Dataset Information

Co-developing patient and family engagement indicators for health system improvement with healthcare system stakeholders: a consensus study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To develop a set of patient and family engagement indicators (PFE-Is) for measuring engagement in health system improvement for a Canadian provincial health delivery system through an evidence-based consensus approach.

Design

This mixed-method, multiphase project included: (1) identification of existing measures of patient and family engagement through a review of the literature and consultations with a diverse provincial council of patients, caregivers, community members and researchers. The Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool (PPEET) was selected; (2) consultations on relevance, acceptability and importance with patient and family advisors, and staff members of Alberta Health Services' Strategic Clinical Networks. This phase included surveys and one-on-one semi-structured interviews aimed to further explore the use of PPEET in this context. Findings from the survey and interviews informed the development of PFE-Is; (3) a Delphi consensus process using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to identify and refine a core set of PFE-Is.

Participants

The consensus panel consisted of patients, family members, community representatives, clinicians, researchers and healthcare leadership.

Results

From an initial list of 33 evidence-based PFE-Is identified, the consensus process yielded 18 final indicators. These PFE-Is were grouped into seven themes: communication, comfort to contribute, support needed for engagement, impact and influence of engagement initiative, diversity of perspectives, respectful engagement, and working together indicators.

Conclusions

This group of final patient, family and health system leaders informed indicators can be used to measure and evaluate meaningful engagement in health research and system transformation. The use of these metrics can help to improve the quality of patient and family engagement to drive health research and system transformation.

SUBMITTER: Santana MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9896218 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Co-developing patient and family engagement indicators for health system improvement with healthcare system stakeholders: a consensus study.

Santana Maria-Jose MJ Ahmed Sadia S Fairie Paul P Zelinsky Sandra S Wilkinson Gloria G McCarron Tamara Lynne TL Mork Mikie M Patel Jatin J Wasylak Tracy T

BMJ open 20230202 2

<h4>Objective</h4>To develop a set of patient and family engagement indicators (PFE-Is) for measuring engagement in health system improvement for a Canadian provincial health delivery system through an evidence-based consensus approach.<h4>Design</h4>This mixed-method, multiphase project included: (1) identification of existing measures of patient and family engagement through a review of the literature and consultations with a diverse provincial council of patients, caregivers, community member ...[more]

PMID: 36731931

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePatient and family engagement (PE) in health service planning and improvement is widely advocated, yet little prior research offered guidance on how to optimise PE, particularly in hospitals. This study aimed to engage stakeholders in generating evidence-informed consensus on recommendations to optimise PE.DesignWe transformed PE processes and resources from prior research into recommendations that populated an online Delphi survey.Setting and participantsPanellists included 58 persons with PE experience including: 22 patient/family advisors and 36 others (PE managers, clinicians, executives and researchers) in round 1 (100%) and 55 in round 2 (95%).Outcome measuresRatings of importance on a seven-point Likert scale of 48 strategies organised in domains: engagement approaches, strategies to integrate diverse perspectives, facilitators, strategies to champion engagement and hospital capacity for engagement.ResultsOf 50 recommendations, 80% or more of panellists prioritised 32 recommendations (27 in round 1, 5 in round 2) across 5 domains: 5 engagement approaches, 4 strategies to identify and integrate diverse patient/family advisor perspectives, 9 strategies to enable meaningful engagement, 9 strategies by which hospitals can champion PE and 5 elements of hospital capacity considered essential for supporting PE. There was high congruence in rating between patient/family advisors and healthcare professionals for all but six recommendations that were highly rated by patient/family advisors but not by others: capturing diverse perspectives, including a critical volume of advisors on committees/teams, prospectively monitoring PE, advocating for government funding of PE, including PE in healthcare worker job descriptions and sharing PE strategies across hospitals.ConclusionsDecision-makers (eg, health system policy-makers, hospitals executives and managers) can use these recommendations as a framework by which to plan and operationalise PE, or evaluate and improve PE in their own settings. Ongoing research is needed to monitor the uptake and impact of these recommendations on PE policy and practice.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Various population segmentation tools have been developed to inform the design of interventions that improve population health. However, there has been little consensus on the core indicators and purposes of population segmentation. The existing frameworks were further limited by their applicability in different practice settings involving stakeholders at all levels. The aim of this study was to generate a comprehensive set of indicators and purposes of population segmentation based on the experience and perspectives of key stakeholders involved in population health. METHODS:We conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews using purposive sampling with key stakeholders (e.g. government officials, healthcare professionals, social service providers, researchers) involved in population health at three distinct levels (micro, meso, macro) in Singapore. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic content analysis was undertaken using NVivo 12. RESULTS:A total of 25 interviews were conducted. Eight core indicators (demographic characteristics, economic characteristics, behavioural characteristics, disease state, functional status, organisation of care, psychosocial factors and service needs of patients) and 21 sub-indicators were identified. Age and financial status were commonly stated as important indicators that could potentially be used for population segmentation across three levels of participants. Six intended purposes for population segmentation included improving health outcomes, planning for resource allocation, optimising healthcare utilisation, enhancing psychosocial and behavioural outcomes, strengthening preventive efforts and driving policy changes. There was consensus that planning for resource allocation and improving health outcomes were considered two of the most important purposes for population segmentation. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings shed light on the need for a more person-centric population segmentation framework that incorporates upstream and holistic indicators to be able to measure population health outcomes and to plan for appropriate resource allocation. Core elements of the framework may apply to other healthcare settings and systems responsible for improving population health. TRIAL REGISTRATION:The study was approved by the SingHealth Institutional Review Board (CIRB Reference number: 2017/2597).

Project description:IntroductionAs demand for healthcare continues to grow, public health systems are increasingly required to drive efficiency improvement (EI) to address public service funding challenges. Despite this requirement, evidence of EI strategies that have been successful applied at the whole-of-system level is limited. This study reports the development, implementation and evaluation of a novel taxonomy of EI strategies used in public health systems to inform systemwide EI models.Materials and methodsThe public health system in New South Wales, Australia, operates a centralised EI model statewide and was the setting for this study. An audit of EI strategies implemented in the NSW Health system between July 2016 and June 2019 was used to identify all available EI strategies within the study timeframe. A content management approach was applied to audit the strategies, with each strategy coded to an EI focus area. Codes were clustered according to similarity, and category names were assigned to each cluster to form a preliminary taxonomy. Each category was defined and examples were provided. The resulting taxonomy was distributed and evaluated by user feedback survey and pre-post study to assess the impact on EI strategy distribution.ResultsA total of 1127 EI strategies were identified and coded into 263 unique strategies, which were clustered into nine categories to form the taxonomy of EI strategies. Categories included the following: non-clinical contracts and supplies; avoided and preventable activity; clinical service delivery and patient outcomes; finance and operations; recruitment, vacancies and FTE; staffing models; leave management; staff engagement and development; premium staffing; and clinical contracts and supplies. Evaluative findings revealed a perceived reduction in the duplication of EI work, improved access to EI knowledge and improved engagement with EI processes when using the taxonomy. The taxonomy was also associated with wider use of EI strategies.ConclusionsWhole-of-system EI is an increasing requirement. Using a taxonomy to guide systemwide practice appears to be advanta-geous in reducing duplication and guiding practice, with implications for use in health systems internationally.

Project description:BackgroundConsiderable health inequities documented in Israel between communities, populations and regions, undermine the rights of all citizens to optimal health. The first step towards health equity is agreement on a set of national indicators, reflecting equity in healthcare provision and health outcomes, and allowing monitoring of the impact of interventions on the reduction of disparities. We describe the process of reaching a consensus on a defined set of national equity indicators.MethodsThe study was conducted between January 2019 and June 2020, in a multistage design: (A) Identifying appropriate and available inequity measures via interviews with stakeholders. (B) Agreement on the screening criteria (public health importance; gap characteristics; potential for change; public interest) and relative weighting. (C) Constructing the consultation framework as an online, 3-round Delphi technique, with a range of experts recruited from the health, welfare and education sectors.ResultsParticipants were of diverse age, gender, geographic location, religion and ethnicity, and came from academia, healthcare provision, government ministries and patient representative groups. Thirty measures of inequity, presented to participants, represented the following domains: Health promotion (11 indicators), acute and chronic morbidity (11), life expectancy and mortality (2), health infrastructures and affordability of care (4), education and employment (2). Of the 77 individuals contacted, 75 (97%) expressed willingness to participate, and 55 (73%) completed all three scoring rounds. The leading ten indicators were: Diabetes care, childhood obesity, adult obesity, distribution of healthcare personnel, fatal childhood injuries, cigarette smoking, infant mortality, ability to afford care, access to psychotherapy and distribution of hospital beds. Agreement among raters, measured as intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), was 0.75.ConclusionA diverse range of consultants reached a consensus on the most important national equity indicators, including both clinical and system indicators. Results should be used to guide governmental decision-making and inter-sectoral strategies, furthering the pursuit of a more equitable healthcare system.

Project description:BackgroundRecently, there has been shifts from providing large volumes to providing higher quality of healthcare services. This qualitative exploratory study was conducted to explore the views of different stakeholders on activities and services that could serve as quality indicators of pharmaceutical care in Palestinian integrative healthcare facilities.MethodsA judgmental sampling technique was used to invite and recruit stakeholders for this study. Semistructured in-depth interviews were conducted with the stakeholders. Data collected during the interviews were qualitatively analyzed using the interpretive description methodology. Themes, subthemes, and patterns were recognized using the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven. The data were coded using RQDA software.ResultsInterviews (n = 22) were conducted with 9 complementary and alternative medicine practitioners, 8 pharmacists, 2 physicians, 2 nurses, and 1 risk/quality assurance manager. The interview median duration was 41 with an IQR of 22 min. Following the thematic analysis adopted to achieve the objectives of this study, six major themes emerged from the data collected from the interviews. The themes emerged from the data were (1) provision of collaborative, direct, and comprehensive patient care services; (2) common services and activities at the time of admission, during stay, at transition between wards/services/hospitals, and at discharge to home or community care; (3) screening for, identifying, and resolving problems; (4) collaboration with other healthcare providers; (5) professional development; and (6) performance and efficiency.ConclusionsQuality indicators are invaluable for informing decisions relevant to justifying allocation of scarce resources, securing funds, and demonstrating value in activities and services within integrative healthcare facilities. Further studies are still needed to develop a set of measurable indicators to measure the impact of pharmaceutical care in integrative healthcare facilities.

Project description:ObjectivesOpen organisational culture in hospitals is important, yet it remains unclear what it entails other than its referral to 'open communication' in the context of patient safety. This study aims to identify the elements of an open hospital culture.MethodsIn this group consensus study with a Delphi technique, statements were constructed based on the existing patient safety literature and input of 11 healthcare professionals from different backgrounds. A final framework consisting of 36 statements was reviewed on inclusion and exclusion, in multiple rounds by 32 experts and professionals working in healthcare. The feedback was analysed and shared with the panel after the group reached consensus on statements (>70% agreement).ResultsThe procedure resulted in 37 statements representing tangible (ie, leadership, organisational structures and processes, communication systems, employee attitudes, training and development, and patient orientation) and intangible themes (ie, psychological safety, open communication, cohesion, power, blame and shame, morals and ethics, and support and trust). The culture themes' teamwork and commitment were not specific for an open culture, contradicting the patient safety literature. Thereby, an open mind was shown to be a novel characteristic.ConclusionsOpen culture entails an open mind-set and attitude of professionals beyond the scope of patient safety in which there is mutual awareness of each other's (un)conscious biases, focus on team relationships and professional well-being and a transparent system with supervisors/leaders being role models and patients being involved. Although it is generally acknowledged that microlevel social processes necessary to enact patient safety deserve more attention, research has largely emphasised system-level structures and processes. This study provides practical enablers for addressing system and microlevel social processes to work towards an open culture in and across teams.

Project description:BackgroundPersons with developmental disabilities (PWDD) face a number of individual, environmental and societal barriers when seeking employment. Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) involves ongoing and dynamic interactions between researchers and stakeholders for the purpose of engaging in mutually beneficial research to address these types of multi-faceted barriers. There is a knowledge gap in the IKT literature on effective stakeholder engagement strategies outside of the dissemination stage to inform policy. In this paper, we report on a number of engagement strategies employed over a 2-year period to engage a wide range of stakeholders in different stages of an IKT project that aimed to investigate the 'wicked' problem of employment for PWDD.MethodOur engagement plan included multiple linked strategies and was designed to ensure the meaningful engagement of, and knowledge co-production with, stakeholders. We held two participatory consensus-building stakeholder policy dialogue events to co-produce knowledge utilising the nominal group technique and the modified Delphi technique. A total of 31 and 49 stakeholders engaged in the first and second events, respectively, from six key stakeholder groups. Focused engagement strategies were employed to build on the stakeholder dialogues for knowledge mobilisation and included a focus group attended only by PWDD, a stakeholder workshop attended only by policy/decision-makers, a webinar attended by human resources professionals and employers, and a current affairs panel attended by the general public.ResultsOur findings suggest that the level of engagement for each stakeholder group varies depending on the goal and need of the project. Our stakeholder dialogue findings highlight the inherent challenges in co-framing and knowledge co-production through the meaningful engagement of multiple stakeholders who hold different ideas and interests. Focused outreach is needed to foster relationships and trust for meaningful engagement.ConclusionsIn addition to providing guidance on how to implement adaptable meaningful engagement strategies, these findings contribute to discussions on how IKT projects are planned and funded. More studies to explore effective mechanisms for engaging a wide range of stakeholders in IKT research are needed. More evidence of successful engagement strategies employed by researchers to achieve meaningful knowledge co-production is also key to advancing the discipline.

Dataset Information

Co-developing patient and family engagement indicators for health system improvement with healthcare system stakeholders: a consensus study.

Objective

Design

Participants

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Co-developing patient and family engagement indicators for health system improvement with healthcare system stakeholders: a consensus study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets