bims-paceca Biomed News
on Patient-centred care
Issue of 2022–08–14
thirteen papers selected by
Rob Penfold, Queensland Health



  1. Int J Emerg Med. 2022 Aug 11. 15(1): 36
       BACKGROUND: Patient-centered care (PCC) is an emerging priority in many healthcare settings but lacks clarity in the emergency department (ED). It is of interest to know what PCC practices are most important to patients to better their experience. The objective of this study was to conduct a mixed-methods systematic review of PCC in the ED.
    METHODS: We used stakeholder and patient engagement to consult with clinicians, subject-matter experts, patient partners, and community organizations to determine patient needs. We examined all articles in the ED context with PCC as the intervention. Two independent reviewers screened 3136 articles and 13 were included. A meta-ethnographic analysis was conducted to determine common themes of PCC.
    RESULTS: Themes included emotional support, communication, education, involvement of patient/family in information sharing and decision making, comfort of environment, respect and trust, continuity, and transition of care. Challenges in the ED reflected a lack of PCC. Moreover, implementation of PCC had many benefits including higher patient satisfaction with their care. Though there were commonalities of PCC components, there was no consistently used definition for PCC in the ED.
    CONCLUSION: The findings of this review support the evidence that PCC is of high value to the ED setting and should be standardized in practice.
    Keywords:  Emergency department; Patient engagement; Patient-centered care
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-022-00438-0
  2. JMIR Med Inform. 2022 Aug 09. 10(8): e36199
       BACKGROUND: Artificial intelligence (AI) has shown promising results in various fields of medicine. It has the potential to facilitate shared decision making (SDM). However, there is no comprehensive mapping of how AI may be used for SDM.
    OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify and evaluate published studies that have tested or implemented AI to facilitate SDM.
    METHODS: We performed a scoping review informed by the methodological framework proposed by Levac et al, modifications to the original Arksey and O'Malley framework of a scoping review, and the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework. We reported our results based on the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting guideline. At the identification stage, an information specialist performed a comprehensive search of 6 electronic databases from their inception to May 2021. The inclusion criteria were: all populations; all AI interventions that were used to facilitate SDM, and if the AI intervention was not used for the decision-making point in SDM, it was excluded; any outcome related to patients, health care providers, or health care systems; studies in any health care setting, only studies published in the English language, and all study types. Overall, 2 reviewers independently performed the study selection process and extracted data. Any disagreements were resolved by a third reviewer. A descriptive analysis was performed.
    RESULTS: The search process yielded 1445 records. After removing duplicates, 894 documents were screened, and 6 peer-reviewed publications met our inclusion criteria. Overall, 2 of them were conducted in North America, 2 in Europe, 1 in Australia, and 1 in Asia. Most articles were published after 2017. Overall, 3 articles focused on primary care, and 3 articles focused on secondary care. All studies used machine learning methods. Moreover, 3 articles included health care providers in the validation stage of the AI intervention, and 1 article included both health care providers and patients in clinical validation, but none of the articles included health care providers or patients in the design and development of the AI intervention. All used AI to support SDM by providing clinical recommendations or predictions.
    CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of the use of AI in SDM is in its infancy. We found AI supporting SDM in similar ways across the included articles. We observed a lack of emphasis on patients' values and preferences, as well as poor reporting of AI interventions, resulting in a lack of clarity about different aspects. Little effort was made to address the topics of explainability of AI interventions and to include end-users in the design and development of the interventions. Further efforts are required to strengthen and standardize the use of AI in different steps of SDM and to evaluate its impact on various decisions, populations, and settings.
    Keywords:  artificial intelligence; machine learning; patient-centered care; scoping review; shared decision making
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.2196/36199
  3. PLoS One. 2022 ;17(8): e0270209
       BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend including the patient's values and preferences when choosing treatment for severe aortic stenosis (sAS). However, little is known about what matters most to patients as they develop treatment preferences. Our objective was to identify, prioritize, and organize patient-reported goals and features of treatment for sAS.
    METHODS: This multi-center mixed-methods study conducted structured focus groups using the nominal group technique to identify patients' most important treatment goals and features. Patients separately rated and grouped those items using card sorting techniques. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses generated a cognitive map and clusters.
    RESULTS: 51 adults with sAS and 3 caregivers with experience choosing treatment (age 36-92 years) were included. Participants were referred from multiple health centers across the U.S. and online. Eight nominal group meetings generated 32 unique treatment goals and 46 treatment features, which were grouped into 10 clusters of goals and 11 clusters of features. The most important clusters were: 1) trust in the healthcare team, 2) having good information about options, and 3) long-term outlook. Other clusters addressed the need for and urgency of treatment, being independent and active, overall health, quality of life, family and friends, recovery, homecare, and the process of decision-making.
    CONCLUSIONS: These patient-reported items addressed the impact of the treatment decision on the lives of patients and their families from the time of decision-making through recovery, homecare, and beyond. Many attributes had not been previously reported for sAS. The goals and features that patients' value, and the relative importance that they attach to them, differ from those reported in clinical trials and vary substantially from one individual to another. These findings are being used to design a shared decision-making tool to help patients and their clinicians choose a treatment that aligns with the patients' priorities.
    TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Trial ID: NCT04755426, Trial URL https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04755426.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270209
  4. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 ;9 918915
      Competency frameworks typically describe the perceived knowledge, skills, attitudes and other characteristics required for a health professional to practice safely and effectively. Patient and public involvement in the development of competency frameworks is uncommon despite delivery of person-centered care being a defining feature of a competent health professional. This systematic review aimed to determine how patients and the public are involved in the development of competency frameworks for health professions, and whether their involvement influenced the outcome of the competency frameworks. Studies were identified from six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Web of Science and ERIC). The database search yielded a total of 8,222 citations, and 43 articles were included for data extraction. Most studies were from the United Kingdom (27%) and developed through multidisciplinary collaborations involving two or more professions (40%). There was a large variation in the number of patients and members of the public recruited (range 1-1,398); recruitment sources included patients and carers with the clinical condition of interest (30%) or established consumer representative groups (22%). Common stages for involving patients and the public were in generation of competency statements (57%) or reviewing the draft competency framework (57%). Only ten studies (27%) took a collaborative approach to the engagement of patients and public in competency framework development. The main ways in which involvement influenced the competency framework were validation of health professional-derived competency statements, provision of desirable behaviors and attitudes and generation of additional competency statements. Overall, there was a lack of reporting regarding the details and outcome of patient and public involvement. Further research is required to optimize approaches to patient and public involvement in competency framework development including guidance regarding who, how, when and for what purposes they should be engaged and the requirements for reporting.
    Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42020203117.
    Keywords:  competency; competency development; competency framework; health professions education; patient and public involvement
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.918915
  5. Health Policy. 2022 Jul 20. pii: S0168-8510(22)00192-0. [Epub ahead of print]
       BACKGROUND: Many governments have programmes collecting and reporting patient experience data, captured through Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs). Our study aims to capture and describe all the ways in which PREM data are used within healthcare systems, and explore the impacts of using PREMs at one level (e.g. national health system strategy) on other levels (e.g. providers).
    METHODS: We conducted a narrative review, underpinned by a systematic search of the literature.
    RESULTS: 1,711 unique entries were identified through the search process. After abstract screening, 142 articles were reviewed in full, resulting in 28 for final inclusion. A majority of papers describe uses of PREMs at the micro level, focussed on improving quality of front-line care. Meso-level uses were in quality-based financing or for performance improvement. Few macro-level uses were identified. We found limited evidence of the impact of meso‑ and macro- efforts to stimulate action to improve patient experience at the micro-level.
    CONCLUSIONS: PREM data are used as performance information at all levels in health systems. The use of PREM data at macro- and meso‑ levels may have an effect in stimulating action at the micro-level, but there is a lack of systematic evidence, or evaluation of these micro-level actions. Longitudinal studies would help better understand how to improve patient experience, and interfaces between PREM scores and the wider associated positive outcomes.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.07.008
  6. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2022 Aug 10.
       PURPOSE: The purpose was to review published articles to examine the impact of advance care planning (ACP) and end-of-life (EOL) conversations on patients with cancer, and aimed to compare the findings for congruency with the goals of ACP.
    DESIGN AND METHOD: The study was guided by Whittemore and Knafl's integrative review methodology. Articles published between 2015 to 2020 were identified through electronic databases. The search included: Cumulative Index for Nursing Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, MEDLINE-Ovid, and MEDLINE full text, and using the MeSH terms. Two hundred and five (205) articles were identified and screened for eligibility, and 15 articles were appraised.
    FINDINGS: The fifteen (15) articles that met the inclusion criteria included five (5) qualitative, eight (8) quantitative, and two (2) mixed methods. The review analysis revealed six themes emerged in three categories: cancer patients' experience with advance care planning (1) patients' prognostic awareness, (2) decision making; cancer patients' perceived outcomes with advance care planning (3) patient-provider relationship, (4) concordance in care based on goals, and cancer patients' propositions related to advance care planning, (5) timings of advance care planning discussions, and (6) support during ACP and/or EOL conversations.
    CONCLUSION: ACP and EOL conversations play a critical role in cancer patients' awareness of their disease and prognosis and help them in making end-of-life care decisions.
    CLINICAL RELEVANCE: There exists a need for earlier ACP and EOL conversations with cancer patients with emotional support during these conversations.
    Keywords:  advance care planning; cancer patient preferences; cancer patients; end-of-life; oncology patients; patient experience
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12804
  7. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2022 Aug;pii: S0889-857X(22)00040-0. [Epub ahead of print]48(3): 691-703
      Patient participation is an integral component in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, patient engagement remains suboptimal, which signifies a predicament in guideline's legitimacy and transparency. Limited budgets, logistic constraints, and discordance in patients' and researchers' perception of a meaningful involvement are some barriers that hinder patient engagement. Advancing skill development across various roles within the guideline's process will enrich patient's contribution and allow them to voice their experience, knowledge, perspective, and concerns. Continuing patient education and evaluation of their engagement on both outcome and process will facilitate team cohesion, trustworthiness, and value to achieve optimal quality of care.
    Keywords:  Clinical guidelines development; Patient advocacy groups; Patient partners; Patient stakeholders; Role of patients in guidelines development
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rdc.2022.05.002
  8. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jul 27. pii: 9163. [Epub ahead of print]19(15):
      (1) There has been growing attention among healthcare researchers on new and innovative methodologies for improving patient experience. This study reviewed the approaches and methods used in current patient experience research by applying the perspective of design thinking to discuss practical methodologies for a patient-centered approach and creative problem-solving. (2) A scoping review was performed to identify research trends in healthcare. A four-stage design thinking process ("Discover", "Define", "Develop", and "Deliver") and five themes ("User focus", "Problem-framing", "Visualization", "Experimentation", and "Diversity"), characterizing the concept, were used for the analysis framework. (3) After reviewing 67 studies, the current studies show that the iterative process of divergent and convergent thinking is lacking, which is a core concept of design thinking, and it is necessary to employ an integrative methodology to actively apply collaborative, multidisciplinary, and creative attributes for a specific and tangible solution. (4) For creative problem-solving to improve patient experience, we should explore the possibilities of various solutions by an iterative process of divergent and convergent thinking. A concrete and visualized solution should be sought through active user interactions from various fields. For this, a specific methodology that allows users to collaborate by applying the integrative viewpoint of design thinking should be introduced.
    Keywords:  creative problem-solving; design thinking; holistic approach; multidisciplinary perspective; patient experience; patient-centered care
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159163
  9. Risk Anal. 2022 Aug 09.
      Safety reporting systems are widely used in healthcare to identify risks to patient safety. But, their effectiveness is undermined if staff do not notice or report incidents. Patients, however, might observe and report these overlooked incidents because they experience the consequences, are highly motivated, and independent of the organization. Online patient feedback may be especially valuable because it is a channel of reporting that allows patients to report without fear of consequence (e.g., anonymously). Harnessing this potential is challenging because online feedback is unstructured and lacks demonstrable validity and added value. Accordingly, we developed an automated language analysis method for measuring the likelihood of patient-reported safety incidents in online patient feedback. Feedback from patients and families (n = 146,685, words = 22,191,427, years = 2013-2019) about acute NHS trusts (hospital conglomerates; n = 134) in England were analyzed. The automated measure had good precision (0.69) and excellent recall (0.98) in identifying incidents; was independent of staff-reported incidents (r = -0.04 to 0.19); and was associated with hospital-level mortality rates (z = 3.87; p < 0.001). The identified safety incidents were often reported as unnoticed (89%) or unresolved (21%), suggesting that patients use online platforms to give visibility to safety concerns they believe have been missed or ignored. Online stakeholder feedback is akin to a safety valve; being independent and unconstrained it provides an outlet for reporting safety issues that may have been unnoticed or unresolved within formal channels.
    Keywords:  incident-reporting; natural language processing; online feedback; patient safety
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14002
  10. JAMA Surg. 2022 Aug 10. e222935
    Preferences for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (PROVE-AAA) Study Team
       Importance: Patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) can choose open repair or endovascular repair (EVAR). While EVAR is less invasive, it requires lifelong surveillance and more frequent aneurysm-related reinterventions than open repair. A decision aid may help patients receive their preferred type of AAA repair.
    Objective: To determine the effect of a decision aid on agreement between patient preference for AAA repair type and the repair type they receive.
    Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cluster randomized trial, 235 patients were randomized at 22 VA vascular surgery clinics. All patients had AAAs greater than 5.0 cm in diameter and were candidates for both open repair and EVAR. Data were collected from August 2017 to December 2020, and data were analyzed from December 2020 to June 2021.
    Interventions: Presurgical consultation using a decision aid vs usual care.
    Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had agreement between their preference and their repair type, measured using χ2 analyses, κ statistics, and adjusted odds ratios.
    Results: Of 235 included patients, 234 (99.6%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 73 (5.9) years. A total of 126 patients were enrolled in the decision aid group, and 109 were enrolled in the control group. Within 2 years after enrollment, 192 (81.7%) underwent repair. Patients were similar between the decision aid and control groups by age, sex, aneurysm size, iliac artery involvement, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score. Patients preferred EVAR over open repair in both groups (96 of 122 [79%] in the decision aid group; 81 of 106 [76%] in the control group; P = .60). Patients in the decision aid group were more likely to receive their preferred repair type than patients in the control group (95% agreement [93 of 98] vs 86% agreement [81 of 94]; P = .03), and κ statistics were higher in the decision aid group (κ = 0.78; 95% CI, 0.60-0.95) compared with the control group (κ = 0.53; 95% CI, 0.32-0.74). Adjusted models confirmed this association (odds ratio of agreement in the decision aid group relative to control group, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.10-7.70).
    Conclusions and Relevance: Patients exposed to a decision aid were more likely to receive their preferred AAA repair type, suggesting that decision aids can help better align patient preferences and treatments in major cardiovascular procedures.
    Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03115346.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2935
  11. Perspect Biol Med. 2022 ;65(2): 221-231
      Acknowledging the "dignity of risk" in hospital discharge planning requires a determination to work towards serious change in the livability and healthfulness of our communities, balanced with a positive affirmation of patients' resourcefulness and enmeshment in networks of coping and care. Unfortunately, when clinicians err single-mindedly towards either extreme, we can perpetuate harm, either by unwitting reenactment of structural power dynamics already present in patients' lives or by failures of curiosity that miss opportunities to uncover resources and supports. This article explores two clinical vignettes involving patient-doctor discordance over hospital discharge preferences in the context of patient risk. By shifting these scenarios away from principlist conflicts between the physician's duty to act beneficently and yet uphold patient autonomy-narratives which center the clinician as primary ethical agent-this article recenters the patient as chief protagonist undertaking the dignity of risk. Through conceptual explorations of structural competency, strengths-based approaches to individuals and communities, and the notion of abundance as a catalyst for imaginative redesign of health (in)equities as we currently find them, this article envisions patient "risk" as an activating state, one capable of inspiring the clinician to undertake a historically and socially informed, structure- and solution-oriented practice.
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2022.0018
  12. Health Educ Behav. 2022 Aug 11. 10901981221116791
      This article meta-analyzed 21 studies that tested the effectiveness of animated videos in improving learning in clinical and nonclinical settings compared with standard education. Animation was defined as the use of moving objects that are typically drawn or simulated. Videos ranged from just over 2 min in duration to 16 min in duration in articles published from 2009 through 2020. Mayer's Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning provided the theoretical model to frame the current analyses. Findings indicated an overall positive effect (d = 0.35) for use of animation in improving viewers' learning across a variety of health and clinical contexts, including surgery and diabetes. Moderator analyses indicated learning effects were greater in patient samples and samples with a higher proportion of male participants. Study findings were discussed in terms of the theoretical and practical implications for health communication scholars and practitioners.
    Keywords:  communication technology; e-health; evaluation; general terms; outcome evaluation; patient education
    DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981221116791