ArticleBMC health services research2019
Enabling public, patient and practitioner involvement in co-designing frailty pathways in the acute care setting.
Article in BMC health services research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review on the frequency and quality of reporting patient and public involvement in patient safety research.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Involving older people in co-designing an intervention to reverse frailty and build resilience.Family practice · 2022Trial
- Partnerships and practices: a scoping review of engaging older adults living with frailty in the research process.Research involvement and engagement · 2026Review
- Moving forward, leaving the patients behind? A multilevel assessment framework for evaluating patient-centred, integrated care quality.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Review
- Co-Designing an Inclusive Stakeholder Engagement Strategy for Rehabilitation Technology Training Using the I-STEM Model.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Patient engagement in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cell therapy: a survey by the EBMT patient engagement task force & transplantation complications working party.Bone marrow transplantation · 2024Article
- Transitioning to home and beyond following stroke: a prospective cohort study of outcomes and needs.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Role matters in understanding 'quality' in palliative care: a qualitative analysis of patient, caregiver and practitioner perspectives.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Development of the EVIBEC Learning Outcomes Framework to support the delivery of evidence-based practice curricula in health care professional programmes: a codesign approach.BMC medical education · 2024Review
- Article
- Patient engagement in the development and delivery of healthcare services: a systematic scoping review.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Potentials and challenges of using co-design in health services research in low- and middle-income countries.Global health research and policy · 2023Article
- A realist process evaluation of an intervention to promote competencies in interprofessional collaboration among interdisciplinary integrated care teams for older people: Study protocol.HRB open research · 2023Article
- Supporting safe and gradual reduction of long-term benzodiazepine receptor agonist use: Development of the SAFEGUARDING-BZRAs toolkit using a codesign approach.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Article
- Co-produced capability framework for successful patient and staff partnerships in healthcare quality improvement: results of a scoping review.BMJ quality & safety · 2022Article
- Implementing and evaluating co-designed change in health.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022Article
- Methods to Generate Innovative Research Ideas and Improve Patient and Public Involvement in Modern Epidemiological Research: Review, Patient Viewpoint, and Guidelines for Implementation of a Digital Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Review
- Mitigating unintended consequences of co-design in health care.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- "Could you give us an idea on what we are all doing here?" the Patient Voice in Cancer Research (PVCR) starting the journey of involvement in Ireland.Research involvement and engagement · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough not an inevitable part of ageing, frailty is an increasingly common condition in older people. Frail older patients are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of hospitalisation, including deconditioning, immobility and loss of independence (Chong et al, J Am Med Dir Assoc 18:638.e7-638.e11, 2017). The 'Systematic Approach to improving care for Frail older patients' (SAFE) study co-designed, with public and patient representatives, quality improvement initiatives aimed at enhancing the delivery of care to frail older patients within an acute hospital setting. This paper describes quality improvement initiatives which resulted from a co-design process aiming to improve service delivery in the acute setting for frail older people. These improvement initiatives were aligned to five priority areas identified by patients and public representatives.
methodsThe co-design work was supported by four pillars of effective and meaningful public and patient representative (PPR) involvement in health research (Bombard et al, Implement Sci 13:98, 2018; Black et al, J Health Serv Res Policy 23:158-67, 2018). These pillars were: research environment and receptive contexts; expectations and role clarity; support for participation and inclusive representation and; commitment to the value of co-learning involving institutional leadership.
resultsFive priority areas were identified by the co-design team for targeted quality improvement initiatives: Collaboration along the integrated care continuum; continence care; improved mobility; access to food and hydration and improved patient information. These priority areas and the responding quality improvement initiatives are discussed in relation to patient-centred outcomes for enhanced care delivery for frail older people in an acute hospital setting.
conclusionsThe co-design approach to quality improvement places patient-centred outcomes such as dignity, identity, respectful communication as well as independence as key drivers for implementation. Enhanced inter-personal communication was consistently emphasised by the co-design team and much of the quality improvement initiatives target more effective, respectful and clear communication between healthcare personnel and patients. Measurement and evaluation of these patient-centred outcomes, while challenging, should be prioritised in the implementation of quality improvement initiatives. Adequate resourcing and administrative commitment pose the greatest challenges to the sustainability of the interventions developed along the SAFE pathways. The inclusion of organisational leadership in the co-design and implementation teams is a critical factor in the success of interventions targeting service delivery and quality improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.