Dataset Information

Consumers' perspectives on their involvement in recognizing and responding to patient deterioration-Developing a model for consumer reporting.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Adverse events occur in health care. Detection and reporting of deterioration therefore have a critical role to play. Patient and family member (consumer) involvement in patient safety has gained powerful support amongst global policymakers. Few studies, with none taking a rigorous qualitative approach, have drawn upon consumers' experiences to establish their preferences in consumer reporting of patient deterioration programmes. OBJECTIVE:To explore consumers' experiences of previous reporting of patient deterioration; their preferred educational strategies on this role and recommended pathways in a consumer reporting of patient deterioration model. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:An interpretive, qualitative research design was utilized. Nine focus group interviews were undertaken across Adelaide, capital city of South Australia. Interviews were audio-taped, transcribed and analysed thematically. Twenty-six adults described, then reflected, on previous experiences of reporting patient deterioration. RESULTS:Overarching themes incorporated consumers' experiences and patient/family education. Three themes emerged in relation to consumers' experiences: feelings, thoughts and actions. Five themes arose on educating consumers: content, timing, format, information providers and information recipients. The consumers' deep reflections on their past reporting experiences led to the development of a new model for consumer reporting of patient deterioration. CONCLUSIONS:Consumers' views on ways to improve consumer reporting of patient deterioration processes emerged. These improvements include structured educational programmes for staff advocating open health-care professional/consumer communication, educational materials developed and tested with English-speaking and culturally and linguistically diverse consumers and a model with three consumer reporting pathways.

SUBMITTER: King L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6543137 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consumers' perspectives on their involvement in recognizing and responding to patient deterioration-Developing a model for consumer reporting.

King Lindy L Peacock Guy G Crotty Mikaila M Clark Robyn R

Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy 20181226 3

<h4>Background</h4>Adverse events occur in health care. Detection and reporting of deterioration therefore have a critical role to play. Patient and family member (consumer) involvement in patient safety has gained powerful support amongst global policymakers. Few studies, with none taking a rigorous qualitative approach, have drawn upon consumers' experiences to establish their preferences in consumer reporting of patient deterioration programmes.<h4>Objective</h4>To explore consumers' experien ...[more]

PMID: 30588720

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about how discrimination in health care relates to inequities in hospital-based care because of limitations in the ability to measure discrimination. Consumer reviews offer a novel source of data to capture experiences of discrimination in health care settings.ObjectiveTo examine how health care consumers perceive and report discrimination through public consumer reviews.Design, setting, and participantsThis qualitative study assessed Yelp online reviews from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2020, of 100 randomly selected acute care hospitals in the US. Word filtering was used to identify reviews potentially related to discrimination by using keywords abstracted from the Everyday Discrimination Scale, a commonly used questionnaire to measure discrimination. A codebook was developed through a modified grounded theory and qualitative content analysis approach to categorize recurrent themes of discrimination, which was then applied to the hospital reviews.ExposuresReported experiences of discrimination within a health care setting.Main outcomes and measuresPerceptions of how discrimination in health care is experienced and reported by consumers.ResultsA total of 10 535 reviews were collected. Reviews were filtered by words commonly associated with discriminatory experiences, which identified 2986 reviews potentially related to discrimination. Using the codebook, the team manually identified 182 reviews that described at least 1 instance of discrimination. Acts of discrimination were categorized by actors of discrimination (individual vs institution), setting (clinical vs nonclinical), and directionality (whether consumers expressed discriminatory beliefs toward health care staff). A total of 53 reviews (29.1%) were coded as examples of institutional racism; 89 reviews (48.9%) mentioned acts of discrimination that occurred in clinical spaces as consumers were waiting for or actively receiving care; 25 reviews (13.7%) mentioned acts of discrimination that occurred in nonclinical spaces, such as lobbies; and 66 reviews (36.3%) documented discrimination by the consumer directed at the health care workforce. Acts of discrimination are described through 6 recurrent themes, including acts of commission, omission, unprofessionalism, disrespect, stereotyping, and dehumanizing.Conclusions and relevanceIn this qualitative study, consumer reviews were found to highlight recurrent patterns of discrimination within health care settings. Applying quality improvement tools, such as the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle, to this source of data and this study's findings may help inform assessments and initiatives directed at reducing discrimination within the health care setting.

Project description:Background While the patient and public involvement (PPI) evidence base has expanded over the past decade, the quality of reporting within papers is often inconsistent, limiting our understanding of how it works, in what context, for whom, and why.Objective To develop international consensus on the key items to report to enhance the quality, transparency, and consistency of the PPI evidence base. To collaboratively involve patients as research partners at all stages in the development of GRIPP2.Methods The EQUATOR method for developing reporting guidelines was used. The original GRIPP (Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public) checklist was revised, based on updated systematic review evidence. A three round Delphi survey was used to develop consensus on items to be included in the guideline. A subsequent face-to-face meeting produced agreement on items not reaching consensus during the Delphi process.Results 143 participants agreed to participate in round one, with an 86% (123/143) response for round two and a 78% (112/143) response for round three. The Delphi survey identified the need for long form (LF) and short form (SF) versions. GRIPP2-LF includes 34 items on aims, definitions, concepts and theory, methods, stages and nature of involvement, context, capture or measurement of impact, outcomes, economic assessment, and reflections and is suitable for studies where the main focus is PPI. GRIPP2-SF includes five items on aims, methods, results, outcomes, and critical perspective and is suitable for studies where PPI is a secondary focus.Conclusions GRIPP2-LF and GRIPP2-SF represent the first international evidence based, consensus informed guidance for reporting patient and public involvement in research. Both versions of GRIPP2 aim to improve the quality, transparency, and consistency of the international PPI evidence base, to ensure PPI practice is based on the best evidence. In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on The BMJ and Research Involvement and Engagement journal websites.

Project description:BackgroundRadiology reporting is a clinically oriented form of documentation that reflects critical information for patients about their health care processes. Realizing its importance, many medical institutions have started providing radiology reports in patient portals. The gain, however, can be limited because of medical language barriers, which require a way for customizing these reports for patients. The open-access, collaborative consumer health vocabulary (CHV) is a terminology system created for such purposes and can be the basis of lexical simplification processes for clinical notes.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the comprehensibility and suitability of CHV in simplifying radiology reports for consumers. This was done by characterizing the content coverage and the lexical similarity between the terms in the reports and the CHV-preferred terms.MethodsThe overall procedure was divided into the following two main stages: (1) translation and (2) evaluation. The translation process involved using MetaMap to link terms in the reports to CHV concepts. This is followed by replacing the terms with CHV-preferred terms using the concept names and sources table (MRCONSO) in the Unified Medical Language System (UMLS) Metathesaurus. In the second stage, medical terms in the reports and general terms that are used to describe medical phenomena were selected and evaluated by comparing the words in the original reports with the translated ones. The evaluation includes measuring the content coverage, investigating lexical similarity, and finding trends in missing concepts.ResultsOf the 792 terms selected from the radiology reports, 695 of them could be mapped directly to CHV concepts, indicating a content coverage of 88.5%. A total of 51 of the concepts (53%, 51/97) that could not be mapped are names of human anatomical structures and regions, followed by 28 anatomical descriptions and pathological variations (29%, 28/97). In addition, 12 radiology techniques and projections represented 12% of the unmapped concepts, whereas the remaining six concepts (6%, 12/97) were physiological descriptions. The rate of lexical similarity between the CHV-preferred terms and the terms in the radiology reports was approximately 72.6%.ConclusionsThe CHV covered a high percentage of concepts found in the radiology reports, but unmapped concepts are associated with areas that are commonly found in radiology reporting. CHV terms also showed a high percentage of lexical similarity with terms in the reports, which contain a myriad of medical jargon. This suggests that many CHV terms might not be suitable for lay consumers who would not be facile with radiology-specific vocabulary. Therefore, further patient-centered content changes are needed of the CHV to increase its usefulness and facilitate its integration into consumer-oriented applications.

Project description:Background: Understanding the causes of patient safety incidents is essential for improving patient safety; therefore, reporting and analysis of these incidents is a key imperative. Despite its implemention more than 15 years ago, the institutionalization of incident reporting in Indonesian hospitals is far from satisfactory. The aim of this study was to analyze the factors responsible for under-reporting of patient safety incidents in Indonesian public hospitals from the perspectives of leaders of hospitals, government departments, and independent institutions.MethodsA qualitative research methodology was adopted for this study using semi-structured interviews of key informants. 25 participants working at nine organizations (government departments, independent institutions, and public hospitals) were interviewed. The interview transcripts were analyzed using a deductive analytic approach. Nvivo 10 was used to for data processing prior to thematic analysis.ResultsThe key factors contributing to the under-reporting of patient safety incidents were categorized as hospital related and nonhospital related (government or independent agency). The hospital-related factors were: lack of understanding, knowledge, and responsibility for reporting; lack of leadership and institutional culture of reporting incidents; perception of reporting as an additional burden. The nonhospital-related factors were: lack of feedback and training; lack of confidentiality mechanisms in the system; absence of policy safeguards to prevent any punitive measures against the reporting hospital; lack of leadership.ConclusionOur study identified factors contributing to the under-reporting of patient safety incidents in Indonesia. The lack of government support and absence of political will to improve patient safety incident reporting appear to be the root causes of under-reporting. Our findings call for concerted efforts involving government, independent agencies, hospitals, and other stakeholders for instituting reforms in the patient safety incident reporting system.

Dataset Information

Consumers' perspectives on their involvement in recognizing and responding to patient deterioration-Developing a model for consumer reporting.

Publications

Consumers' perspectives on their involvement in recognizing and responding to patient deterioration-Developing a model for consumer reporting.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets