Dataset Information

Can social media be used as a hospital quality improvement tool?

ABSTRACT: Many hospitals wish to improve their patients' experience of care. To learn whether social media could be used as a tool to engage patients and to identify opportunities for hospital quality improvement (QI), we solicited patients' narrative feedback on the Baystate Medical Center Facebook page during a 3-week period in 2014. Two investigators used directed qualitative content analysis to code comments and descriptive statistics to assess the frequency of selected codes and themes. We identified common themes, including: (1) comments about staff (17/37 respondents, 45.9%); (2) comments about specific departments (22/37, 59.5%); (3) comments on technical aspects of care, including perceived errors and inattention to pain control (9/37, 24.3%); and (4) comments describing the hospital physical plant, parking, and amenities (9/37, 24.3%). A small number (n?=?3) of patients repeatedly responded, accounting for 30% (45/148) of narratives. Although patient feedback on social media could help to drive hospital QI efforts, any potential benefits must be weighed against the reputational risks, the lack of representativeness among respondents, and the volume of responses needed to identify areas of improvement.

SUBMITTER: Lagu T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4926770 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can social media be used as a hospital quality improvement tool?

Lagu Tara T Goff Sarah L SL Craft Ben B Calcasola Stephanie S Benjamin Evan M EM Priya Aruna A Lindenauer Peter K PK

Journal of hospital medicine 20150921 1

Many hospitals wish to improve their patients' experience of care. To learn whether social media could be used as a tool to engage patients and to identify opportunities for hospital quality improvement (QI), we solicited patients' narrative feedback on the Baystate Medical Center Facebook page during a 3-week period in 2014. Two investigators used directed qualitative content analysis to code comments and descriptive statistics to assess the frequency of selected codes and themes. We identified ...[more]

PMID: 26390277

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSocial media can be used to engage consumers in hospital service design and quality improvement (QI) activities, however its uptake may be limited by a lack of guidance to support implementation. This article presents the perceived barriers and enablers in using social media for consumer engagement derived from an interview study with public hospital stakeholders.MethodsSemi-structured interviews with 26 Australian hospital service providers and consumer representatives. Data were analysed using a deductive content analysis method.ResultsData were collected between October 2019 and April 2020. Facebook was the platform most commonly used for consumer engagement activities. Barriers and enablers to social media-based consumer engagement were identified. The barrier themes were (1) fears and concerns; (2) lack of skills and resources for social media engagement; (3) lack of organisational processes and support; and (4) problems with social media platforms and the changing social media landscape. The enabler themes were: (1) hospitals facilitating access and use; (2) making discussions safe; (3) cultivating a social media community; and (4) building on success.ConclusionUsing social media to facilitate consumer engagement in hospital service design and QI activities is feasible and acceptable to service providers and consumers. Hospitals and their executives can create a supportive environment for social media-based engagement activities through developing clear governance systems and providing training and support to all users. Consumers need to be involved in co-designing social media-based activities and determining which forms of engagement are accessible and acceptable. For some consumers and service providers, barriers such as a lack of resources and distrust of social media companies might mean that social media-based engagement will be less acceptable for them. Because of this it is important that hospitals provide complementary methods of engagement (eg, face-to-face) alongside social media-based methods.

Project description:Publicly available hospital quality reports seek to inform consumers of important healthcare quality and affordability attributes, and may inform consumer decision-making. To understand how much consumers search for such information online on one Internet search engine, whether they mention such information in social media and how positively they view this information.A leading Internet search engine (Google) was the main focus of the study. Google Trends and Google Adwords keyword analyses were performed for national and Californian searches between 1 August 2012 and 31 July 2013 for keywords related to 'top hospital', best hospital', and 'hospital quality', as well as for six specific hospital quality reports. Separately, a proprietary social media monitoring tool was used to investigate blog, forum, social media and traditional media mentions of, and sentiment towards, major public reports of hospital quality in California in 2012.(1) Counts of searches for keywords performed on Google; (2) counts of and (3) sentiment of mentions of public reports on social media.National Google search volume for 75 hospital quality-related terms averaged 610 700 searches per month with strong variation by keyword and by state. A commercial report (Healthgrades) was more commonly searched for nationally on Google than the federal government's Hospital Compare, which otherwise dominated quality-related search terms. Social media references in California to quality reports were generally few, and commercially produced hospital quality reports were more widely mentioned than state (Office of Statewide Healthcare Planning and Development (OSHPD)), or non-profit (CalHospitalCompare) reports.Consumers are somewhat aware of hospital quality based on Internet search activity and social media disclosures. Public stakeholders may be able to broaden their quality dissemination initiatives by advertising on Google or Twitter and using social media interactively with consumers looking for relevant information.

Project description:PurposeDevelopment of innovative drugs for melanoma is occurring rapidly. Incremental gains in overall survival amongst innovative products may be difficult to measure in clinical trials, and their use may be associated with increased toxicity profiles. Therefore, HTA agencies increasingly require information on HRQoL for the assessment of such drugs. This study explored the feasibility of social media to assess patient perspectives on HRQoL in melanoma, and whether current cancer- and melanoma-specific HRQoL questionnaires represent these perspectives.MethodsA survey was distributed on the social media channels of Melanoma Patient Network Europe to assess melanoma patients' perspectives regarding HRQoL. Two researchers independently conducted content analysis to identify key themes, which were subsequently compared to questions from one current cancer-specific and two melanoma-specific HRQoL questionnaires (i.e. EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, FACT-M).ResultsIn total, 72 patients and 17 carers completed the survey. Patients indicated that family, having a normal life, and enjoying life were the three most important aspects of HRQoL for them. Carers indicated that being capable, having manageable adverse events, and being pain-free were the three most important aspects of HRQoL for patients. Respondents seem to find some questions from HRQoL questionnaires relevant (e.g. 'Have you felt able to carry on with things as normal?') and others less relevant (e.g. 'Have you had swelling near your melanoma site?'). Additionally, wording may differ between patients and HRQoL questionnaires, whereby patients generally use a more positive tone.ConclusionsSocial media may provide a valuable tool in assessing patient perspectives regarding HRQoL. However, differences seem to emerge between patient and carer perspectives. Additionally, patient perspectives did not seem to fully correlate to questions posed in cancer- (i.e. EORTC QLQ-C30) and melanoma-specific (i.e. EORTC QLQ-MEL38, FACT-M) HRQoL questionnaires examined.

Project description:ObjectiveValid, reliable critical appraisal tools advance quality improvement (QI) intervention impacts by helping stakeholders identify higher quality studies. QI approaches are diverse and differ from clinical interventions. Widely used critical appraisal instruments do not take unique QI features into account and existing QI tools (eg, Standards for QI Reporting Excellence) are intended for publication guidance rather than critical appraisal. This study developed and psychometrically tested a critical appraisal instrument, the QI Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) for assessing QI-specific features of QI publications.MethodsApproaches to developing the tool and ensuring validity included a literature review, in-person and online survey expert panel input, and application to empirical examples. We investigated psychometric properties in a set of diverse QI publications (N=54) by analysing reliability measures and item endorsement rates and explored sources of disagreement between reviewers.ResultsThe QI-MQCS includes 16 content domains to evaluate QI intervention publications: Organisational Motivation, Intervention Rationale, Intervention Description, Organisational Characteristics, Implementation, Study Design, Comparator Description, Data Sources, Timing, Adherence/Fidelity, Health Outcomes, Organisational Readiness, Penetration/Reach, Sustainability, Spread and Limitations. Median inter-rater agreement for QI-MQCS items was κ 0.57 (83% agreement). Item statistics indicated sufficient ability to differentiate between publications (median quality criteria met 67%). Internal consistency measures indicated coherence without excessive conceptual overlap (absolute mean interitem correlation=0.19). The critical appraisal instrument is accompanied by a user manual detailing What to consider, Where to look and How to rate.ConclusionsWe developed a ready-to-use, valid and reliable critical appraisal instrument applicable to healthcare QI intervention publications, but recognise scope for continuing refinement.

Dataset Information

Can social media be used as a hospital quality improvement tool?

Publications

Can social media be used as a hospital quality improvement tool?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets