Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32384891›Full record

ReviewBMC health services research2020

Patient involvement in healthcare workers' practices: how does it operate? A mixed-methods study in a French university hospital.

Lucie Malloggi, Brice Leclère, Clément Le Glatin, Leïla Moret

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Organizational capacity for patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: interviews with patient/family advisors, managers and clinicians.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021
    Article
  5. Approaches to optimize patient and family engagement in hospital planning and improvement: Qualitative interviews.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lucie MalloggiDepartment of Medical Evaluation and Epidemiology, Nantes University Hospital, Hôpital Saint-Jacques, 85 rue Saint-Jacques, 44093, Nantes cedex, France. lucie.malloggi@chu-nantes.fr.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3666-1455
Brice LeclèreDepartment of Medical Evaluation and Epidemiology, Nantes University Hospital, Hôpital Saint-Jacques, 85 rue Saint-Jacques, 44093, Nantes cedex, France.
Clément Le GlatinDepartment of Medical Evaluation and Epidemiology, Nantes University Hospital, Hôpital Saint-Jacques, 85 rue Saint-Jacques, 44093, Nantes cedex, France.
Leïla MoretDepartment of Medical Evaluation and Epidemiology, Nantes University Hospital, Hôpital Saint-Jacques, 85 rue Saint-Jacques, 44093, Nantes cedex, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present challenge for patient involvement is the improvement of healthcare efficiency through a deeper consideration of the patient experience. In hospitals, numerous interventions promoting patient involvement are informally implemented by healthcare workers (HCWs). The first aim of this study was to conduct an overview of hospital HCWs' experiences of the involvement of patients or their representatives. This overview included the involvement of patients in the domains of healthcare provision and support for other patients, healthcare quality and safety improvement, training and research. The second aim was to describe the challenges and conditions for the development of participative interventions by HCWs.

methodsWe conducted a mixed-methods sequential study at Nantes University Hospital from September 2017 to May 2018. To achieve the first aim, we performed a descriptive analysis of quantitative data collected via a questionnaire survey of 1290 HCWs. To achieve the second aim, we conducted a thematic analysis of qualitative data collected via eight semi-structured interviews with HCWs who reported involving patients or their representatives (family and patient association members) in healthcare.

resultsAmong the 213 survey participants (16.5%), 133 reported a total of 424 participative interventions, mostly in the domains of care quality and safety (37%) and care provision and support (29%). The analysis of the qualitative data evidenced three types of factors determining the implementation of such interventions: the profiles of patients and their representatives, the beliefs and attitudes of HCWs, and organisational factors. While leadership from patients and HCWs was a central element in the development of patient involvement interventions, organisations' capacities to foster a sustainable partnership culture appeared to be the next challenge to promote the patient-as-partner model in health systems. Our results also highlighted numerous benefits of patient and representative involvement for patients and HCWs.

conclusionsThe numerous initiatives reported show that patients and patient representatives participate alongside HCWs in hospitals. It is essential to take into account the facilitating and hindering factors of patient involvement in hospital HCWs' practices for the further development of current initiatives. Additional studies, especially from the point of view of patients, are needed to complement our findings.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationPhysician-Patient RelationsFranceHospitals, UniversityHumansPersonnel, HospitalQualitative ResearchSurveys and QuestionnairesExpert patientHealthcare quality improvementHospitalsMixed-methodsPatient engagementPatient involvement

Identifiers

PMID32384891
PMCPMC7206773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.