Project description:In this study, we highlight patients’ experiences with metal hypersensitivity (MH) after receiving implantable medical devices (IMDs). We aim to identify gaps in clinical care and improve outcomes for individuals who have or may be sensitive to metals. Secondary data analysis from a previous interpretative phenomenological qualitative study was utilized. Using patient journey maps, we explored the experiences of 8 individuals from outpatient settings who received IMD and have first-hand experience with MH. We documented their journey from MH symptom recognition to diagnosis and subsequent IMD management. The results reveal that the time frames from device implantation to the treatment of MH varied from 17 to 228 months. The longest phase on the patient journey maps was the symptom recognition phase, which refers to the time between symptom emergence and MH diagnosis. Participants also required extensive healthcare utilization following their initial surgery. These findings emphasize that MH should be considered in differential diagnoses for patients with IMD. Early screening and detection of MH can enhance patient safety, alleviate distress, and reduce unnecessary healthcare utilization.
Project description:PURPOSE:To understand how different methodologies of qualitative research are able to capture patient experience of the hospital journey. METHODS:A qualitative study of orthopaedic patients admitted for hip and knee replacement surgery in a 250-bed university hospital was performed. Eight patients were shadowed from the time they entered the hospital to the time of transfer to rehabilitation. Four patients and sixteen professionals, including orthopaedists, head nurses, nurses and administrative staff, were interviewed. RESULTS:Through analysis of the data collected four main themes emerged: the information gap; the covering patient-professionals relationship; the effectiveness of family closeness; and the micro-integration of hospital services. The three different standpoints (patient shadowing, health professionals' interviews and patients' interviews) allowed different issues to be captured in the various phases of the journey. CONCLUSIONS:Hospitals can significantly improve the quality of the service provided by exploring and understanding the individual patient journey. When dealing with a key cross-functional business process, the time-space dynamics of the activities performed have to be considered. Further research in the academic field can explore practical, methodological and ethical challenges more deeply in capturing the whole patient journey experience by using multiple methods and integrated tools.
Project description:Background: Hemophilia is a rare X-linked bleeding disorder. Prophylaxis has improved outcomes, but there are still unmet needs to be addressed. The aim of this study was to develop a patient journey in pediatric patients with hemophilia, a visual tool that illustrates patients' relationship with the healthcare provider through time useful for identifying patient needs, potential concerns ("pain points"), and gaps in care. Methods: qualitative study in a pediatric hemophilia unit using a human-centered design methodology. First stage: discover and empathize: (a) semi-structured interviews to patients/families and stakeholders; (b) observation techniques ("shadowing") to patients/families and professionals. Second stage: analyzing the collected information to create the patient journey. Results: A preliminary "clinical journey" was built using information from eight interviews with professionals from the interdisciplinary hemophilia team. Interviews with patient association representatives, 13 patients/families, and six "shadowing" techniques with patients and professionals were used to compare the "clinical journey" with the patient's reported experience. Main "pain points" were detected before diagnosis, at diagnosis, during assimilation, at treatment initiation, during training, and when patients start asking about their condition. The empowerment process was detected as a potential moment to improve patient/family experiences. Conclusions: The patient journey helps to better understand patient/family experiences related to the disease in different scenarios. Caregivers and patient learning and empowerment processes are significant moments where the interdisciplinary team should focus to offer valuable solutions to improve outcomes. Further research is required in this area, particularly empirical research to amend or confirm the suggested patient journey.
Project description:AimThe use of gameful design for supporting health-related behaviours has been one of the major trends in health technology. An opportunity to increase engagement and motivation in a given health behaviour and the possibility of reaching improved outcomes through continued or consistent behaviour could be provided by gamification. This study aimed to identify gamification opportunities for digital patient journey solutions to increase patients' engagement and motivation for health-related behaviour during an arthroplasty journey.DesignA secondary analysis.MethodSemistructured interviews were performed among 20 elective primary total hip and knee arthroplasty patients in a single joint-replacement centre in Finland during autumn 2018. NVivo software was used for deductive content analysis. The study was conducted among 20 patients in a single joint replacement centre during 2018.ResultsSeveral opportunities for gamification were identified for digital patient journey solutions, which could be used in advanced care to increase patients' engagement and motivation for health-related behaviour during the arthroplasty journey. These opportunities were identified related to five dimensions: accomplishment, challenge, guided, playfulness and social experience. Clear, scheduled, progressive and personalized goals with an activity tracking, real-time timespan visualization and social networking with peers, support networks and healthcare providers could be provided. Opportunities for competition and immersion were not identified.
Project description:PurposeThe World Health Organization (WHO) declared severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a pandemic in March 2020, causing almost 3.5 million coronavirus disease (COVID-19) related deaths worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed a significant burden on healthcare systems, economies, and social systems in many countries around the world. The access and delivery of rehabilitation care were severely disrupted, and patients have faced several challenges during the COVID-19 outbreak. These challenges include addressing new functional impairments faced by survivors of COVID-19 and infection prevention to avoid the virus spread to healthcare workers and other patients not infected with COVID-19. In this scoping review, we aim to develop rehabilitation recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic across the continuum of rehabilitation care.Materials and methodsEstablished frameworks were used to guide the scoping review methodology. Medline, Embase, Pubmed, CINAHL databases from inception to August 1, 2020, and prominent rehabilitation organizations' websites were searched.Study selectionWe included articles and reports if they were focused on rehabilitation recommendations for COVID-19 survivors or the general population at the time of the COVID-19 pandemic.Data extractionTwo of our team members used the pre-tested data extraction form to extract data from included full-text articles. The strength and the quality of the extracted recommendations were evaluated by two reviewers using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.ResultsWe retrieved 6,468 citations, of which 2,086 were eligible after removing duplicates. We excluded 1,980 citations based on the title and the abstract. Of the screened full-text articles, we included 106 studies. We present recommendations based on the patient journey at the time of the pandemic. We assessed the evidence to be of overall fair quality and strong for the recommendations.ConclusionWe have combined the latest research results and accumulated expert opinions on rehabilitation to develop acute and post-acute rehabilitation recommendations in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic. Further updates are warranted in order to incorporate the emerging evidence into rehabilitation guidelines.
Project description:IntroductionInsomnia affects daily functioning and overall health, and is thus associated with significant individual, societal, and economic burden. The experience of patients living with insomnia, their perception of the condition, and its impact on their quality of life is not well documented. The objective of this study was to map the patient journey in insomnia and identify unmet needs.MethodsParticipants were individuals with insomnia, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat insomnia, in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, and Canada. Qualitative interviews (50 patients, 70 HCPs) and a quantitative survey (700 patients, 723 HCPs) were conducted to inform the patient-journey mapping and obtain information on the emotions, perceptions, and experiences of patients and HCPs.ResultsThe patient journey comprises seven phases. The first defines the onset of insomnia symptoms. Phase 2 represents self-initiated behavior change to improve sleep (e.g., sleep hygiene, reducing caffeine, exercise). The next phase is characterized by use of over-the-counter (OTC) treatments, which generally fail to provide lasting relief. Phase 4 describes the first HCP consultation (occurring several months to several years after onset) and typically occurs at a crisis point for the patient; patients may be looking for an immediate solution (e.g., medication), which may not align with their HCP's recommendation. The following stage comprises sleep hygiene/behavioral changes (±OTC treatment) under HCP guidance for many patients, although offering prescription treatments without a sleep hygiene stage under supervision is more common in some countries. Phase 6 describes prescription medication initiation, where patients fluctuate between relief/hopefulness and a sense of failure, while HCPs try to balance the need to provide relief for the patient while maintaining best medical practice and minimizing adverse effects. The final phase (living with long-term insomnia) represents an indefinite period during which sleep issues remain unresolved for many patients, with most of them continuing to use prescription treatments for longer than indicated and creating their own variable, self-managed regimens combining multiple modalities.ConclusionThis patient journey analysis for insomnia revealed seven distinct phases, highlighting different touchpoints where insomnia management could be optimized.
Project description:ObjectiveThis research describes the clinical pathway and characteristics of two cohorts of patients. The first cohort consists of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer while the second consists of patients with a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) and no evidence of lung cancer. Linked data from an electronic medical record and the Louisiana Tumor Registry were used in this investigation.Materials and methodsREACHnet is one of 9 clinical research networks (CRNs) in PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network and includes electronic health records for over 8 million patients from multiple partner health systems. Data from Ochsner Health System and Tulane Medical Center were linked to Louisiana Tumor Registry (LTR), a statewide population-based cancer registry, for analysis of patient's clinical pathways between July 2013 and 2017. Patient characteristics and health services utilization rates by cancer stage were reported as frequency distributions. The Kaplan-Meier product limit method was used to estimate the time from index date to diagnosis by stage in lung cancer cohort.ResultsA total of 30,559 potentially eligible patients were identified and 2929 (9.58%) had primary lung cancer. Of these, 1496 (51.1%) were documented in LTR and their clinical pathway to diagnosis was further studied. Time to diagnosis varied significantly by cancer stage. A total of 24,140 patients with an SPN were identified in REACHnet and 15,978 (66.6%) had documented follow up care for 1 year. 1612 (10%) had no evidence of any work up for their SPN. The remaining 14,366 had some evidence of follow up, primarily office visits and additional chest imaging.ConclusionIn both cohorts multiple biopsies were evident in the clinical pathway. Despite clinical workup, 70% of patients in the lung cancer cohort had stage III or IV disease. In the SPN cohort, only 66% were identified as receiving a diagnostic work-up.
Project description:IntroductionThe diagnosis and management of atopic dermatitis (AD) is extensively addressed in detailed clinical guidelines. However, the high heterogeneity regarding presentation and progression and the increasingly broad therapeutic landscape suggest a complex real-world scenario, leading to multiple trajectories of AD patients.MethodsUsing a Delphi methodology for assessing the degree of consensus, we explored the views of a panel of dermatologists regarding the patients' trajectory through the diagnosis (block 1), treatment (block 2), and long-term management (block 3) of AD. Based on a systematic search of the literature, a scientific committee prepared a questionnaire of relevant items that were rated on a 10-point scale (from "totally agree" to "totally disagree") by a panel of dermatologists attending patients with AD in the hospital setting. Consensus was established based on predefined rules.ResultsThe final questionnaire included 58 items and was answered by 17 dermatologists. Overall, consensus was reached on 22 items (37.9%), each of which was a consensus for agreement. The consensus rates in blocks 1, 2, and 3 were 22.7%, 19.0%, and 86%, respectively.ConclusionsOur analysis revealed a remarkable lack of consensus on various aspects of the routine diagnosis and treatment of AD. These findings suggest the presence of unmet needs or limited implementation of guidelines for the management of AD and encourage further research to explore the causes of this low consensus on the management of AD in the real-world setting.
Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported data-satisfaction, preferences, outcomes and experience-are increasingly studied to provide excellent patient-centred care. In particular, healthcare professionals need to understand whether and how patient experience data can more pertinently inform the design of service delivery from a patient-centred perspective when compared with other indicators. This study aims to explore whether timely patient-reported data could capture relevant issues to improve the hospital patient journey.MethodsBetween January and February 2019, a longitudinal survey was conducted in the orthopaedics department of a 250-bed Italian university hospital with patients admitted for surgery; the aim was to analyse the patient journey from the first outpatient visit to discharge. The same patients completed a paper-and-pencil questionnaire, which was created to collect timely preference, experience and main outcomes data, and the hospital patient satisfaction questionnaire. The first was completed at the time of admission to the hospital and at the end of hospitalisation, and the second questionnaire was completed at the end of hospitalisation.ResultsA total of 254 patients completed the three questionnaires. The results show the specific value of patient-reported data. Greater or less negative satisfaction may not reveal pathology-related needs, but patient experience data can detect important areas of improvement along the hospital journey. As clinical conditions and the context of care change rapidly within a single hospital stay for surgery, collecting data at two different moments of the patient journey enables researchers to capture areas of potential improvement in the patient journey that are linked to the context, clinical conditions and emotions experienced by the patient.ConclusionBy contributing to the literature on how patient-reported data could be collected and used in hospital quality improvement, this study opens the debate about the use of real-time focused data. Further studies should explore how to use patient-reported data effectively (including what the patient reports are working well) and how to improve hospital processes by profiling patients' needs and defining the appropriate methodologies to capture the experiences of vulnerable patients. These topics may offer new frontiers of research to achieve a patient-centred healthcare system.