死者家属通过法医提供的反馈:提出了哪些担忧?

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Saskie Dorman, Becky Protopsaltis, Ryan Barter, Andy Brogan
{"title":"死者家属通过法医提供的反馈:提出了哪些担忧?","authors":"Saskie Dorman, Becky Protopsaltis, Ryan Barter, Andy Brogan","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Relatives can offer important insights into the quality of care. In England, the Medical Examiner (ME) system has been introduced to identify if there are any causes for concern relating to the cause of death or the person's care in their final illness. We reviewed feedback from bereaved relatives to identify opportunities for improvement. Routinely collected data (date and place of death, demographics, relationship to the person who had died, concerns raised via the ME system) were collated over 12 months (March 2023 to February 2024, East Dorset, UK). Each comment recorded in the ME records was read by one of the authors and issues identified were coded as themes. Concerns were recorded in 8% and appreciative comments in 12%. The most frequent concerns raised related to family/carer communication (56% of concerns raised). Feedback also reported issues relating to access, delays and care which did not attend to what mattered. Effective feedback loops and meaningful action are important elements of generative governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11934399/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feedback from bereaved relatives via Medical Examiners: what kinds of concerns are raised?\",\"authors\":\"Saskie Dorman, Becky Protopsaltis, Ryan Barter, Andy Brogan\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Relatives can offer important insights into the quality of care. In England, the Medical Examiner (ME) system has been introduced to identify if there are any causes for concern relating to the cause of death or the person's care in their final illness. We reviewed feedback from bereaved relatives to identify opportunities for improvement. Routinely collected data (date and place of death, demographics, relationship to the person who had died, concerns raised via the ME system) were collated over 12 months (March 2023 to February 2024, East Dorset, UK). Each comment recorded in the ME records was read by one of the authors and issues identified were coded as themes. Concerns were recorded in 8% and appreciative comments in 12%. The most frequent concerns raised related to family/carer communication (56% of concerns raised). Feedback also reported issues relating to access, delays and care which did not attend to what mattered. Effective feedback loops and meaningful action are important elements of generative governance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11934399/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003152\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-003152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

亲属可以对护理质量提供重要的见解。在英格兰,引入了法医(ME)制度,以确定是否存在与死亡原因或临终关怀有关的任何令人担忧的原因。我们审查了来自丧亲家属的反馈,以确定改进的机会。常规收集的数据(死亡日期和地点、人口统计、与死者的关系、通过ME系统提出的问题)在12个月内(2023年3月至2024年2月,英国东多塞特)进行整理。记录在ME记录中的每条评论都由一位作者阅读,并且确定的问题被编码为主题。8%的人表示关注,12%的人表示赞赏。最常见的担忧与家庭/照顾者沟通有关(56%的担忧)。反馈还报告了与获取、延误和护理有关的问题,而这些问题没有涉及到重要的问题。有效的反馈循环和有意义的行动是生成式治理的重要元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feedback from bereaved relatives via Medical Examiners: what kinds of concerns are raised?

Relatives can offer important insights into the quality of care. In England, the Medical Examiner (ME) system has been introduced to identify if there are any causes for concern relating to the cause of death or the person's care in their final illness. We reviewed feedback from bereaved relatives to identify opportunities for improvement. Routinely collected data (date and place of death, demographics, relationship to the person who had died, concerns raised via the ME system) were collated over 12 months (March 2023 to February 2024, East Dorset, UK). Each comment recorded in the ME records was read by one of the authors and issues identified were coded as themes. Concerns were recorded in 8% and appreciative comments in 12%. The most frequent concerns raised related to family/carer communication (56% of concerns raised). Feedback also reported issues relating to access, delays and care which did not attend to what mattered. Effective feedback loops and meaningful action are important elements of generative governance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ Open Quality Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
20 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