1
|
Tobiano G, Latimer S, Manias E, Marshall AP, Rattray M, Jenkinson K, Teasdale T, Wren K, Chaboyer W. Co-design of an intervention to improve patient participation in discharge medication communication. Int J Qual Health Care 2024; 36:mzae013. [PMID: 38492231 PMCID: PMC10944286 DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzae013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2023] [Revised: 01/30/2024] [Accepted: 02/20/2024] [Indexed: 03/18/2024] Open
Abstract
Patients can experience medication-related harm and hospital readmission because they do not understand or adhere to post-hospital medication instructions. Increasing patient medication literacy and, in turn, participation in medication conversations could be a solution. The purposes of this study were to co-design and test an intervention to enhance patient participation in hospital discharge medication communication. In terms of methods, co-design, a collaborative approach where stakeholders design solutions to problems, was used to develop a prototype medication communication intervention. First, our consumer and healthcare professional stakeholders generated intervention ideas. Next, inpatients, opinion leaders, and academic researchers collaborated to determine the most pertinent and feasible intervention ideas. Finally, the prototype intervention was shown to six intended end-users (i.e. hospital patients) who underwent usability interviews and completed the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire. The final intervention comprised of a suite of three websites: (i) a medication search engine; (ii) resources to help patients manage their medications once home; and (iii) a question builder tool. The intervention has been tested with intended end-users and results of the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire have shown that the intervention is acceptable. Identified usability issues have been addressed. In conclusion, this co-designed intervention provides patients with trustworthy resources that can help them to understand medication information and ask medication-related questions, thus promoting medication literacy and patient participation. In turn, this intervention could enhance patients' medication self-efficacy and healthcare utilization. Using a co-design approach ensured authentic consumer and other stakeholder engagement, while allowing opinion leaders and researchers to ensure that a feasible intervention was developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Georgia Tobiano
- Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
- Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast University Hospital, Hospital Boulevard, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Sharon Latimer
- Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Elizabeth Manias
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
- Centre for Quality and Patient Safety Research, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, Victoria 3125, Australia
| | - Andrea P Marshall
- Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast University Hospital, Hospital Boulevard, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Megan Rattray
- College of Medicine & Public Health, Flinders University, 1284 South Road, Clovelly Park, Adelaide, South Australia 5042, Australia
| | - Kim Jenkinson
- Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast University Hospital, Hospital Boulevard, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Trudy Teasdale
- Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast University Hospital, Hospital Boulevard, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Kellie Wren
- Gold Coast Health, Gold Coast University Hospital, Hospital Boulevard, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| | - Wendy Chaboyer
- Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wound Care, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
- School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Parklands Drive, Gold Coast, Queensland 4215, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dhanani S, Ramlakhan JU, Berta WB, Gagliardi AR. Optimizing the design and implementation of question prompt lists to support person-centred care: A scoping review. Health Expect 2023; 26:1404-1417. [PMID: 37227115 PMCID: PMC10349246 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2023] [Revised: 03/13/2023] [Accepted: 05/15/2023] [Indexed: 05/26/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Question prompt lists (QPLs) are lists of questions that patients may want to discuss with clinicians. QPLs support person-centred care and have been associated with many beneficial outcomes including improved patient question-asking, and the amount and quality of the information provided by clinicians. The purpose of this study was to review published research on QPLs to explore how QPL design and implementation can be optimized. METHODS We performed a scoping review by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Database from inception to 8 May 2022, for English language studies of any design that evaluated QPLs. We used summary statistics and text to report study characteristics, and QPL design and implementation. RESULTS We included 57 studies published from 1988 to 2022 by authors in 12 countries on a range of clinical topics. Of those, 56% provided the QPL, but few described how QPLs were developed. The number of questions varied widely (range 9-191). Most QPLs were single-page handouts (44%) but others ranged from 2 to 33 pages. Most studies implemented a QPL alone with no other accompanying strategy; most often in a print format before consultations by mail (18%) or in the waiting room (66%). Both patients and clinicians identified numerous benefits to patients of QPLs (e.g., increased patient confidence to ask questions, and patient satisfaction with communication or care received; and reduced anxiety about health status or treatment). To support use, patients desired access to QPLs in advance of clinician visits, and clinicians desired information/training on how to use the QPL and answer questions. Most (88%) studies reported at least one beneficial impact of QPLs. This was true even for single-page QPLs with few questions unaccompanied by other implementation strategies. Despite favourable views of QPLs, few studies assessed outcomes amongst clinicians. CONCLUSION This review identified QPL characteristics and implementation strategies that may be associated with beneficial outcomes. Future research should confirm these findings via systematic review and explore the benefits of QPLs from the clinician's perspective. PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION Following this review, we used the findings to develop a QPL on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and interviewed women and clinicians about QPL design including content, format, enablers and barriers of use, and potential outcomes including beneficial impacts and possible harms (will be published elsewhere).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shazia Dhanani
- Toronto General Hospital Research InstituteUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada
| | - Jessica U. Ramlakhan
- Toronto General Hospital Research InstituteUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada
| | - Whitney B. Berta
- Institute of Health Policy, Management and EvaluationUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
| | - Anna R. Gagliardi
- Toronto General Hospital Research InstituteUniversity Health NetworkTorontoCanada
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Waddell A, Goodwin D, Spassova G, Bragge P. "The Terminology Might Be Ahead of Practice": Embedding Shared Decision Making in Practice-Barriers and Facilitators to Implementation of SDM in the Context of Maternity Care. MDM Policy Pract 2023; 8:23814683231199943. [PMID: 37743932 PMCID: PMC10517621 DOI: 10.1177/23814683231199943] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2023] [Accepted: 07/20/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Background. It is a patient's right to be included in decisions about their health care. Implementing shared decision making (SDM) is important to enable active communication between clinicians and patients. Although health policy makers are increasingly mandating SDM implementation, SDM adoption has been slow. This study explored stakeholders' organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementing policy mandated SDM in maternity care in Victoria, Australia. Method. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants including clinicians, health service administrators and decision makers, and government policy makers. Data were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation. Results. Factors identified as facilitating SDM implementation included using a whole-of-system approach, providing additional implementation resources, correct documentation facilitated by electronic medical records, and including patient outcomes in measurement. Barriers included health service lack of capacity, unclear policy definitions of SDM, and policy makers' lack of resources to track implementation. Conclusion. This is the first study to our knowledge to explore barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation from the perspective of multiple actors following policy mandating SDM in tertiary health services in Australia. The primary finding was that there are concerns that SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice. Nonclinical staff play a crucial role translating policy to practice. Addressing organizational- and system-level barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation should be a key concern of health policy makers, health services, and staff. Highlights New government policies require shared decision making (SDM) implementation in hospitals.There is limited evidence for how to implement SDM in hospital settings.There are concerns SDM implementation policy is outpacing practice.Understanding and capacity for SDM varies considerably among stakeholders.Whole of system approaches and electronic medical records are seen to facilitate SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Waddell
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
- Safer Care Victoria, Victorian Department of Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Denise Goodwin
- Behaviour Works Australia Health Programs, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| | - Gerri Spassova
- Department of Marketing, Monash Business School, Caulfield East, VIC, Australia
| | - Peter Bragge
- Monash Sustainable Evidence Review Service, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Waddell A, Spassova G, Sampson L, Jungbluth L, Dam J, Bragge P. Co-designing a theory-informed intervention to increase shared decision-making in maternity care. Health Res Policy Syst 2023; 21:15. [PMID: 36721156 PMCID: PMC9888748 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-023-00959-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Accepted: 01/09/2023] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shared decision-making (SDM) has been shown to improve healthcare outcomes and is a recognized right of patients. Policy requires health services to implement SDM. However, there is limited research into what interventions work and for what reasons. The aim of the study was to develop a series of interventions to increase the use of SDM in maternity care with stakeholders. METHODS Interventions to increase the use of SDM in the setting of pregnancy care were developed using Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework and building on findings of an in-depth qualitative study which were inductively analysed. Intervention development workshops involved co-design, with patients, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policy makers. Workshops focused on identifying viable SDM opportunities and tailoring interventions to the local context (the Royal Women's Hospital) and salient qualitative themes. RESULTS Pain management options during labour were identified by participants as a high priority for application of SDM, and three interventions were developed including patient and clinician access to the Victorian Government's maternity record via the patient portal and electronic medical records (EMR); a multi-layered persuasive communications campaign designed; and clinical champions and SDM simulation training. Factors identified by participants for successful implementation included having alignment with strategic direction of the service, support of leaders, using pre-standing resources and workflows, using clinical champions, and ensuring equity. CONCLUSION Three interventions co-designed to increase the use of SDM for pain management during labour address key barriers and facilitators to SDM in maternity care. This study exemplifies how health services can use behavioural science and co-design principles to increase the use of SDM. Insights into the co-design of interventions to implement SDM in routine practice provide a framework for other health services, policy makers and researchers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Waddell
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia.
- Victorian Department of Health, Safer Care Victoria, 50 Lonsdale St, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
| | - Gerri Spassova
- Department of Marketing, Monash Business School, 900 Dandenong Rd, Caulfield East, Victoria, 3145, Australia
| | - Louise Sampson
- Royal Women's Hospital, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia
| | - Lena Jungbluth
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia
| | - Jennifer Dam
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia
| | - Peter Bragge
- Evidence Review Service, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tracy MC, Muscat DM, Shepherd HL, Trevena LJ. Doctors' Attitudes to Patient Question Asking, Patient-Generated Question Lists, and Question Prompt Lists: A Qualitative Study. Med Decis Making 2021; 42:283-292. [PMID: 34455860 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x211029579] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Participation by patients in their own health care improves quality and safety. Question prompt lists (QPLs) can improve participation, particularly with doctors' endorsement. Few data have explored doctors' attitudes on these tools. We sought the experiences and attitudes of general practitioners and other specialists toward patient question asking and QPLs in their practice. METHODS In-depth, semistructured interviews and focus groups with purposively selected Australian doctors were conducted. Interview guides were used to explore doctors' experiences of patient question asking, patients' lists, and a sample QPL created using an Australian government-funded online tool, "Question Builder." Recordings were transcribed verbatim and data analyzed thematically using the method by Braun and Clarke. RESULTS Focus groups with 3 to 9 participants and a further 17 individual interviews were conducted. There was a total of 40 participants, 23 general practitioners and 17 other specialists (e.g., physicians, surgeons, pediatricians). Our analysis was summarized into several themes. 1) The doctors expected, encouraged, and had significant experience of patient question asking and patients' lists. They described many barriers for patients and their efforts to ensure patients had the information they needed. 2) The doctors felt responsible for creating an environment conducive to patient question asking, the delivery of answers, having strategies for unanswered questions, and balancing the agendas of both parties in the consultation. 3) Structured QPLs that prepared patients and facilitated the consultation agenda were viewed positively. The degree of time pressures participating doctors experienced in their context had a strong influence on how they responded to the sample QPL. CONCLUSION Doctors in this study expected patients to ask questions and endorsed the benefits of QPLs. However, there were more diverse views about the feasibility of implementing them in practice. Designing QPLs to fit within current workflows, via more succinct and tailored designs, may result in wider doctor acceptance and endorsement, hence maximizing the benefits of QPLs with improved patient participation and patient safety.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marguerite Clare Tracy
- ASK-GP Centre for Research Excellence, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Danielle Maree Muscat
- Sydney Health Literacy Lab, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Heather L Shepherd
- Susan Wakil Sydney Nursing School, Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED), School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia)
| | - Lyndal Jane Trevena
- ASK-GP Centre for Research Excellence, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Tracy MC, Shepherd HL, Patel P, Trevena LJ. Exploring the Vast Choice of Question Prompt Lists Available to Health Consumers via Google: Environmental Scan. J Med Internet Res 2020; 22:e17002. [PMID: 32469321 PMCID: PMC7293062 DOI: 10.2196/17002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/11/2019] [Revised: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 03/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background There is increasing interest in shared decision making (SDM) in Australia. Question prompt lists (QPLs) support question asking by patients, a key part of SDM. QPLs have been studied in a variety of settings, and increasingly the internet provides a source of suggested questions for patients. Environmental scans have been shown to be useful in assessing the availability and quality of online SDM tools. Objective This study aimed to assess the number and readability of QPLs available to users via Google.com.au. Methods Our environmental scan used search terms derived from literature and reputable websites to search for QPLs available via Google.com.au. Following removal of duplicates from the 4000 URLs and 22 reputable sites, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to create a list of unique QPLs. A sample of 20 QPLs was further assessed for list length, proxy measures of quality such as a date of review, and evidence of doctor endorsement. Readability of the sample QPL instructions and QPLs themselves was assessed using Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores. Results Our environmental scan identified 173 unique QPLs available to users. Lists ranged in length from 1 question to >200 questions. Of our sample, 50% (10/20) had a listed date of creation or update, and 60% (12/20) had evidence of authorship or source. Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores for instructions were higher than for the QPLs (grades 10.3 and 7.7, respectively). There was over a 1 grade difference between QPLs from reputable sites compared with other sites (grades 4.2 and 5.4, respectively). Conclusions People seeking questions to ask their doctor using Google.com.au encounter a vast number of question lists that they can use to prepare for consultations with their doctors. Markers of the quality or usefulness of various types of online QPLs, either surrogate or direct, have not yet been established, which makes it difficult to assess the value of the abundance of lists. Doctor endorsement of question asking has previously been shown to be an important factor in the effectiveness of QPLs, but information regarding this is not readily available online. Whether these diverse QPLs are endorsed by medical practitioners warrants further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marguerite Clare Tracy
- Ask, Share, Know: Rapid Evidence for General Practice Decisions Centre for Research Excellence, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Heather L Shepherd
- Ask, Share, Know: Rapid Evidence for General Practice Decisions Centre for Research Excellence, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Centre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-based Decision-making (CeMPED), The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Pinika Patel
- Ask, Share, Know: Rapid Evidence for General Practice Decisions Centre for Research Excellence, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Lyndal Jane Trevena
- Ask, Share, Know: Rapid Evidence for General Practice Decisions Centre for Research Excellence, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|