‘Practical’ resources to support patient and family engagement in healthcare decisions: a scoping review

BMC Health Services Research

Jennifer Gallivan¹  Carol Eigenseher¹  Mandy Bellows¹  Katharina Kovacs Burns² 

[1] Patient Engagement Department, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada;Health Sciences Council and Interdisciplinary Health Research Academy, 3-389 Edmonton Clinic Health Academy, University of Alberta, 11405 – 87 Avenue, Edmonton T6G 1C9, Alberta, Canada

关键词: Evaluation;    Infrastructure;    Education;    Engagement tools;    Resource Kit;    Scoping literature review;    Patient engagement;   

Others  :  1132716
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-175

 received in 2013-09-11, accepted in 2014-03-25,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Extensive literature exists on public involvement or engagement, but what actual tools or guides exist that are practical, tested and easy to use specifically for initiating and implementing patient and family engagement, is uncertain. No comprehensive review and synthesis of general international published or grey literature on this specific topic was found. A systematic scoping review of published and grey literature is, therefore, appropriate for searching through the vast general engagement literature to identify ‘patient/family engagement’ tools and guides applicable in health organization decision-making, such as within Alberta Health Services in Alberta, Canada. This latter organization requested this search and review to inform the contents of a patient engagement resource kit for patients, providers and leaders.

Methods

Search terms related to ‘patient engagement’, tools, guides, education and infrastructure or resources, were applied to published literature databases and grey literature search engines. Grey literature also included United States, Australia and Europe where most known public engagement practices exist, and Canada as the location for this study. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set, and include: English documents referencing ‘patient engagement’ with specific criteria, and published between 1995 and 2011. For document analysis and synthesis, document analysis worksheets were used by three reviewers for the selected 224 published and 193 grey literature documents. Inter-rater reliability was ensured for the final reviews and syntheses of 76 published and 193 grey documents.

Results

Seven key themes emerged from the literature synthesis analysis, and were identified for patient, provider and/or leader groups. Articles/items within each theme were clustered under main topic areas of ‘tools’, ‘education’ and ‘infrastructure’. The synthesis and findings in the literature include 15 different terms and definitions for ‘patient engagement’, 17 different engagement models, numerous barriers and benefits, and 34 toolkits for various patient engagement and evaluation initiatives.

Conclusions

Patient engagement is very complex. This scoping review for patient/family engagement tools and guides is a good start for a resource inventory and can guide the content development of a patient engagement resource kit to be used by patients/families, healthcare providers and administrators.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Kovacs Burns et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Luxford K, Safron DG, Delbanco T: Promoting patient-centered care: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers in healthcare organizations with a reputation for improving the patient experience. Int J Qual Health Care 2011, 23(5):510-515.
• [2]Coyle J, Williams B: Valuing people as individuals: development of an instrument through a survey of person-centredness in secondary care. J Adv Nurs 2001, 36(3):450-459.
• [3]Alberta Health Services: Patient Engagement: A Framework for Engaging Patients with Alberta Health Services. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Health Services; 2010:1-16.
• [4]Arksey H, 0’Malley L: Scoping studies towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 2005, 8:19-32.
• [5]Mays N, Roberts E, Popay J: Synthesising research evidence. In Studying the Organisation and Delivery of Health Services: Research Methods. Edited by Fulop N, Allen P, Clarke A, Black N. London and New York: Routledge – Taylor and Francis Group; 2001:194.
• [6]Creswell J: Research Design. 3rd edition. London: SAGE Publications Inc.; 2009.
• [7]Guest G: Applied thematic Analysis. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage; 2012.
• [8]Gallivan J, Kovacs Burns KA, Bellows M, Eigenseher C: The many faces of patient engagement. J Participatory Med 2012, 4:e32.
• [9]European Patients’ Forum: The Value+ Handbook for Project Coordinators, Leaders and Promoter on Meaningful Patient Involvement. European Commission, Directorate General for Health and Consumers, Public Health Programme; 2008-2013.
• [10]European Patients’ Forum: The Value+ Toolkit: for Patient Organisations on Meaningful Patient Involvement Patients Adding Value to Policy, Projects and Services: European Patients’ Forum. Online http://www.eu-patient.eu/Documents/Projects/Value+%20Toolkit.pdf webcite
• [11]Oregon Department of Education: A Toolkit for Family Involvement in Education. Oregon Department of Education; Online http://www.ode.state.or.us/opportunities/grants/nclb/fitoolkitpdf.pdf webcite
• [12]Leicester City Primary Care Trust: Patient and Public Involvement Toolkit for Staff. Leicester City: National Health Services; 2010.
• [13]Health & Social Care Regulatory Forum: Framework for Public & Service User Involvement in Health and Social Care Regulation in Ireland. Ireland; 2009.
• [14]Corporate Consultation Secretariat, Health Policy and Communications Branch: The Health Policy Toolkit for Public Involvement in Decision Making. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada; 2000. 0-662-29243-X
• [15]Capital Health: The Citizen Engagement Progress Measurement Framework. Nova Scotia: Capital Health; Online 2010 http://www.cdha.nshealth.ca/involving-patients-citizens/our-strategies webcite
• [16]NHS Modernisation Agency: Improvement Leaders’ Guide involving Patients and Carers General Improvement Skills. London: Department of Health, NHS; 2005.
• [17]Gregory J: A Framework of Consumer Engagement in Australian Health Policy: Developing a Framework for the AIHPS Study. Australian Institute of Health Policy Studies Research Project; 2006. Working Paper 2
• [18]Picker Institute Europe: Using Patient Feedback: A Practical Guide to Improving Patient Experience. U.K: Picker Institute Europe; Online http://www.nhssurveys.org/Filestore/documents/QIFull.pdf webcite
• [19]NHS Milton Keynes and Centre for Evidence-based Medicine: Public and Patient Engagement Getting it Right. England: Oxford University; 2010. Available online at: http://www.qualitymk.nhs.uk/patient_public_engagement.htm webcite
• [20]NHS Modernisation Agency: Improvement Leaders’ Guide to Measurement for Improvement. Online 2002. https://www.fundacionpfizer.org/sites/default/files/pdf/comoevaluarlasmejoras.pdf webcite
• [21]Cambridgeshire Community Services, National Health Service Trust: A Staff Guide to Involving Service Users, their Carers and the Public in Cambrideshire Community Services NHS Trust. 2010. Available at: http://www.cambscommunityservices.nhs.uk/getting-involved/your-feedback webcite
• [22]Sharpe A: Toolkit for Patient Engagement: The International Forum on Quality and Safety in Healthcare. 2002. [Poster at International Forum on Quality and Safety in Healthcare]
• [23]Community Engagement Handbook - for Queensland Health District Health Council Members. [State of Queensland: Queensland Health] Online October 2002 http://www.healthissuescentre.org.au/documents/items/2008/04/204586-upload-00001.pdf webcite
• [24]Capital Health: Engagement Framework and Toolkit. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Capital Health; Online 2011. http://www.cdha.nshealth.ca/involving-patients-citizens/documents webcite
• [25]Rotherham Community Health Services: Rotherham Community Health Services Handbook for Patient Engagement (Toolkit). National Health Service; 2010.
• [26]Scottish Health Council: The Participation Toolkit Supporting Patient Focus and Public Involvement in NHS Scotland. 2010.
• [27]South Central WCC Collaborative PPI Programme: Patient and Public Engagement Toolkit for World Class Commissioning. NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement; Online http://localdemocracyandhealth.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/ppe-toolit-south-central.pdf webcite
• [28]Leonhardt K, Bonin D, Pagel P: How to Develop A Community-Based Patient Advisory Council. Walworth County: Aurora Health Care; 2007.
• [29]Forbat L, Hubbard G, Kearney N: Patient and public involvement: models and muddles. J Clin Nurs 2009, 18:2547-2554.
• [30]Sanna L: Assessing the involvement of the patient communicty in European commission co-funded health projects. J Ambul Care Manage 2010, 33:265-271.
• [31]While A: Real users’ experiences fall short of the mark. Br J Community Nurs 2002, 7:546.
• [32]Happell B: Facilitating consumer participation: an approach to finding the ‘right’ consumer. Collegian 2010, 17:125-130.
• [33]Abelson J, Giacomini M, Lehoux P, Gauvin F-P: Bringing ‘the public’ into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practices. Health Poilcy 2007, 82:37-50.
• [34]Chafe R, Neville D, Rathwell T, Deber R: Deciding whether to engage the public on health care issues. Healthcare Manag FORUM 2008, 24-28.
• [35]Farrell C: Patient and Public Involvement in Health: The Evidence for Policy Implementation - A Summary of Results of the Health in Partnership Research Programme. London, England: Department of Health; 2004.
• [36]Abelson J, Eyles J: Public Participation and Citizen Governance in the Canadian Health System. Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada; 2002. Discussion Paper No. 7
• [37]Culyer A: Involving stakeholders in healthcare decisions - the experience of the national institute for health and clinical excellence (NICE) in England and Wales. Health Q 2005, 8:56-60.
• [38]Institute for Patient- and Family- Centered Care: Partnering with Patients and Families to Enhance Safety and Quality – a Mini Toolkit. Maryland: Institute for Patient and Family Centred care; 2010. Available at: http://www.ipfcc.org/tools/Patient-Safety-Toolkit-04.pdf webcite
• [39]Arnstein Sherry R: Ladder of citizen participation. J Am Plann Assoc 1969, 35:216-224.
• [40]International Association for Public Participation: IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation. Online 2007 http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.iap2.org/resource/resmgr/imported/IAP2%20Spectrum_vertical.pdf webcite
• [41]Rural and Regional Health and Aged Care Services Division: Doing it with us not for us - Participation in your Health Service System 2006-09: Victorian Consumers, Carers and the Community Working together with their Health Services and the Department of Human Services. Melbourne, Australia: Rural and Regional Health and Aged Care Services Division, Victorian Government Department of Human Services; 2006.
• [42]Kovacs Burns K: A Canadian Partnership of Patient/Citizen Groups and Government: Engagement in National Health Initiatives and Policy Directions. Edmonton, AB: Faculty of Nursing, University of Alberta; 2006.
• [43]McEvoy R, Keenaghan C, Murray A: Service User Involvement in the Irish Health Service: A Review of the Evidence. Dublin: Irish Health Service; 2008. Health Service Executive, [Online] http://www.hse.ie/eng/services/Publications/Your_Service,_Your_Say_Consumer_Affairs/Reports/LiteratureReview.pdf webcite
• [44]Sheedy A: Handbook on Citizen Engagement: Beyond Consultation. Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Networks Inc; 2008.
• [45]Nilsen E: Methods of Consumer Involvement in Developing Healthcare Policy and Research, Clinical Practice Guidelines and Patient Information Material (review). Ottawa: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2010.
• [46]Centre for Public Dialogue: Public Dialogue: A Tool for Citizen Engagement. Washington DC: A Manual for Federal Departments and Agencies; 2000.
• [47]Vancouver Coastal Health: Community Engagement Framework. Vancouver: Coastal Health; Online http://www.vch.ca/media/CE%20Booklet%202009.pdf webcite
• [48]Howe A: Can the patient be on our team? an operational approach to patient involv ment in interprofessional approaches to safe care. J Interprof Care 2006, 20:527-534.
• [49]Lansky D: Patient Engagement and Patient Decision-Making in US Health Care. The Commonwealth Fund and Nuffield Trust Conference; 2003.
• [50]Frankish James C, Kwan B, Ratner Pamela A, Higgins Joan W, Larsen C: Challenges of citizen particpation in regional health authorities. Soc Sci Med 2002, 54:1471-1480.
• [51]Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Smith P, Martin E, Gauvin FP: Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Soc Sci Med 2003, 57:239-251.
• [52]Cayton H: Patient Engagement and Patient Decision-Making in England. Department of Health for England, The Commonwealth Fund/Nuffield Trust; 2004.
• [53]Anton S, McKee L, Harrison S, Farrar S: Involving the public in NHS service planning. J Health Organ Manag 2007, 21:470-483.
• [54]Venuta R, Graham Ian D: Involving citizens and patients in health research. J Ambul Care Manage 2010, 33:215-222.
• [55]Wait S, Nolte E: Public involvement policies in health: exploring their conceptual basis. Health Econ Policy Law 2006, 1:149-162.
• [56]Parsons S, Winterbottom A, Cross P, Redding D: The Quality of Patient Engagement and Involvement in Primary Care. London: The King’s Fund; 2010.
• [57]Phillips S, Orsini M: Mapping the Links: Citizen Involvement in Policy Processes. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Policy Research Networks Inc; 2002. [CPRN discussion paper no. F21]
• [58]Health WA: Consumer Carer and Community Engagement Framework: for Health Services, Hosptials and WA Health Following Consultation across WA health. Government of Western Australia, Department of Health; Online April 2007 http://www.health.wa.gov.au/hrit/docs/publications/WA_Health_Consumer_Apr07.pdf webcite
• [59]Coulter A, Ellins J: Effectiveness of strategies for informing, educating and involving patients. Br Med J 2007, 335:24-27.