34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Patient Feedback Response Framework – Understanding why UK hospital staff find it difficult to make improvements based on patient feedback: A qualitative study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Patients are increasingly being asked for feedback about their healthcare experiences. However, healthcare staff often find it difficult to act on this feedback in order to make improvements to services. This paper draws upon notions of legitimacy and readiness to develop a conceptual framework (Patient Feedback Response Framework – PFRF) which outlines why staff may find it problematic to respond to patient feedback.

          A large qualitative study was conducted with 17 ward based teams between 2013 and 2014, across three hospital Trusts in the North of England. This was a process evaluation of a wider study where ward staff were encouraged to make action plans based on patient feedback. We focus on three methods here: i) examination of taped discussion between ward staff during action planning meetings ii) facilitators notes of these meetings iii) telephone interviews with staff focusing on whether action plans had been achieved six months later. Analysis employed an abductive approach.

          Through the development of the PFRF, we found that making changes based on patient feedback is a complex multi-tiered process and not something that ward staff can simply ‘do’. First, staff must exhibit normative legitimacy – the belief that listening to patients is a worthwhile exercise. Second, structural legitimacy has to be in place – ward teams need adequate autonomy, ownership and resource to enact change. Some ward teams are able to make improvements within their immediate control and environment. Third, for those staff who require interdepartmental co-operation or high level assistance to achieve change, organisational readiness must exist at the level of the hospital otherwise improvement will rarely be enacted. Case studies drawn from our empirical data demonstrate the above. It is only when appropriate levels of individual and organisational capacity to change exist, that patient feedback is likely to be acted upon to improve services.

          Highlights

          • Hospital staff find it difficult to make improvements based on patient feedback.

          • We propose a conceptual framework - Patient Feedback Response Framework.

          • Draws on notions of normative/ structural legitimacy and organisational readiness.

          • Weak structural legitimacy and lack of organisational readiness are problematic.

          • Individual and organisational capacity for change must align to achieve improvement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            A randomized controlled trial evaluating the impact of knowledge translation and exchange strategies

            Context Significant resources and time are invested in the production of research knowledge. The primary objective of this randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of three knowledge translation and exchange strategies in the incorporation of research evidence into public health policies and programs. Methods This trial was conducted with a national sample of public health departments in Canada from 2004 to 2006. The three interventions, implemented over one year in 2005, included access to an online registry of research evidence; tailored messaging; and a knowledge broker. The primary outcome assessed the extent to which research evidence was used in a recent program decision, and the secondary outcome measured the change in the sum of evidence-informed healthy body weight promotion policies or programs being delivered at health departments. Mixed-effects models were used to test the hypotheses. Findings One hundred and eight of 141 (77%) health departments participated in this study. No significant effect of the intervention was observed for primary outcome (p < 0.45). However, for public health policies and programs (HPPs), a significant effect of the intervention was observed only for tailored, targeted messages (p < 0.01). The treatment effect was moderated by organizational research culture (e.g., value placed on research evidence in decision making). Conclusion The results of this study suggest that under certain conditions tailored, targeted messages are more effective than knowledge brokering and access to an online registry of research evidence. Greater emphasis on the identification of organizational factors is needed in order to implement strategies that best meet the needs of individual organizations. Trial Registration The trial registration number and title are as follows: ISRCTN35240937 -- Is a knowledge broker more effective than other strategies in promoting evidence-based physical activity and healthy body weight programming?
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Facilitated patient experience feedback can improve nursing care: a pilot study for a phase III cluster randomised controlled trial

              Background England’s extensive NHS patient survey programme has not fulfilled government promises of widespread improvements in patients’ experiences, and media reports of poor nursing care in NHS hospitals are increasingly common. Impediments to the surveys’ impact on the quality of nursing care may include: the fact that they are not ward-specific, so nurses claim “that doesn’t happen on my ward”; nurses’ scepticism about the relevance of patient feedback to their practice; and lack of prompt communication of results. The surveys’ impact could be increased by: conducting ward-specific surveys; returning results to ward staff more quickly; including patients’ written comments in reports; and offering nurses an opportunity to discuss the feedback. Very few randomised trials have been conducted to test the effectiveness of patient feedback on quality improvement and there have been few, if any, published trials of ward-specific patient surveys. Methods Over two years, postal surveys of recent inpatients were conducted at four-monthly intervals in 18 wards in two NHS Trusts in England. Wards were randomly allocated to Basic Feedback (ward-specific printed patient survey results including patients’ written comments sent to nurses by letter); Feedback Plus (in addition to printed results, ward meetings to discuss results and plan improvements) or Control (no active feedback of survey results). Patient survey responses to questions about nursing care were used to compute wards’ average Nursing Care Scores at each interval. Nurses’ reactions to the patient feedback were recorded. Results Conducting ward-level surveys and delivering ward-specific results was feasible. Ward meetings were effective for engaging nurses and challenging scepticism and patients’ written comments stimulated interest. 4,236 (47%) patients returned questionnaires. Nursing Care Scores improved more for Feedback Plus than Basic Feedback or Control (difference between Control and Feedback Plus = 8.28 ± 7.2 (p = 0.02)). Conclusions This study provides preliminary evidence that facilitated patient feedback can improve patients’ experiences such that a full trial is justified. These findings suggest that merely informing nurses of patient survey results in writing does not stimulate improvements, even if results are disaggregated by ward, but the addition of ward meetings had an important and significant impact.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Soc Sci Med
                Soc Sci Med
                Social Science & Medicine (1982)
                Pergamon
                0277-9536
                1873-5347
                1 April 2017
                April 2017
                : 178
                : 19-27
                Affiliations
                [a ]Bradford Institute for Health Research, United Kingdom
                [b ]Bradford Institute for Health Research and University of Leeds, United Kingdom
                [c ]University of Bradford, United Kingdom
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals, Duckworth Lane, Bradford, BD9 6RJ, United Kingdom.Bradford Institute for Health ResearchBradford Teaching HospitalsDuckworth LaneBradfordBD9 6RJUnited Kingdom laura.sheard@ 123456bthft.nhs.uk
                Article
                S0277-9536(17)30085-0
                10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.02.005
                5360173
                28189820
                789259eb-2d9d-41b8-84f4-1e9a49b0ced9
                © 2017 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 5 October 2016
                : 31 January 2017
                : 2 February 2017
                Categories
                Article

                Health & Social care
                united kingdom,patient feedback,patient experience,patient safety,qualitative research,health services organisations,health services research

                Comments

                Comment on this article