Digital methods to enhance the usefulness of patient experience data in services for long-term conditions: the DEPEND mixed-methods study

C. Sanders, P. Nahar, Nicola Small, D. Hodgson, B. N. Ong, Azad Dehghan, C. Sharp, W. Dixon, S. Lewis, E. Kontopantelis, G. Daker-White, P. Bower, L. Davies, Humayun Kayesh, Rebecca Spencer, Aneela Mcavoy, R. Boaden, K. Lovell, J. Ainsworth, M. Nowakowska, Andrew Shepherd, Patrick Cahoon, R. Hopkins, Dawn Allen, Annmarie Lewis, G. Nenadic
{"title":"Digital methods to enhance the usefulness of patient experience data in services for long-term conditions: the DEPEND mixed-methods study","authors":"C. Sanders, P. Nahar, Nicola Small, D. Hodgson, B. N. Ong, Azad Dehghan, C. Sharp, W. Dixon, S. Lewis, E. Kontopantelis, G. Daker-White, P. Bower, L. Davies, Humayun Kayesh, Rebecca Spencer, Aneela Mcavoy, R. Boaden, K. Lovell, J. Ainsworth, M. Nowakowska, Andrew Shepherd, Patrick Cahoon, R. Hopkins, Dawn Allen, Annmarie Lewis, G. Nenadic","doi":"10.3310/hsdr08280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Collecting NHS patient experience data is critical to ensure the delivery of high-quality services. Data are obtained from multiple sources, including service-specific surveys and widely used generic surveys. There are concerns about the timeliness of feedback, that some groups of patients and carers do not give feedback and that free-text feedback may be useful but is difficult to analyse. Objective To understand how to improve the collection and usefulness of patient experience data in services for people with long-term conditions using digital data capture and improved analysis of comments. Design The DEPEND study is a mixed-methods study with four parts: qualitative research to explore the perspectives of patients, carers and staff; use of computer science text-analytics methods to analyse comments; co-design of new tools to improve data collection and usefulness; and implementation and process evaluation to assess use of the tools and any impacts. Setting Services for people with severe mental illness and musculoskeletal conditions at four sites as exemplars to reflect both mental health and physical long-terms conditions: an acute trust (site A), a mental health trust (site B) and two general practices (sites C1 and C2). Participants A total of 100 staff members with diverse roles in patient experience management, clinical practice and information technology; 59 patients and 21 carers participated in the qualitative research components. Interventions The tools comprised a digital survey completed using a tablet device (kiosk) or a pen and paper/online version; guidance and information for patients, carers and staff; text-mining programs; reporting templates; and a process for eliciting and recording verbal feedback in community mental health services. Results We found a lack of understanding and experience of the process of giving feedback. People wanted more meaningful and informal feedback to suit local contexts. Text mining enabled systematic analysis, although challenges remained, and qualitative analysis provided additional insights. All sites managed to collect feedback digitally; however, there was a perceived need for additional resources, and engagement varied. Observation indicated that patients were apprehensive about using kiosks but often would participate with support. The process for collecting and recording verbal feedback in mental health services made sense to participants, but was not successfully adopted, with staff workload and technical problems often highlighted as barriers. Staff thought that new methods were insightful, but observation did not reveal changes in services during the testing period. Conclusions The use of digital methods can produce some improvements in the collection and usefulness of feedback. Context and flexibility are important, and digital methods need to be complemented with alternative methods. Text mining can provide useful analysis for reporting on large data sets within large organisations, but qualitative analysis may be more useful for small data sets and in small organisations. Limitations New practices need time and support to be adopted and this study had limited resources and a limited testing time. Future work Further research is needed to improve text-analysis methods for routine use in services and to evaluate the impact of methods (digital and non-digital) on service improvement in varied contexts and among diverse patients and carers. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.","PeriodicalId":12880,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Delivery Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-128"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Delivery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Background Collecting NHS patient experience data is critical to ensure the delivery of high-quality services. Data are obtained from multiple sources, including service-specific surveys and widely used generic surveys. There are concerns about the timeliness of feedback, that some groups of patients and carers do not give feedback and that free-text feedback may be useful but is difficult to analyse. Objective To understand how to improve the collection and usefulness of patient experience data in services for people with long-term conditions using digital data capture and improved analysis of comments. Design The DEPEND study is a mixed-methods study with four parts: qualitative research to explore the perspectives of patients, carers and staff; use of computer science text-analytics methods to analyse comments; co-design of new tools to improve data collection and usefulness; and implementation and process evaluation to assess use of the tools and any impacts. Setting Services for people with severe mental illness and musculoskeletal conditions at four sites as exemplars to reflect both mental health and physical long-terms conditions: an acute trust (site A), a mental health trust (site B) and two general practices (sites C1 and C2). Participants A total of 100 staff members with diverse roles in patient experience management, clinical practice and information technology; 59 patients and 21 carers participated in the qualitative research components. Interventions The tools comprised a digital survey completed using a tablet device (kiosk) or a pen and paper/online version; guidance and information for patients, carers and staff; text-mining programs; reporting templates; and a process for eliciting and recording verbal feedback in community mental health services. Results We found a lack of understanding and experience of the process of giving feedback. People wanted more meaningful and informal feedback to suit local contexts. Text mining enabled systematic analysis, although challenges remained, and qualitative analysis provided additional insights. All sites managed to collect feedback digitally; however, there was a perceived need for additional resources, and engagement varied. Observation indicated that patients were apprehensive about using kiosks but often would participate with support. The process for collecting and recording verbal feedback in mental health services made sense to participants, but was not successfully adopted, with staff workload and technical problems often highlighted as barriers. Staff thought that new methods were insightful, but observation did not reveal changes in services during the testing period. Conclusions The use of digital methods can produce some improvements in the collection and usefulness of feedback. Context and flexibility are important, and digital methods need to be complemented with alternative methods. Text mining can provide useful analysis for reporting on large data sets within large organisations, but qualitative analysis may be more useful for small data sets and in small organisations. Limitations New practices need time and support to be adopted and this study had limited resources and a limited testing time. Future work Further research is needed to improve text-analysis methods for routine use in services and to evaluate the impact of methods (digital and non-digital) on service improvement in varied contexts and among diverse patients and carers. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
提高长期服务中患者经验数据的有用性的数字方法:DEPEND混合方法研究
背景收集NHS患者体验数据对于确保提供高质量服务至关重要。数据来自多个来源,包括针对特定服务的调查和广泛使用的通用调查。有人担心反馈的及时性,一些患者和护理人员群体不提供反馈,自由文本反馈可能有用,但很难分析。目的了解如何利用数字数据采集和改进的评论分析,提高患者体验数据在长期疾病患者服务中的收集和有用性。设计DEPEND研究是一项混合方法研究,包括四个部分:定性研究,探索患者、护理人员和工作人员的观点;使用计算机科学文本分析方法分析评论;共同设计新工具,以改进数据收集和有用性;以及实施和过程评估,以评估工具的使用和任何影响。在四个地点为患有严重精神疾病和肌肉骨骼疾病的人提供服务,以反映心理健康和身体长期状况:一个急性信托(地点A)、一个心理健康信托(地点B)和两个一般做法(地点C1和C2)。参与者共有100名工作人员,在患者体验管理、临床实践和信息技术方面发挥着不同的作用;59名患者和21名护理人员参与了定性研究部分。干预措施这些工具包括使用平板电脑设备(信息亭)或纸笔/在线版本完成的数字调查;为患者、护理人员和工作人员提供指导和信息;文本挖掘程序;报告模板;以及在社区心理健康服务中获取和记录口头反馈的过程。结果我们发现对反馈过程缺乏理解和经验。人们希望得到更有意义的非正式反馈,以适应当地环境。文本挖掘实现了系统分析,尽管仍然存在挑战,定性分析提供了更多的见解。所有网站都设法以数字方式收集反馈;然而,人们认为需要额外的资源,参与程度各不相同。观察表明,患者对使用信息亭感到担忧,但通常会在支持下参与。心理健康服务中收集和记录口头反馈的过程对参与者来说是有意义的,但没有成功采用,工作人员的工作量和技术问题往往被强调为障碍。工作人员认为新方法很有见地,但观察并没有揭示测试期间服务的变化。结论数字方法的使用可以在反馈的收集和有用性方面产生一些改进。背景和灵活性很重要,数字方法需要用替代方法来补充。文本挖掘可以为大型组织内的大型数据集报告提供有用的分析,但定性分析可能对小型数据集和小型组织更有用。限制新的实践需要时间和支持才能被采用,而这项研究的资源和测试时间有限。未来的工作需要进一步研究,以改进服务中常规使用的文本分析方法,并评估各种方法(数字和非数字)在不同背景下以及不同患者和护理人员中对服务改进的影响。资助该项目由美国国立卫生研究院卫生服务和分娩研究计划资助,并将在《卫生服务和交付研究》上全文发表;第8卷,第28期。有关更多项目信息,请访问NIHR期刊图书馆网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信