利用患者体验数据开发患者体验工具包以改善医院护理:一项混合方法研究

L. Sheard, C. Marsh, T. Mills, Rosemary Peacock, Joe Langley, R. Partridge, I. Gwilt, R. Lawton
{"title":"利用患者体验数据开发患者体验工具包以改善医院护理:一项混合方法研究","authors":"L. Sheard, C. Marsh, T. Mills, Rosemary Peacock, Joe Langley, R. Partridge, I. Gwilt, R. Lawton","doi":"10.3310/hsdr07360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n Patients are increasingly being asked to provide feedback about their experience of health-care services. Within the NHS, a significant level of resource is now allocated to the collection of this feedback. However, it is not well understood whether or not, or how, health-care staff are able to use these data to make improvements to future care delivery.\n \n \n \n To understand and enhance how hospital staff learn from and act on patient experience (PE) feedback in order to co-design, test, refine and evaluate a Patient Experience Toolkit (PET).\n \n \n \n A predominantly qualitative study with four interlinking work packages.\n \n \n \n Three NHS trusts in the north of England, focusing on six ward-based clinical teams (two at each trust).\n \n \n \n A scoping review and qualitative exploratory study were conducted between November 2015 and August 2016. The findings of this work fed into a participatory co-design process with ward staff and patient representatives, which led to the production of the PET. This was primarily based on activities undertaken in three workshops (over the winter of 2016/17). Then, the facilitated use of the PET took place across the six wards over a 12-month period (February 2017 to February 2018). This involved testing and refinement through an action research (AR) methodology. A large, mixed-methods, independent process evaluation was conducted over the same 12-month period.\n \n \n \n The testing and refinement of the PET during the AR phase, with the mixed-methods evaluation running alongside it, produced noteworthy findings. The idea that current PE data can be effectively triangulated for the purpose of improvement is largely a fallacy. Rather, additional but more relational feedback had to be collected by patient representatives, an unanticipated element of the study, to provide health-care staff with data that they could work with more easily. Multidisciplinary involvement in PE initiatives is difficult to establish unless teams already work in this way. Regardless, there is merit in involving different levels of the nursing hierarchy. Consideration of patient feedback by health-care staff can be an emotive process that may be difficult initially and that needs dedicated time and sensitive management. The six ward teams engaged variably with the AR process over a 12-month period. Some teams implemented far-reaching plans, whereas other teams focused on time-minimising ‘quick wins’. The evaluation found that facilitation of the toolkit was central to its implementation. The most important factors here were the development of relationships between people and the facilitator’s ability to navigate organisational complexity.\n \n \n \n The settings in which the PET was tested were extremely diverse, so the influence of variable context limits hard conclusions about its success.\n \n \n \n The current manner in which PE feedback is collected and used is generally not fit for the purpose of enabling health-care staff to make meaningful local improvements. The PET was co-designed with health-care staff and patient representatives but it requires skilled facilitation to achieve successful outcomes.\n \n \n \n The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.\n","PeriodicalId":12880,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Delivery Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using patient experience data to develop a patient experience toolkit to improve hospital care: a mixed-methods study\",\"authors\":\"L. Sheard, C. Marsh, T. Mills, Rosemary Peacock, Joe Langley, R. Partridge, I. Gwilt, R. Lawton\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/hsdr07360\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n Patients are increasingly being asked to provide feedback about their experience of health-care services. Within the NHS, a significant level of resource is now allocated to the collection of this feedback. However, it is not well understood whether or not, or how, health-care staff are able to use these data to make improvements to future care delivery.\\n \\n \\n \\n To understand and enhance how hospital staff learn from and act on patient experience (PE) feedback in order to co-design, test, refine and evaluate a Patient Experience Toolkit (PET).\\n \\n \\n \\n A predominantly qualitative study with four interlinking work packages.\\n \\n \\n \\n Three NHS trusts in the north of England, focusing on six ward-based clinical teams (two at each trust).\\n \\n \\n \\n A scoping review and qualitative exploratory study were conducted between November 2015 and August 2016. The findings of this work fed into a participatory co-design process with ward staff and patient representatives, which led to the production of the PET. This was primarily based on activities undertaken in three workshops (over the winter of 2016/17). Then, the facilitated use of the PET took place across the six wards over a 12-month period (February 2017 to February 2018). This involved testing and refinement through an action research (AR) methodology. A large, mixed-methods, independent process evaluation was conducted over the same 12-month period.\\n \\n \\n \\n The testing and refinement of the PET during the AR phase, with the mixed-methods evaluation running alongside it, produced noteworthy findings. The idea that current PE data can be effectively triangulated for the purpose of improvement is largely a fallacy. Rather, additional but more relational feedback had to be collected by patient representatives, an unanticipated element of the study, to provide health-care staff with data that they could work with more easily. Multidisciplinary involvement in PE initiatives is difficult to establish unless teams already work in this way. Regardless, there is merit in involving different levels of the nursing hierarchy. Consideration of patient feedback by health-care staff can be an emotive process that may be difficult initially and that needs dedicated time and sensitive management. The six ward teams engaged variably with the AR process over a 12-month period. Some teams implemented far-reaching plans, whereas other teams focused on time-minimising ‘quick wins’. The evaluation found that facilitation of the toolkit was central to its implementation. The most important factors here were the development of relationships between people and the facilitator’s ability to navigate organisational complexity.\\n \\n \\n \\n The settings in which the PET was tested were extremely diverse, so the influence of variable context limits hard conclusions about its success.\\n \\n \\n \\n The current manner in which PE feedback is collected and used is generally not fit for the purpose of enabling health-care staff to make meaningful local improvements. The PET was co-designed with health-care staff and patient representatives but it requires skilled facilitation to achieve successful outcomes.\\n \\n \\n \\n The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":12880,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Delivery Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr07360\",\"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/hsdr07360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

越来越多的患者被要求就他们的医疗服务经验提供反馈。在英国国家医疗服务体系内,现在分配了大量资源来收集这些反馈。然而,目前尚不清楚医护人员是否或如何能够利用这些数据来改善未来的护理服务。了解和加强医院工作人员如何从患者体验(PE)反馈中学习并采取行动,以便共同设计、测试、完善和评估患者体验工具包(PET)。主要是定性研究,包含四个相互关联的工作包。英格兰北部的三个NHS信托基金,专注于六个病房临床团队(每个信托基金两个)。2015年11月至2016年8月期间进行了范围界定审查和定性探索性研究。这项工作的发现融入了与病房工作人员和患者代表的参与式共同设计过程,从而导致了PET的生产。这主要是基于三个研讨会(2016/17年冬季)开展的活动。然后,在12个月的时间里(2017年2月至2018年2月),六个病房都方便地使用了PET。这包括通过行动研究方法进行测试和改进。在同一个12个月期间进行了一次大规模的、混合方法的独立过程评估。在AR阶段对PET进行测试和改进,同时进行混合方法评估,产生了值得注意的结果。认为可以有效地对当前PE数据进行三角化以进行改进的想法在很大程度上是一种谬论。相反,患者代表必须收集更多但关系更密切的反馈,这是研究中一个意想不到的因素,为医护人员提供他们可以更容易地处理的数据。除非团队已经以这种方式开展工作,否则很难建立多学科参与体育运动的举措。无论如何,让不同层次的护理人员参与进来是有好处的。医护人员对患者反馈的考虑可能是一个情绪化的过程,最初可能很困难,需要专门的时间和敏感的管理。在12个月的时间里,六个病房团队参与AR流程的情况各不相同。一些球队实施了影响深远的计划,而另一些球队则专注于尽量减少“快速胜利”的时间。评价发现,为工具包提供便利是其执行的核心。这里最重要的因素是人与人之间关系的发展以及调解人驾驭组织复杂性的能力。PET测试的环境非常多样化,因此可变环境的影响限制了关于其成功的硬性结论。目前收集和使用PE反馈的方式通常不适合让医护人员在当地做出有意义的改进。PET是与医护人员和患者代表共同设计的,但它需要熟练的协助才能取得成功。国家卫生研究所卫生服务和交付研究方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Using patient experience data to develop a patient experience toolkit to improve hospital care: a mixed-methods study
Patients are increasingly being asked to provide feedback about their experience of health-care services. Within the NHS, a significant level of resource is now allocated to the collection of this feedback. However, it is not well understood whether or not, or how, health-care staff are able to use these data to make improvements to future care delivery. To understand and enhance how hospital staff learn from and act on patient experience (PE) feedback in order to co-design, test, refine and evaluate a Patient Experience Toolkit (PET). A predominantly qualitative study with four interlinking work packages. Three NHS trusts in the north of England, focusing on six ward-based clinical teams (two at each trust). A scoping review and qualitative exploratory study were conducted between November 2015 and August 2016. The findings of this work fed into a participatory co-design process with ward staff and patient representatives, which led to the production of the PET. This was primarily based on activities undertaken in three workshops (over the winter of 2016/17). Then, the facilitated use of the PET took place across the six wards over a 12-month period (February 2017 to February 2018). This involved testing and refinement through an action research (AR) methodology. A large, mixed-methods, independent process evaluation was conducted over the same 12-month period. The testing and refinement of the PET during the AR phase, with the mixed-methods evaluation running alongside it, produced noteworthy findings. The idea that current PE data can be effectively triangulated for the purpose of improvement is largely a fallacy. Rather, additional but more relational feedback had to be collected by patient representatives, an unanticipated element of the study, to provide health-care staff with data that they could work with more easily. Multidisciplinary involvement in PE initiatives is difficult to establish unless teams already work in this way. Regardless, there is merit in involving different levels of the nursing hierarchy. Consideration of patient feedback by health-care staff can be an emotive process that may be difficult initially and that needs dedicated time and sensitive management. The six ward teams engaged variably with the AR process over a 12-month period. Some teams implemented far-reaching plans, whereas other teams focused on time-minimising ‘quick wins’. The evaluation found that facilitation of the toolkit was central to its implementation. The most important factors here were the development of relationships between people and the facilitator’s ability to navigate organisational complexity. The settings in which the PET was tested were extremely diverse, so the influence of variable context limits hard conclusions about its success. The current manner in which PE feedback is collected and used is generally not fit for the purpose of enabling health-care staff to make meaningful local improvements. The PET was co-designed with health-care staff and patient representatives but it requires skilled facilitation to achieve successful outcomes. The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
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