Accompanying patients in clinical oncology teams: Reported activities and perceived effects

INTRODUCTION

Since 2018, four establishments in Quebec, Canada, have decided to implement the PAROLE-Onco programme, which introduced accompanying patients (APs) in healthcare teams to improve the experience of cancer patients. APs are patient advisors who have had a cancer treatment experience and who conduct consultations to complement the service offered by providing emotional, informational and educational support to patients undergoing treatments (e.g., radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery), mostly for breast cancer. We aimed to explore the evolution of APs' perspectives regarding their activities within the clinical oncology teams as well as the perceived effects of their intervention with patients, the clinical team and themselves.

METHODS

A qualitative study based on semistructured interviews and focus groups was conducted with APs at the beginning of their intervention (T1) and 2 years afterwards (T2). The themes discussed were APs' activities and the perceived effects of their interventions on themselves, on the patients and on the clinical team.

RESULTS

In total, 20 APs were interviewed. In T2, APs' activities shifted from listening and sharing experiences to empowering patients by helping them become partners in their care and felt generally more integrated into the clinical team. APs help patients feel understood and supported, alleviate stress and become partners in the care they receive. They also alleviate the clinical team's workload by offering a complementary service through emotional support, which, according to them, helps patients feel calmer and more prepared for their appointments with healthcare professionals. They communicate additional information about their patients' health journey, which makes the appointment more efficient for healthcare professionals. When APs accompany patients, they feel as if they can make a difference in patients' lives. Their activities are perceived by some as an opportunity to give back but also as a way of giving meaning to their own experience, in turn serving as a learning experience.

CONCLUSION

By mobilizing their experiential knowledge, APs provide emotional, informational, cognitive and navigational support, which allows patients to be more empowered in their care and which complements professionals' scientific knowledge, thereby helping to refine their sensitivity to the patients' experiences.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Two patient-researchers have contributed to the study design, the conduct of the study, the data analysis and interpretation, as well as in the preparation and writing of this manuscript.

Patient and family perceptions of interprofessional collaborative teamwork: An integrative review

AIMS

To understand the patient and family perceptions of teamwork by synthesising existing evidence using the Interprofessional Education Collaborative Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice as a guiding framework.

BACKGROUND

Advances in healthcare have resulted in more people living longer with health conditions, and patients and families have become the primary caregivers. The role of the interprofessional collaborative team supports a paradigm shift to a care model with the patient and family at the centre of healthcare decisions. However, patient and family views of interprofessional collaborative team care have rarely been studied.

METHODS

The authors applied Whittmore and Knafl's methodology to conduct an integrative review of the literature. Databases searched included Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed and PsycINFO along with reference searches. The studies included were those related to patient and family perceptions of teamwork published from 2000 to 2020. The IPEC Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice served as the guiding framework for analysis. A PRISMA flow chart documented the search, inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles met the inclusion criteria. The findings identified differing perspectives by patients of the impact of the interprofessional collaborative team in their care which suggests that interventions to increase knowledge about interprofessional collaborative team care from the patient and family perspective may be beneficial.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited research on understanding IPC teams from the patient and family viewpoint. This review reveals incongruencies in patient and provider perspectives of IPC teams and suggests the need for additional research about patient and family perspectives of teamwork. To fully implement the IPC team vision, perceptions of teamwork must be fully understood.

Receipt of opioids and patient care experiences among nonsurgical hospitalized adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between receipt of opioids and patient care experiences among nonsurgical hospitalized adults.

DATA SOURCES

A total of 17 691 patient-level responses to the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) patient care experience survey linked to medical records from nonsurgical hospitalizations in an 11-hospital health care system in a Midwestern state, years 2011-2016.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a pooled cross-sectional study that used propensity score matching analyses and logistic regression to estimate the relationship between patients' care experience measures (overall and pain-specific) and their receipt of opioids while hospitalized. In supplementary analyses, we used the same propensity score matching methods to estimate the relationship between patient care experience measures and receipt of opioids in four patient subgroups based on average patient-reported pain during hospitalization (no pain; mild pain; moderate pain; and severe pain).

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Receipt of opioids was not associated with patient care experience measures in our main analysis. In our supplementary analysis, we found lower ratings for pain control among hospitalizations for patients who reported moderate pain (Marginal Effects = -4.5 percent; P value = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

Counter to some previous studies, we observed that receipt of opioids was not associated with patient care experience measures for nonsurgical hospitalized adults. These findings may be due to different pain experiences of adults hospitalized for nonsurgical versus surgical reasons.

U.S. Hospital Employment of Foreign-Educated Nurses and Patient Experience: A Cross-Sectional Study

INTRODUCTION

For over half a century, hospitals in the United States have actively recruited foreign-educated nurses (FENs) in response to nurse shortages in hospitals and nursing homes. Little attention has been paid to the quality of care in the United States related to employment of FENs.

AIMS

The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine whether employment of FENs in U.S. hospitals is associated with patient care experience.

METHOD

This study used cross-sectional data from three sources in 425 hospitals in four large states to evaluate the relationship between patient perceptions of care and hospital employment of FENs. The study linked data from publicly reported patient experience of care surveys, nurse surveys, and administrative data using unique hospital identifiers common across the data sets.

RESULTS

Patient-reported care experience was found to be more negative in hospitals employing more FENs, after controls for other possible explanations. Each 10% increase in FENs was associated with a decrease in the percentage of patients who would recommend their hospital and a decrease in the percentage of patients giving favorable reports on five nursing-specific aspects of patient experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that employment of substantial numbers of nurses educated outside the United States may have implications for quality of care. The findings suggest that research on the outcomes of transition programs for FENs would be useful to inform regulatory policies.

Patient Experience in an Era of Primary Care Transformation: Revisiting the PACIC

RATIONALE

Aims and Objective: The validation study of the Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) questionnaire suggested a 5-factor structure determined a priori, but subsequent analyses have questioned the validity of the original factor structure. This study analyzed the factor structure of the PACIC using a large and diverse patient sample, and evaluated the identified factors through the lens of recent transformational initiatives in primary care.

METHODS

Convenience samples of adults completed surveys in waiting rooms during clinic visits. Primary care patients with 1 or more chronic illnesses with complete PACIC responses at baseline from 39 clinics (n=1,567) and at follow-up from 36 clinics (n=1,536) participated. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on baseline and follow-up patient questionnaire data from a cluster randomized controlled trial. Identified factors were evaluated in terms of item loadings, content, reliability, and the extent to which items reflected advances in the delivery of chronic illness care.

RESULTS

Analyses supported the use of the PACIC summary score. Although a 5-factor model was retained, factor loadings were different from the original PACIC validation study. All factors had sufficient reliability, but findings suggested potential revisions to enhance the factor structure.

CONCLUSIONS

It may be time to revise the PACIC to enhance the stability of the subscales (factors) and better reflect recent transformations in the delivery of chronic illness care.

The patient-centered medical home and patient experience

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between practices' reported use of patient-centered medical home (PCMH) processes and patients' perceptions of their care experience.

DATA SOURCE

Primary survey data from 393 physician practices and 1,304 patients receiving care in those practices.

STUDY DESIGN

This is an observational, cross-sectional study. Using standard ordinary least-squares and a sample selection model, we estimated the association between patients' care experience and the use of PCMH processes in the practices where they receive care.

DATA COLLECTION

We linked data from a nationally representative survey of individuals with chronic disease and two nationally representative surveys of physician practices.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We found that practices' use of PCMH processes was not associated with patient experience after controlling for sample selection as well as practice and patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, which was large, but somewhat limited in its measures of the PCMH and of patient experience, we found no association between PCMH processes and patient experience. The continued accumulation of evidence related to the possibilities of the PCMH, how PCMH is measured, and how the impact of PCMH is gauged provides important information for health care decision makers.