Dataset Information

How do frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement? Findings from an ethnographic case study evaluation.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:Improving patient experience is widely regarded as a key component of health care quality. However, while a considerable amount of data are collected about patient experience, there are concerns this information is not always used to improve care. This study explored whether and how frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement. METHODS:We conducted a year-long ethnographic case study evaluation, including 299?hours of observations and 95 interviews, of how frontline staff in six medical wards at different hospital sites in the United Kingdom used patient experience data for improvement. RESULTS:In every site, staff undertook quality improvement projects using a range of data sources. Teams of health care practitioners and ancillary staff engaged collectively in a process of sense-making using formal and informal sources of patient experience data. While survey data were popular, 'soft' intelligence - such as patients' stories, informal comments and observations - also informed staff's improvement plans, without always being recognized as data. Teams with staff from different professional backgrounds and grades tended to make more progress than less diverse teams, being able to draw on a wider net of practical, organizational and social resources, support and skills, which we describe as team-based capital. CONCLUSIONS:Organizational recognition, or rejection, of specific forms of patient experience intelligence as 'data' affects whether staff feel the data are actionable. Teams combining a diverse range of staff generated higher levels of 'team-based capital' for quality improvement than those adopting a single disciplinary approach. This may be a key mechanism for achieving person-centred improvement in health care.

SUBMITTER: Locock L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7307415 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How do frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement? Findings from an ethnographic case study evaluation.

Locock Louise L Montgomery Catherine C Parkin Stephen S Chisholm Alison A Bostock Jennifer J Dopson Sue S Gager Melanie M Gibbons Elizabeth E Graham Chris C King Jenny J Martin Angela A Powell John J Ziebland Sue S

Journal of health services research & policy 20200214 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>Improving patient experience is widely regarded as a key component of health care quality. However, while a considerable amount of data are collected about patient experience, there are concerns this information is not always used to improve care. This study explored whether and how frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a year-long ethnographic case study evaluation, including 299 hours of observations and 95 interview ...[more]

PMID: 32056464

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionUrinary catheters are used extensively throughout healthcare for various reasons including management of urinary tract dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously explore both catheter user experience and staff perception of catheter services within community urinary catheter care.MethodsA questionnaire was conducted to investigate the views of community nursing staff. During the same time period, patients were interviewed about i) catheter-care standards and adherence to guidelines ii) patients' feelings towards their catheter and iii) potential improvements to catheter practices and design.ResultsSixty-nine staff were surveyed. Although 97% of staff indicated they used local guidelines, in up to 62% of cases findings suggested practices in sending urine samples for culture did not comply with guidelines. Seventy-five percent of staff were satisfied with catheter care, but weaknesses were identified in handover processes, communication between staff and patients, and excessive documentation. Staff results were compared with the findings from interviews of 29 long-term urinary catheter users, demonstrating a higher level of satisfaction with catheter care amongst patients (86%). Patients and staff agreed that generally the impacts of their catheter on personal hygiene, sense of independence, sense of dignity and of patient happiness, were neutral (neither positive nor negative). However, regarding improvements to catheter practices and catheter design; 73% of staff but only 45% of patients suggested improvements in service, while 76% of patients but only 49% of staff suggested improvement in design.ConclusionThe study reveals general satisfaction with community catheter care, but indicates areas of potential improvements regarding communication, documentation and catheter design. When compared to patient responses, staff overall had a less positive view of patients perception of their relationship with their catheter.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare services regularly receive patient feedback, most of which is positive. Empirical studies suggest that health services can use positive feedback to create patient benefit. Our aim was to map all available empirical evidence for how positive patient feedback creates change in healthcare settings.MethodsEmpirical studies in English were systematically identified through database searches (ACM Digital Library, AMED, ASSIA, CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycINFO), forwards and backwards citation, and expert consultation. We summarise the characteristics of included studies and the feedback they consider, present a thematic synthesis of qualitative findings, and provide narrative summaries of quantitative findings.Results68 papers were included, describing research conducted across six continents, with qualitative (n = 51), quantitative (n = 10), and mixed (n = 7) methods. Only two studies were interventional. The most common settings were hospitals (n = 27) and community healthcare (n = 19). The most common recipients were nurses (n = 29). Most outcomes described were desirable. These were categorised as (a) short-term emotional change for healthcare workers (including feeling motivated and improved psychological wellbeing); (b) work-home interactional change for healthcare workers (such as improved home-life relationships); (c) work-related change for healthcare workers (such as improved performance and staff retention). Some undesirable outcomes were described, including envy when not receiving positive feedback. The impact of feedback may be moderated by characteristics of particular healthcare roles, such as night shift workers having less interaction time with patients. Some factors moderating the change created by feedback are modifiable.ConclusionFurther interventional research is required to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of receiving positive feedback in creating specific forms of change such as increases in staff retention. Healthcare managers may wish to use positive feedback more regularly, and to address barriers to staff receiving feedback.

Project description:ObjectivesFrontline insights into care delivery correlate with patients' clinical outcomes. These outcomes might be improved through near-real time identification and mitigation of staff concerns. We evaluated the effects of a prospective frontline surveillance system on patient and team outcomes.DesignProspective, stepped wedge, non-randomised, cluster controlled trial; prespecified per protocol analysis for high-fidelity intervention delivery.ParticipantsSeven interdisciplinary medical ward teams from two hospitals in the UK.InterventionProspective clinical team surveillance (PCTS): structured daily interdisciplinary briefings to capture staff concerns, with organisational facilitation and feedback.Main measuresThe primary outcome was excess length of stay (eLOS): an admission more than 24 hours above the local average for comparable patients. Secondary outcomes included safety and teamwork climates, and incident reporting. Mixed-effects models adjusted for time effects, age, comorbidity, palliation status and ward admissions. Safety and teamwork climates were measured with the Safety Attitudes Questionnaire. High-fidelity PCTS delivery comprised high engagement and high briefing frequency.ResultsImplementation fidelity was variable, both in briefing frequency (median 80% working days/month, IQR 65%-90%) and engagement (median 70 issues/ward/month, IQR 34-113). 1714/6518 (26.3%) intervention admissions had eLOS versus 1279/4927 (26.0%) control admissions, an absolute risk increase of 0.3%. PCTS increased eLOS in the adjusted intention-to-treat model (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.58, p=0.003). Conversely, high-fidelity PCTS reduced eLOS (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94, p=0.006). High-fidelity PCTS also increased total, high-yield and non-nurse incident reports (incidence rate ratios 1.28-1.79, all p<0.002). Sustained PCTS significantly improved safety and teamwork climates over time.ConclusionsThis study highlighted the potential benefits and pitfalls of ward-level interdisciplinary interventions. While these interventions can improve care delivery in complex, fluid environments, the manner of their implementation is paramount. Suboptimal implementation may have an unexpectedly negative impact on performance.Trial registration numberISRCTN 34806867 (http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN34806867).

Project description:OBJECTIVES:China launched the National Healthcare Improvement Initiative (NHII) in 2015 to improve patient experiences in healthcare. This study aimed to generate evidence of hospital care quality from the patients' perspective. DESIGN:This nationwide cross-sectional study interviewed participants from 31 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions across China. SETTING:A total of 117 tertiary hospitals in mainland China. PARTICIPANTS:48 422 responses from outpatients and 35 957 responses from inpatients were included in this study. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE:The scores of six predefined domains in the Chinese Patient Experience Questionnaire, five of which were designed to reflect specific dimensions of care, and one of which indicated the overall rating. RESULTS:More than 80% of the respondents viewed their care experiences as positive. The NHII seems to have had a positive impact, as indicated by the steady, although unremarkable, increase in the patient experience scores over the 2016-2018 period. The Chinese patients generally reported a positive experience with the clinical aspects of care, but reported a less positive experience with the environmental, interpersonal and social services aspects of care. The institutional factors, including region and type of hospital, and personal factors, such as gender, age, education and occupation, were factors affecting the patient experience in China. Humanistic care was the aspect of care with the greatest association with the overall patient experience rating in both the outpatient and inpatient settings. CONCLUSIONS:The national survey indicated an overall positive patient perspective of care in China. Older age, higher education level and formal employment status were found to be correlated with positive care experiences, as were higher levels of economic development of the region, a more generous insurance benefits package and a higher degree of coordinated care. The interpersonal-related initiatives had substantial roles in the improvement of the patient experience. In the regions where farmers and users of traditional Chinese medicine services constitute a greater proportion of the population, improvement of patient experiences for these groups deserves special policy attention.

Dataset Information

How do frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement? Findings from an ethnographic case study evaluation.

Publications

How do frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement? Findings from an ethnographic case study evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets