to the intervention or control condition. Intervention The ward-level intervention comprised two tools: (1) a questionnaire that asked patients about factors contributing to safety (patient measure of safety (PMOS)) and (2) a proforma for patients to report both safety concerns and positive experiences (patient incident reporting tool). Feedback was considered in multidisciplinary action planning meetings. Measurements Primary outcomes were routinely collected ward-level harm-free care (HFC) scores and patient-level feedback on safety (PMOS). Results Intervention uptake and retention of wards was 100% and patient participation was high (86%). We found no significant effect of the intervention on any outcomes at 6 or 12 months. However, for new harms (ie, those for which the wards were directly accountable) intervention wards did show greater, though non-significant, improvement compared with control wards. Analyses also indicated that improvements were largest for wards that showed the greatest compliance with the intervention. Limitations Adherence to the intervention, particularly the implementation of action plans, was poor. Patient safety outcomes may represent too blunt a measure. Conclusions Patients are willing to provide feedback about the safety of their care. However, we were unable to demonstrate any overall effect of this intervention on either measure of patient safety and therefore cannot recommend this intervention for wider uptake. Findings indicate promise for increasing HFC where wards implement ≥75% of the intervention components. Trial registration number ISRCTN07689702; pre-results.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Which experiences of health care delivery matter to service users and why? A critical interpretive synthesis and conceptual map

              Objective Patients' experiences are often treated as health care quality indicators. Our aim was to identify the range of experiences of health care delivery that matter to patients and to produce a conceptual map to facilitate consideration of why they matter. Methods Broad-based review and critical interpretive synthesis of research literature on patients' perspectives of health care delivery. We recorded experiences reported by a diverse range of patients on ‘concept cards’, considered why they were important, and explored various ways of organizing them, including internationally recognized health care quality frameworks. We developed a conceptual map that we refined with feedback from stakeholders. Results Patients identify many health care experiences as important. Existing health care quality frameworks do not cover them all. Our conceptual map presents a rich array of experiences, including health care relationships (beyond communication) and their implications for people's valued capabilities (e.g. to feel respected, contribute to their care, experience reciprocity). It is organized to reflect our synthesis argument, which links health care delivery to what people are enabled (or not) to feel, be and do. The map highlights the broad implications of the social dynamics of health care delivery. Experiences are labelled from a patient's perspective, rendering the importance of responsiveness to individuals axiomatic. Conclusions Our conceptual map identifies and helps explain the importance of diverse experiences of health care delivery. It challenges and helps policy-makers, service providers and researchers to attend to the range of experiences that matter, and to take seriously the need for responsiveness to individuals.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Research Associate
                Role: Professor
                Role: Associate Professor
                Role: Honorary Visiting Fellow
                Role: Project Manager
                Role: Professorccp3@le.ac.uk
                Journal
                Health Expect
                Health Expect
                10.1111/(ISSN)1369-7625
                HEX
                Health Expectations : An International Journal of Public Participation in Health Care and Health Policy
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                1369-6513
                1369-7625
                19 December 2019
                April 2020
                : 23
                : 2 ( doiID: 10.1111/hex.v23.2 )
                : 396-404
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Health Sciences department University of Leicester Leicester UK
                [ 2 ] Intensive Care Medicine University of Birmingham Birmingham UK
                [ 3 ] Warwick Medical School The University of Warwick Warwick UK
                [ 4 ] Research Development and Innovation University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust Birmingham UK
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Carolyn Tarrant, Health Sciences department, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.

                Email: ccp3@ 123456le.ac.uk

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7356-5342
                Article
                HEX13010
                10.1111/hex.13010
                7104653
                31858677
                766c3f4f-31a0-47b8-88ab-4c4d81af3047
                © 2019 The Authors Health Expectations published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 06 August 2019
                : 08 November 2019
                : 23 November 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Pages: 9, Words: 6877
                Funding
                Funded by: Health Services and Delivery Research Programme , open-funder-registry 10.13039/501100002001;
                Award ID: 14/156/23
                Categories
                Original Research Paper
                Original Research Papers
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                April 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.7.8 mode:remove_FC converted:30.03.2020

                Health & Social care
                acute care,patient experience,staff reflection
                Health & Social care
                acute care, patient experience, staff reflection

                Comments

                Comment on this article