利用在线患者反馈改善NHS服务:INQUIRE多方法研究

J. Powell, H. Atherton, V. Williams, Fadhila Mazanderani, Farzana Dudhwala, S. Woolgar, A. Boylan, J. Fleming, S. Kirkpatrick, Angela Martin, M. V. van Velthoven, A. de Iongh, Douglas Findlay, L. Locock, S. Ziebland
{"title":"利用在线患者反馈改善NHS服务:INQUIRE多方法研究","authors":"J. Powell, H. Atherton, V. Williams, Fadhila Mazanderani, Farzana Dudhwala, S. Woolgar, A. Boylan, J. Fleming, S. Kirkpatrick, Angela Martin, M. V. van Velthoven, A. de Iongh, Douglas Findlay, L. Locock, S. Ziebland","doi":"10.3310/hsdr07380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care.\n \n \n \n To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts.\n \n \n \n A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations.\n \n \n \n The UK.\n \n \n \n We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site.\n \n \n \n Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible).\n \n \n \n This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites.\n \n \n \n Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patients.\n \n \n \n Intervention studies could measure online feedback as an intervention for service improvement and longitudinal studies could examine use over time, including unanticipated consequences. Content analyses could look for new knowledge on specific tests or treatments. Methodological work is needed to identify the best approaches to analysing feedback.\n \n \n \n The ethnographic case study work was registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33095169.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 7, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\n","PeriodicalId":12880,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Delivery Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services: the INQUIRE multimethod study\",\"authors\":\"J. Powell, H. Atherton, V. Williams, Fadhila Mazanderani, Farzana Dudhwala, S. Woolgar, A. Boylan, J. Fleming, S. Kirkpatrick, Angela Martin, M. V. van Velthoven, A. de Iongh, Douglas Findlay, L. Locock, S. Ziebland\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/hsdr07380\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care.\\n \\n \\n \\n To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts.\\n \\n \\n \\n A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations.\\n \\n \\n \\n The UK.\\n \\n \\n \\n We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site.\\n \\n \\n \\n Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible).\\n \\n \\n \\n This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites.\\n \\n \\n \\n Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patients.\\n \\n \\n \\n Intervention studies could measure online feedback as an intervention for service improvement and longitudinal studies could examine use over time, including unanticipated consequences. Content analyses could look for new knowledge on specific tests or treatments. Methodological work is needed to identify the best approaches to analysing feedback.\\n \\n \\n \\n The ethnographic case study work was registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33095169.\\n \\n \\n \\n This project was funded by the National institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 7, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":12880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"23\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07380\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Delivery Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

摘要

在线客户反馈在许多行业已经成为惯例,但它尚未被用于改善医疗保健服务。识别在线患者反馈的当前证据;确定公众和卫生专业人员对在线患者反馈的态度和行为;探讨患者向NHS提供在线反馈的经验;以及检查NHS信托机构内在线患者反馈的做法和流程。一个由五项研究组成的多方法方案:(1)证据综合和利益攸关方协商;(2) 对公众进行问卷调查;(3) 对患者和护理人员创建和使用在线评论的体验进行定性研究;(4) 问卷调查和保健专业人员重点小组;以及(5)对四个NHS二级护理提供者组织的民族志组织案例研究。英国。我们搜索了书目数据库,并进行了手工搜索,直到2018年1月。综合工作以与15个利益攸关方协商产生的主题为指导。我们对英国人口(n = 2036)和37次有针对性地抽样对有在线反馈经验的人进行的定性半结构访谈。我们对1001名配额抽样医生和749名护士或助产士以及一个由五名专职卫生专业人员组成的焦点小组进行了在线调查。我们在四个NHS信托机构进行了人种学案例研究,一名研究人员在每个地点花费6-10周的时间。许多人(普通人群中42%的互联网用户)阅读其他患者的在线反馈。写在线反馈的人更少(8%),但当他们这样做时,他们的主要原因之一是给予赞扬。大多数在线反馈的语气都是积极的,人们描述他们关心NHS并希望帮助它(“关爱”)。他们还希望自己的反馈能在谈话中引起回应。许多专业人士,尤其是医生,对在线反馈持谨慎态度,认为其主要是批判性的、不具代表性的,很少鼓励。从NHS的信任角度来看,在线患者反馈正在创造新形式的响应能力(组织需要基础设施来处理多个渠道,并增加在线反馈的数量)和响应能力(确保响应迅速且公开可见)。这项工作只提供了一个快速出现的现象的横截面快照。问卷调查可能受到回答偏差的限制。医生的配额样本和护士的志愿者样本可能不具有代表性。民族志的工作在探究不同地点之间的差异方面受到限制。对于患者来说,提供和使用在线反馈变得越来越普遍,他们通常有动机给予赞扬并帮助NHS改进,但卫生组织和专业人员非常谨慎,没有充分准备好使用在线反馈来改进服务。我们发现了患者动机与员工和组织观点之间的一些脱节,如果NHS服务部门要接受患者的建设性批评和评论,就需要解决这些脱节。干预研究可以测量在线反馈,作为改善服务的干预措施,纵向研究可以检查随着时间的推移的使用情况,包括意想不到的后果。内容分析可以寻找关于特定测试或治疗的新知识。需要开展方法学工作,以确定分析反馈的最佳方法。民族志案例研究工作登记为当前对照试验ISRCTN33095169。该项目由国家卫生研究所(NIHR)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7卷,第38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。
Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services: the INQUIRE multimethod study
Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care. To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts. A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations. The UK. We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site. Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible). This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites. Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patients. Intervention studies could measure online feedback as an intervention for service improvement and longitudinal studies could examine use over time, including unanticipated consequences. Content analyses could look for new knowledge on specific tests or treatments. Methodological work is needed to identify the best approaches to analysing feedback. The ethnographic case study work was registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33095169. This project was funded by the National institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 7, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信