4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient’s perspective on improving the quality of acute medical care: determining patient reported outcomes

      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

          Rationale

          There is an increasing societal demand for quality assurance and transparency of medical care. The American National Academy of Medicine has determined patient centredness as a quality domain for improvement of healthcare. While many of the current quality indicators are disease specific, most emergency department (ED) patients present with undifferentiated complaints. Therefore, there is a need for generic outcome measures. Our objective was to determine relevant patient reported outcomes (PROs) for quality measurement of acute care.

          Methods

          We conducted semistructured interviews in patients ≥18 years presenting at the ED for internal medicine. Patients with a cognitive impairment or language barrier were excluded. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis.

          Results

          Thirty patients were interviewed. Patients reported outcomes as relevant in five domains: relief of symptoms, understanding the diagnosis, presence and understanding of the diagnostic and/or therapeutic plan, reassurance and patient experiences. Experiences were often mentioned as relevant to the perceived quality of care and appeared to influence the domain reassurance.

          Conclusion

          We determined five domains of relevant PROs in acute care. These domains will be used for developing generic patient reported measures for acute care. The patients’ perspective will be incorporated in these measures with the ultimate aim of organising truly patient-centred care at the ED.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory?

          This paper applies a theory-driven approach to explore why the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical practice, in particular, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, has little or no apparent influence on clinical decision making. A theory-driven approach involves combining knowledge of whether and how an intervention works. It is argued that such an approach is currently lacking within the literature evaluating the effectiveness of feeding back HRQoL information to clinicians. The paper identifies a number of mechanisms that might give rise to the expected outcomes that are currently implicit within the design of the intervention and hypotheses specified within the trials evaluating the use of HRQoL measures in clinical practice. It then examines how far current clinical practice matches these mechanisms and in doing so, a number of possible explanations for the lack of impact of HRQoL on clinical decision making are reviewed. The influence of HRQoL information on clinical decision making depends on a large number of factors related to the design of the intervention, patients' and clinicians' desire to discuss HRQoL issues within the consultation and the legitimacy that clinicians give to HRQoL instruments. To date, knowledge of how the feedback of HRQoL information to clinicians might improve doctor-patient communication or clinical decision making has yet to sufficiently inform an assessment of whether these aspects of patient care are improved. The paper concludes by specifying how the feedback of HRQoL information to clinicians might be modified to maximise its impact on clinical decision making.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The development of indicators to measure the quality of clinical care in emergency departments following a modified-delphi approach.

              To develop and apply a systematic approach to identify and define valid, relevant, and feasible measures of emergency department (ED) clinical performance. An extensive literature review was conducted to identify clinical conditions frequently treated in most EDs, and clinically relevant outcomes to evaluate these conditions. Based on this review, a set of condition-outcome pairs was defined. An expert panel was convened and a Modified-Delphi process was used to identify specific condition-outcome pairs where the panel felt there was a link between quality of care for the condition and a specific outcome. Next, for highly rated condition-outcome pairs, specific measurable indicators were identified in the literature. The panelists rated these indicators on their relevance to ED performance and need for risk adjustment. The feasibility of calculating these indicators was determined by applying them to a routinely collected data set. Thirteen clinical conditions and eight quality-of-care outcomes (mortality, morbidity, admissions, recurrent visits, follow-up with primary care, length of stay, diagnostics, and resource use) were identified from the literature (104 pairs). The panel selected 21 condition-outcome pairs, representing eight of 13 clinical conditions. Then, the panel selected 29 specific clinical indicators, representing the condition-outcome pairs, to measure ED performance. It was possible to calculate eight of these indicators, covering five clinical conditions, using a routinely collected data set. Using a Modified-Delphi process, it was possible to identify a series of condition-outcome pairs that panelists felt were potentially related to ED quality of care, then define specific indicators for many of these condition-outcome pairs. Some indicators could be measured using an existing data set. The development of sound clinical performance indicators for the ED is possible, but the feasibility of measuring them will be dependent on the availability and accessibility of high-quality data.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open Qual
                BMJ Open Qual
                bmjqir
                bmjoq
                BMJ Open Quality
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2399-6641
                2019
                29 September 2019
                : 8
                : 3
                : e000736
                Affiliations
                [1 ]departmentFaculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, and CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Aging and Long Term care , Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [2 ]departmentInternal Medicine , Máxima MC , Veldhoven/Eindhoven, The Netherlands
                [3 ]departmentInternal Medicine, Section Acute Medicine , Amsterdam UMC, Location VUMC , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [4 ]departmentInternal Medicine , Amsterdam UMC, location AMC , Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Marjolein N T Kremers; marjolein.kremers@ 123456mmc.nl
                Article
                bmjoq-2019-000736
                10.1136/bmjoq-2019-000736
                6768353
                31637327
                e8c35ed5-352d-418d-9218-c330aa13292d
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 17 May 2019
                : 29 August 2019
                : 10 September 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Nederlandse Internisten Vereniging;
                Award ID: N/A
                Categories
                Original Research
                1506
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                healthcare quality improvement,patient-centred care,patient reported outcome measures

                Comments

                Comment on this article