Dataset Information

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.

ABSTRACT: Patients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level.Cluster randomized controlled trial. Local communities were randomized in intervention (priority setting with patient involvement) and control sites (no patient involvement).Communities in a canadian region were required to set priorities for improving chronic disease management in primary care, from a list of 37 validated quality indicators.Patients were consulted in writing, before participating in face-to-face deliberation with professionals.Professionals established priorities among themselves, without patient involvement.A total of 172 individuals from six communities participated in the study, including 83 chronic disease patients, and 89 health professionals.The primary outcome was the level of agreement between patients' and professionals' priorities. Secondary outcomes included professionals' intention to use the selected quality indicators, and the costs of patient involvement.Priorities established with patients were more aligned with core generic components of the Medical Home and Chronic Care Model, including: access to primary care, self-care support, patient participation in clinical decisions, and partnership with community organizations (p?

SUBMITTER: Boivin A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3936906 | biostudies-other | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.

Boivin Antoine A Lehoux Pascale P Lacombe Réal R Burgers Jako J Grol Richard R

Implementation science : IS 20140220

<h4>Background</h4>Patients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level.<h4>Methods</h4><h4>Design</h4>Cluster randomized ...[more]

PMID: 24555508

Similar Datasets

Project description:In countries such as Cyprus the financial crisis and the recession have severely affected the funding and priority setting of the health care system. There is evidence highlighting the importance of population' preferences in designing priorities for health care settings. Although public preferences have been thorough analysed in many countries, there is a research gap in terms of simultaneously investigating the relative importance and the weight of differing and competing criteria for determining healthcare priority settings. The main objective of the study was tο investigate public preferences for the relative utility and weight of differing and competing criteria for health care priority setting in Cyprus.The 'conjoint analysis' technique was applied to develop a ranking exercise. The aim of the study was to identify the preferences of the participants for alternative options. Participants were asked to grade in a priority order 16 hypothetical case scenarios of patients with different disease and of diverse socio-economic characteristics awaiting treatment. The sample was purposive and consisted of 100 Cypriots, selected from public locations all over the country.It was revealed that the "severity of the disease" and the "age of the patient" were the key prioritization criteria. Participants assigned the smallest relative value to the criterion "healthy lifestyle". More precisely, participants older than 35 years old assigned higher relative importance to "age", while younger participants to the "severity of the disease". The "healthy lifestyle" criterion was assigned to the lowest relative importance to by all participants.In Cyprus, public participation in health care priority setting is almost inexistent. Nonetheless, it seems that the public's participation in this process could lead to a wider acceptance of the healthcare system especially as a result of the financial crisis and the upcoming reforms implemented such as the establishment of the General System of Health Insurance.

Project description:BackgroundMost patients with diabetes do not meet all evidence-based goals of care, and many patients report poor communication and lack of involvement in decision-making during primary care visits.ObjectiveTo test the hypothesis that a "Pre-Visit Prioritization" secure email message could improve visit communication and glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes.DesignWe conducted a pragmatic, provider-randomized, multi-site clinical trial from March 2015 to October 2016 across 30 primary care practices within Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC), a large integrated care delivery system.ParticipantsEligible patients had at least 1 year of KPNC membership, type 2 diabetes with most recently measured hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) > = 8.0%, and were registered users of the KPNC online patient portal.InterventionsPatients in the intervention arm, upon booking an appointment, received a secure email through the KPNC online portal with a link to the EHR allowing them to submit their top one or two priorities prior to the visit. Control patients received usual care.Main measuresGlycemic control; change in HbA1c 6 and 12 months after the initial visit; patient-reported outcomes related to patient-provider communication and patient care experiences.Key resultsDuring the study period, 1276 patients had at least one eligible visit. In post-visit surveys (n = 457), more intervention arm patients reported preparing questions for their visit (72% vs 63%, p = 0.048) and being given treatment choices to consider (81% vs 73%, p = 0.041). Patients in both arms had similar reductions in HbA1c over the 12-month study period (0.56% ± 1.45%), with no significant differences between arms.ConclusionsA "light touch" email-based pre-visit intervention resulted in improved measures of visit interaction but did not significantly improve glycemic control relative to usual care. Improving diabetes clinical outcomes through more effective primary care visits may require more intensive approaches to patient visit preparation.Trial registryNCT02375932.

Project description:BackgroundDissemination is a critical facet of implementing quality improvement in organizations. As a field, addiction treatment has produced effective interventions but disseminated them slowly and reached only a fraction of people needing treatment. This study investigates four methods of disseminating quality improvement (QI) to addiction treatment programs in the U.S. It is, to our knowledge, the largest study of organizational change ever conducted in healthcare. The trial seeks to determine the most cost-effective method of disseminating quality improvement in addiction treatment.MethodsThe study is evaluating the costs and effectiveness of different QI approaches by randomizing 201 addiction-treatment programs to four interventions. Each intervention used a web-based learning kit plus monthly phone calls, coaching, face-to-face meetings, or the combination of all three. Effectiveness is defined as reducing waiting time (days between first contact and treatment), increasing program admissions, and increasing continuation in treatment. Opportunity costs will be estimated for the resources associated with providing the services.OutcomesThe study has three primary outcomes: waiting time, annual program admissions, and continuation in treatment. Secondary outcomes include: voluntary employee turnover, treatment completion, and operating margin. We are also seeking to understand the role of mediators, moderators, and other factors related to an organization's success in making changes.AnalysisWe are fitting a mixed-effect regression model to each program's average monthly waiting time and continuation rates (based on aggregated client records), including terms to isolate state and intervention effects. Admissions to treatment are aggregated to a yearly level to compensate for seasonality. We will order the interventions by cost to compare them pair-wise to the lowest cost intervention (monthly phone calls). All randomized sites with outcome data will be included in the analysis, following the intent-to-treat principle. Organizational covariates in the analysis include program size, management score, and state.DiscussionThe study offers seven recommendations for conducting a large-scale cluster-randomized trial: provide valuable services, have aims that are clear and important, seek powerful allies, understand the recruiting challenge, cultivate commitment, address turnover, and encourage rigor and flexibility.Trial registrationClinicalTrials. govNCT00934141.

Project description:Despite significant increases in global health investment and the availability of low-cost, efficacious interventions to prevent mother-to-child HIV transmission (pMTCT) in low- and middle-income countries with high HIV burden, the translation of scientific advances into effective delivery strategies has been slow, uneven and incomplete. As a result, pediatric HIV infection remains largely uncontrolled. A five-step, facility-level systems analysis and improvement intervention (SAIA) was designed to maximize effectiveness of pMTCT service provision by improving understanding of inefficiencies (step one: cascade analysis), guiding identification and prioritization of low-cost workflow modifications (step two: value stream mapping), and iteratively testing and redesigning these modifications (steps three through five). This protocol describes the SAIA intervention and methods to evaluate the intervention's impact on reducing drop-offs along the pMTCT cascade.This study employs a two-arm, longitudinal cluster randomized trial design. The unit of randomization is the health facility. A total of 90 facilities were identified in Côte d'Ivoire, Kenya and Mozambique (30 per country). A subset was randomly selected and assigned to intervention and comparison arms, stratified by country and service volume, resulting in 18 intervention and 18 comparison facilities across all three countries, with six intervention and six comparison facilities per country. The SAIA intervention will be implemented for six months in the 18 intervention facilities. Primary trial outcomes are designed to assess improvements in the pMTCT service cascade, and include the percentage of pregnant women being tested for HIV at the first antenatal care visit, the percentage of HIV-infected pregnant women receiving adequate prophylaxis or combination antiretroviral therapy in pregnancy, and the percentage of newborns exposed to HIV in pregnancy receiving an HIV diagnosis eight weeks postpartum. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) will guide collection and analysis of qualitative data on implementation process.This study is a pragmatic trial that has the potential benefit of improving maternal and infant outcomes by reducing drop-offs along the pMTCT cascade. The SAIA intervention is designed to provide simple tools to guide decision-making for pMTCT program staff at the facility level, and to identify low cost, contextually appropriate pMTCT improvement strategies.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02023658.

Dataset Information

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.

Publications

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets