首页> 外文OA文献 >Healthcare professional and patient co-design and validation of a mechanism for service users to feedback patient safety experiences following a care transfer: a qualitative study
【2h】

Healthcare professional and patient co-design and validation of a mechanism for service users to feedback patient safety experiences following a care transfer: a qualitative study

机译:医疗保健专业人员和患者共同设计并验证服务使用者在护理转移后反馈患者安全经验的机制:定性研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: To develop and validate a mechanism for patients to provide feedback on safety experiences following a care transfer between organisations.udDesign: Qualitative study using participatory methods (co-design workshops) and cognitive interviews. Workshop data were analysed concurrently with participants and cognitive interviews were thematically analysed using a deductive approach based on the developed feedback mechanism.udParticipants: Expert patients (n=5) and healthcare professionals (n=11) were recruited purposively to develop the feedback mechanism in two workshops. Workshop one explored principles underpinning safety feedback mechanisms, and workshop two included the practical development of the feedback mechanism. Final design and content of the feedback mechanism (a safety survey) were verified by workshop participants, and cognitive interviews (n=28) were conducted with patients.udResults: Workshop participants identified that safety feedback mechanisms should be patient-centred, short and concise with clear signposting on how to complete, with an option to be anonymous and balanced between positive (safe) and negative (unsafe) experiences. The agreed feedback mechanism consisted of a survey split across three stages of the care transfer; departure, journey and arrival. Care across organisational boundaries was recognised as being complex, with healthcare professionals acknowledging the difficulty implementing changes that impact other organisations. Cognitive interview participants agreed the content of the survey was relevant but identified barriers to completion relating to the survey formatting and understanding of a care transfer.udConclusions: Participatory, co-design principles helped overcome differences in understandings of safety in the complex setting of care transfers when developing a safety survey. Practical barriers to the survey’s usability and acceptability to patients were identified, resulting in a modified survey design. Further research is required to determine the usability and acceptability of the survey to patients and healthcare professionals, as well as identifying how governance structures should accommodate patient feedback when relating to multiple health or social care providers.udStrengths and limitations of the study:ud This study developed a safety survey using participatory and co-design methods to bring together patient and healthcare professional perspectives.ud Cognitive interviews with 28 patients were used to validate and further refine the survey format and questions.ud Further research is required to pilot the survey to determine whether patients would be willing to be engaged in reporting their experiences of safety following a transfer in care.ud Due to the nature of organisational care transfers, which potentially include large numbers of organisations, it is unlikely that participants represented all possible types of transfers that patients experience.ud It was not possible to explore further the governance relationships that exist between different organisations responsible for patients’ care, which could impact on the implementation of the survey into practice.
机译:目的:建立并验证一种机制,使患者能够在组织之间进行护理转移后就安全经验提供反馈。 udDesign:使用参与性方法(共同设计研讨会)进行的定性研究和认知访谈。与参与者同时分析研究室数据,并基于发达的反馈机制,采用演绎方法对认知访谈进行主题分析。 ud参与者:目的是招募专家患者(n = 5)和医疗保健专业人员(n = 11)来发展反馈机制在两个讲习班中。研讨会一探讨了安全反馈机制的基本原理,研讨会二探讨了反馈机制的实际发展。研讨会参与者验证了反馈机制的最终设计和内容(一项安全调查),并与患者进行了认知访谈(n = 28)。 ud结果:研讨会参与者认为安全反馈机制应以患者为中心,简短且简洁明了的路标说明如何完成操作,并可以匿名选择并在积极(安全)和消极(不安全)体验之间取得平衡。商定的反馈机制包括一项调查,该调查分为护理转移的三个阶段。出发,旅程和到达。跨组织边界的护理被认为是复杂的,卫生保健专业人员承认难以实施影响其他组织的变更。认知访谈参与者同意调查的内容是相关的,但确定了与调查的格式和对护理转移的理解有关的完成障碍。 ud结论:参与式,共同设计原则有助于克服复杂护理环境中对安全性的理解上的差异进行安全调查时转移。确定了调查对患者的可用性和可接受性的实际障碍,从而改进了调查设计。需要进行进一步的研究,以确定调查对患者和医护人员的可用性和可接受性,以及确定与多个卫生保健或社会护理提供者有关的治理结构应如何容纳患者的反馈意见。 ud研究的优势和局限性: ud 这项研究使用参与式和协同设计方法开发了一项安全调查,以汇集患者和医疗保健专业人士的观点。ud通过对28位患者的认知访谈来验证并进一步完善调查格式和问题。ud正在进行进一步的研究需要进行试点调查以确定患者是否愿意在转诊后愿意报告其安全经历。ud由于组织转诊的性质(可能包括大量的组织),不太可能参与者代表患者经历过的所有可能的转移类型。ud不是可能进一步探索负责患者护理的不同组织之间存在的治理关系,这可能会影响到实践调查的实施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号