Cargando…

Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?

BACKGROUND: Co-production and co-design approaches to quality improvement (QI) efforts are gaining momentum in healthcare. Yet, these approaches can be challenging, not least when it comes to patient involvement. The aim of this study was to examine what might influence QI efforts in which patients...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bergerum, Carolina, Engström, Agneta Kullén, Thor, Johan, Wolmesjö, Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33267880
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05970-4
_version_ 1783617722391724032
author Bergerum, Carolina
Engström, Agneta Kullén
Thor, Johan
Wolmesjö, Maria
author_facet Bergerum, Carolina
Engström, Agneta Kullén
Thor, Johan
Wolmesjö, Maria
author_sort Bergerum, Carolina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Co-production and co-design approaches to quality improvement (QI) efforts are gaining momentum in healthcare. Yet, these approaches can be challenging, not least when it comes to patient involvement. The aim of this study was to examine what might influence QI efforts in which patients are involved, as experienced by the patients and the healthcare professionals involved. METHODS: This study involved a qualitative design inspired by the constructivist grounded theory. In one mid-sized Swedish hospital’s patient process organisation, data was collected from six QI teams that involved patients in their QI efforts, addressing care paths for patients with transient, chronic and/or multiple parallel diagnoses. Field notes were collected from participant observations during 53 QI team meetings in three of the six patient processes. Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients and 12 healthcare professionals in all the six QI teams. RESULTS: Patients were involved in QI efforts in different ways. In three of the QI teams, patient representatives attended team meetings regularly. One team consulted patient representatives on a single occasion, one team collected patient preferences structurally from individual interviews with patients, and one team combined interviews and a workshop with patients. The patients’ and healthcare professionals’ expressions of what might influence the QI efforts involving patients were similar in several ways. QI team members emphasized the importance of organisational structure and culture. Furthermore, they expressed a desire for ongoing interaction between patients and healthcare professionals in healthcare QI. CONCLUSIONS: QI team members recognised continuous dialogue and collective thinking by the sharing of experiences and preferences between patients and healthcare professionals as essential for achieving better matches between healthcare resources and patient needs in their QI efforts. Significant structural and cultural aspects of performing QI in complex hospital organisations were considered to be obstructions to progress. Therefore, to sustain learning and behaviour change through QI efforts at the team level, a deeper understanding of how structural and cultural aspects of QI promote or prevent success appears essential. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-020-05970-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7709309
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77093092020-12-02 Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare? Bergerum, Carolina Engström, Agneta Kullén Thor, Johan Wolmesjö, Maria BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Co-production and co-design approaches to quality improvement (QI) efforts are gaining momentum in healthcare. Yet, these approaches can be challenging, not least when it comes to patient involvement. The aim of this study was to examine what might influence QI efforts in which patients are involved, as experienced by the patients and the healthcare professionals involved. METHODS: This study involved a qualitative design inspired by the constructivist grounded theory. In one mid-sized Swedish hospital’s patient process organisation, data was collected from six QI teams that involved patients in their QI efforts, addressing care paths for patients with transient, chronic and/or multiple parallel diagnoses. Field notes were collected from participant observations during 53 QI team meetings in three of the six patient processes. Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 patients and 12 healthcare professionals in all the six QI teams. RESULTS: Patients were involved in QI efforts in different ways. In three of the QI teams, patient representatives attended team meetings regularly. One team consulted patient representatives on a single occasion, one team collected patient preferences structurally from individual interviews with patients, and one team combined interviews and a workshop with patients. The patients’ and healthcare professionals’ expressions of what might influence the QI efforts involving patients were similar in several ways. QI team members emphasized the importance of organisational structure and culture. Furthermore, they expressed a desire for ongoing interaction between patients and healthcare professionals in healthcare QI. CONCLUSIONS: QI team members recognised continuous dialogue and collective thinking by the sharing of experiences and preferences between patients and healthcare professionals as essential for achieving better matches between healthcare resources and patient needs in their QI efforts. Significant structural and cultural aspects of performing QI in complex hospital organisations were considered to be obstructions to progress. Therefore, to sustain learning and behaviour change through QI efforts at the team level, a deeper understanding of how structural and cultural aspects of QI promote or prevent success appears essential. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-020-05970-4. BioMed Central 2020-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7709309/ /pubmed/33267880 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05970-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bergerum, Carolina
Engström, Agneta Kullén
Thor, Johan
Wolmesjö, Maria
Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title_full Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title_fullStr Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title_full_unstemmed Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title_short Patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
title_sort patient involvement in quality improvement – a ‘tug of war’ or a dialogue in a learning process to improve healthcare?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33267880
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05970-4
work_keys_str_mv AT bergerumcarolina patientinvolvementinqualityimprovementatugofwaroradialogueinalearningprocesstoimprovehealthcare
AT engstromagnetakullen patientinvolvementinqualityimprovementatugofwaroradialogueinalearningprocesstoimprovehealthcare
AT thorjohan patientinvolvementinqualityimprovementatugofwaroradialogueinalearningprocesstoimprovehealthcare
AT wolmesjomaria patientinvolvementinqualityimprovementatugofwaroradialogueinalearningprocesstoimprovehealthcare