Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Patient Experience (PE) Approaches and Design Thinking (DT) as a Creative Problem-Solving Method
1.2. DT Process
1.3. DT Themes
- RQ 1. What are the characteristics of current studies (study countries, study subjects, and study focus)?
- RQ 2. How holistic is the approach and how iterative the process of each study when applied to the DT process?
- RQ 3. What approaches and methods were employed, and what user types were involved in the reviewed studies?
- RQ 4. How did these studies achieve patient-centeredness in terms of collaboration?
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. Study Characteristics
3.2. Process for a Holistic and Iterative Approach
3.3. DT Themes for a User-Centered Approach
3.3.1. User Focus Aspect
3.3.2. Problem-Framing Aspect
3.3.3. Visualization Aspect
3.3.4. Experimentation Aspect
3.3.5. Diversity Aspect
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Fradgley, E.A.; Paul, C.L.; Bryant, J.; Collins, N.; Ackland, S.P.; Bellamy, D.; Levi, C.R. Collaborative Patient-Centered Quality Improvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey Comparing the Types and Numbers of Quality Initiatives Selected by Patients and Health Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Survey Comparing the Types and Numbers of Quality Initiatives Selected by Patients and Health Professionals. Eval. Health Prof. 2016, 39, 475–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America, Iom, National Academy of Sciences. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Wong, E.; Mavondo, F.; Fisher, J. Patient Feedback to Improve Quality of Patient-Centred Care in Public Hospitals: A Systematic Review of the Evidence. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Constand, M.K.; MacDermid, J.C.; Dal Bello-Haas, V.; Law, M. Scoping Review of Patient-Centered Care Approaches in Healthcare. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2014, 14, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shaller, D. Patient-Centered Care: What Does it Take? Commonwealth Fund: New York, NY, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Stickdorn, M.; Hormess, M.E.; Lawrence, A.; Schneider, J. This Is Service Design Doing: Applying Service Design Thinking in the Real World; O’Reilly Media: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Kværner, K.J.; Støme, L.N.; Romm, J.; Rygh, K.; Almquist, F.; Tornaas, S.; Berg, M.S. Coassessment Framework to Identify Person-Centred Unmet Needs in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Case Report in Norway. BMJ Innov. 2021, 7, 148–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thies, A. On the Value of Design Thinking for Innovation in Complex Contexts: A Case from Healthcare. Interact. Des. Archit. 2015, 27, 159–171. [Google Scholar]
- Cross, N. Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work; Bloomsbury Visual Arts: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Roberts, J.P.; Fisher, T.R.; Trowbridge, M.J.; Bent, C. A Design Thinking Framework for Healthcare Management and Innovation. Healthcare 2016, 4, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gottlieb, M.; Wagner, E.; Wagner, A.; Chan, T. Applying Design Thinking Principles to Curricular Development in Medical Education. AEM Educ. Train. 2017, 1, 21–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Van de Bovenkamp, H.M.; Zuiderent-Jerak, T. An Empirical Study of Patient Participation in Guideline Development: Exploring the Potential for Articulating Patient Knowledge in Evidence-Based Epistemic Settings. Health Expect. 2015, 18, 942–955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Revenäs, Å.; Martin, C.; Opava, C.H.; Brusewitz, M.; Keller, C.; Åsenlöf, P. A Mobile Internet Service for Self-Management of Physical Activity in People with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Challenges in Advancing the Co-Design Process during the Requirements Specification Phase. JMIR Res. Protoc. 2015, 4, e111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lokker, C.; Gentles, S.J.; Ganann, R.; Jezrawi, R.; Tahir, I.; Okelana, O.; Yousif, C.; Iorio, A.; Valaitis, R. Knowledge Translation Strategies for Sharing Evidence-Based Health Information with Older Adults and Their Caregivers: Findings from a Persona-Scenario Method. BMC Geriatr. 2021, 21, 665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maame Kissiwaa Amoah, V.; Anokye, R.; Boakye, D.S.; Gyamfi, N. Perceived Barriers to Effective Therapeutic Communication among Nurses and Patients at Kumasi South Hospital. Cogent Med. 2018, 5, 1459341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grimaldi, A.; Penfornis, A.; Consoli, S.; Falissard, B.; Eymard, E.; Williams, P.; Dejager, S. Breaking Barriers to Effective Type 2 Diabetes Management: Findings from the Use of the OPTIMA© Questionnaire in Clinical Practice. Adv. Ther. 2016, 33, 1033–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lindberg-Scharf, P.; Steinger, B.; Koller, M.; Hofstädter, A.; Ortmann, O.; Kurz, J.; Sasse, J.; Klinkhammer-Schalke, M. Long-Term Improvement of Quality of Life in Patients with Breast Cancer: Supporting Patient-Physician Communication by an Electronic Tool for Inpatient and Outpatient Care. Support. Care Cancer 2021, 29, 7865–7875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- What Is the Framework for Innovation? Design Council’s Evolved Double Diamond. Available online: http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/news-opinion/design-process-what-double-diamond (accessed on 2 May 2022).
- Badwan, B.; Bothara, R.; Latijnhouwers, M.; Smithies, A.; Sandars, J. The Importance of Design Thinking in Medical Education. Med. Teach. 2018, 40, 425–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carlgren, L.; Rauth, I.; Elmquist, M. Framing Design Thinking: The Concept in Idea and Enactment: Creativity and Innovation Management. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2016, 25, 38–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, N.N.; Baker, G.R.; Moody, L.; Scane, K.; Urquhart, R.; Wodchis, W.P.; Gagliardi, A.R. Approaches to Optimize Patient and Family Engagement in Hospital Planning and Improvement: Qualitative Interviews. Health Expect. 2021, 24, 967–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2005, 8, 19–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gough, D.; Thomas, J.; Oliver, S. Clarifying Differences between Review Designs and Methods. Syst. Rev. 2012, 1, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Levac, D.; Colquhoun, H.; O’Brien, K.K. Scoping Studies: Advancing the Methodology. Implement. Sci. 2010, 5, 69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Peterson, J.; Pearce, P.F.; Ferguson, L.A.; Langford, C.A. Understanding Scoping Reviews: Definition, Purpose, and Process: Definition, Purpose, and Process. J. Am. Assoc. Nurse Pract. 2017, 29, 12–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.; Colquhoun, H.; Kastner, M.; Levac, D.; Ng, C.; Sharpe, J.P.; Wilson, K.; et al. A Scoping Review on the Conduct and Reporting of Scoping Reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2016, 16, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cacchione, P.Z. The Evolving Methodology of Scoping Reviews. Clin. Nurs. Res. 2016, 25, 115–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Oguntunde, O.; Nyenwa, J.; Kilani-Ahmadu, S.; Salihu, A.; Yusuf, I. Addressing Socio-Cultural Barriers to Family Planning and Co-Designing Services to Improve Utilization: Evidence from Northern Nigeria. Res. Sq. 2019, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Theys, S.; Lust, E.; Heinen, M.; Verhaeghe, S.; Beeckman, D.; Eeckloo, K.; Malfait, S.; Van Hecke, A. Barriers and Enablers for the Implementation of a Hospital Communication Tool for Patient Participation: A Qualitative Study. J. Clin. Nurs. 2020, 29, 1945–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thayssen, S.; Hansen, D.G.; Søndergaard, J.; Høybye, M.T.; Christensen, P.M.; Hansen, H.P. Completing a Questionnaire at Home Prior to Needs Assessment in General Practice: A Qualitative Study of Cancer Patients’ Experience. Patient 2016, 9, 223–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roodbeen, R.; Vreke, A.; Boland, G.; Rademakers, J.; van den Muijsenbergh, M.; Noordman, J.; van Dulmen, S. Communication and Shared Decision-Making with Patients with Limited Health Literacy; Helpful Strategies, Barriers and Suggestions for Improvement Reported by Hospital-Based Palliative Care Providers. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0234926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yılmaz, N.G.; Sungur, H.; van Weert, J.C.M.; van den Muijsenbergh, M.E.T.C.; Schouten, B.C. Enhancing Patient Participation of Older Migrant Cancer Patients: Needs, Barriers, and EHealth. Ethn. Health 2020, 27, 1123–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hovén, E.; Lannering, B.; Gustafsson, G.; Boman, K.K. Information Needs of Survivors and Families after Childhood CNS Tumor Treatment: A Population-Based Study. Acta Oncol. 2018, 57, 649–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bergerum, C.; Engström, A.K.; Thor, J.; Wolmesjö, M. Patient Involvement in Quality Improvement-a “tug of War” or a Dialogue in a Learning Process to Improve Healthcare? BMC Health Serv. Res. 2020, 20, 1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grim, K.; Rosenberg, D.; Svedberg, P.; Schön, U.-K. Shared Decision-Making in Mental Health Care-A User Perspective on Decisional Needs in Community-Based Services. Int. J. Qual. Stud. Health Well-Being 2016, 11, 30563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Selby, K.; Cardinaux, R.; Metry, B.; de Rougemont, S.; Chabloz, J.; Meier-Herrmann, V.; Stoller, J.; Durand, M.-A.; Auer, R. Citizen Advisory Groups for the Creation and Improvement of Decision Aids: Experience from Two Swiss Centers for Primary Care. Res. Involv. Engagem. 2021, 7, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Coy, K.; Brock, P.; Pomeroy, S.; Cadogan, J.; Beckett, K. A Road Less Travelled: Using Experience Based Co-Design to Map Children’s and Families’ Emotional Journey Following Burn Injury and Identify Service Improvements. Burns 2019, 45, 1848–1855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litchfield, I.J.; Bentham, L.M.; Lilford, R.J.; McManus, R.J.; Hill, A.; Greenfield, S. Adaption, Implementation and Evaluation of Collaborative Service Improvements in the Testing and Result Communication Process in Primary Care from Patient and Staff Perspectives: A Qualitative Study. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2017, 17, 615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lyes, S.; Richards-Belle, A.; Connolly, B.; Rowan, K.M.; Hinton, L.; Locock, L. Can the UK 24-Item Family Satisfaction in the Intensive Care Unit Questionnaire Be Used to Evaluate Quality Improvement Strategies Aimed at Improving Family Satisfaction with the ICU? A Qualitative Study. J. Intensive Care Soc. 2020, 21, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Renedo, A.; Marston, C. Developing Patient-Centred Care: An Ethnographic Study of Patient Perceptions and Influence on Quality Improvement. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2015, 15, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ramos, M.; Bowen, S.; Wright, P.C.; Ferreira, M.G.G.; Forcellini, F.A. Experience Based Co-Design in Healthcare Services: An Analysis of Projects Barriers and Enablers. Des. Health 2020, 4, 276–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Locock, L.; Montgomery, C.; Parkin, S.; Chisholm, A.; Bostock, J.; Dopson, S.; Gager, M.; Gibbons, E.; Graham, C.; King, J.; et al. How Do Frontline Staff Use Patient Experience Data for Service Improvement? Findings from an Ethnographic Case Study Evaluation. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 2020, 25, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haddow, J.B.; Walshe, M.; Aggarwal, D.; Thapar, A.; Hardman, J.; Wilson, J.; Oshowo, A.; Bhan, C.; Mukhtar, H. Improving the Diagnostic Stage of the Suspected Colorectal Cancer Pathway: A Quality Improvement Project. Healthcare 2016, 4, 225–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Thomson, A.; Rivas, C.; Giovannoni, G. Multiple Sclerosis Outpatient Future Groups: Improving the Quality of Participant Interaction and Ideation Tools within Service Improvement Activities. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2015, 15, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bowie, P.; McNab, D.; Ferguson, J.; de Wet, C.; Smith, G.; MacLeod, M.; McKay, J.; White, C. Quality Improvement and Person-Centredness: A Participatory Mixed Methods Study to Develop the “always Event” Concept for Primary Care. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e006667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Frith, L.; Hepworth, L.; Lowers, V.; Joseph, F.; Davies, E.; Gabbay, M. Role of Public Involvement in the Royal College of Physicians’ Future Hospitals Healthcare Improvement Programme: An Evaluation. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e027680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Stevens, M.C.G.; Beynon, P.; Cameron, A.; Cargill, J.; Cheshire, J.; Dolby, S. Understanding and Utilizing the Unmet Needs of Teenagers and Young Adults with Cancer to Determine Priorities for Service Development: The Macmillan on Target Programme. J. Adolesc. Young Adult Oncol. 2018, 7, 652–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ågård, A.S.; Hofhuis, J.G.M.; Koopmans, M.; Gerritsen, R.T.; Spronk, P.E.; Engelberg, R.A.; Randall Curtis, J.; Zijlstra, J.G.; Jensen, H.I. Identifying Improvement Opportunities for Patient- and Family-Centered Care in the ICU: Using Qualitative Methods to Understand Family Perspectives. J. Crit. Care 2019, 49, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fitch, M.I.; Nicoll, I.; Lockwood, G.; Chan, R.J.; Grundy, P. Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Challenges and Improvements to Cancer Survivorship Care: How Are We Doing? J. Adolesc. Young Adult Oncol. 2021, 10, 432–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Miatello, A.; Mulvale, G.; Hackett, C.; Mulvale, A.; Kutty, A.; Alshazly, F. Data Elicited through Apps for Health Systems Improvement: Lessons from Using the MyEXP Suite of Smartphone and Web Apps. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2018, 17, 160940691879843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brosseau, M.; Gagnon, D.; Rohde, K.; Schellinck, J. Integrating Engagement and Improvement Work in a Pediatric Hospital. Healthc. Q. 2017, 20, 67–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fucile, B.; Bridge, E.; Duliban, C.; Law, M.P. Experience-Based Co-Design: A Method for Patient and Family Engagement in System-Level Quality Improvement. Patient Exp. J. 2017, 4, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Filler, T.; Foster, A.M.; Grace, S.L.; Stewart, D.E.; Straus, S.E.; Gagliardi, A.R. Patient-Centered Care for Women: Delphi Consensus on Evidence-Derived Recommendations. Value Health 2020, 23, 1012–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liu, J.J.; Rotteau, L.; Bell, C.M.; Shojania, K.G. Putting out Fires: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Use of Patient Complaints to Drive Improvement at Three Academic Hospitals. BMJ Qual. Saf. 2019, 28, 894–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- St Clair Russell, J.; Southerland, S.; Huff, E.D.; Thomson, M.; Meyer, K.B.; Lynch, J.R. A Peer-to-Peer Mentoring Program for in-Center Hemodialysis: A Patient-Centered Quality Improvement Program. Nephrol. Nurs. J. 2017, 44, 481–496. [Google Scholar]
- Powell, R.E.; Doty, A.; Casten, R.J.; Rovner, B.W.; Rising, K.L. A Qualitative Analysis of Interprofessional Healthcare Team Members’ Perceptions of Patient Barriers to Healthcare Engagement. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2016, 16, 493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haines, E.R.; Lux, L.; Smitherman, A.B.; Kessler, M.L.; Schonberg, J.; Dopp, A.; Stover, A.M.; Powell, B.J.; Birken, S.A. An Actionable Needs Assessment for Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer: The AYA Needs Assessment & Service Bridge (NA-SB). Support. Care Cancer 2021, 29, 4693–4704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duckworth, M.; Adelman, J.; Belategui, K.; Feliciano, Z.; Jackson, E.; Khasnabish, S.; Lehman, I.-F.S.; Lindros, M.E.; Mortimer, H.; Ryan, K.; et al. Assessing the Effectiveness of Engaging Patients and Their Families in the Three-Step Fall Prevention Process across Modalities of an Evidence-Based Fall Prevention Toolkit: An Implementation Science Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2019, 21, e10008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sockolow, P.; Schug, S.; Zhu, J.; Smith, T.J.; Senathirajah, Y.; Bloom, S. At-Risk Adolescents as Experts in a New Requirements Elicitation Procedure for the Development of a Smart Phone Psychoeducational Trauma-Informed Care Application. Inform. Health Soc. Care 2017, 42, 77–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bekelman, D.B.; Rabin, B.A.; Nowels, C.T.; Sahay, A.; Heidenreich, P.A.; Fischer, S.M.; Main, D.S. Barriers and Facilitators to Scaling up Outpatient Palliative Care. J. Palliat. Med. 2016, 19, 456–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Luna, A.; Price, A.; Srivastava, U.; Chu, L.F. Critical Patient Insights from the Same-Day Feedback Programme at Stanford Health Care. BMJ Open Qual. 2020, 9, e000773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stoyell, J.F.; Jordan, M.; Derouin, A.; Thompson, J.; Gall, S.; Jooste, K.R.; Keskinyan, V.S.; Lakis, K.R.; Lee, Y.-L.A.; Docherty, S. Evaluation of a Quality Improvement Intervention to Improve Pediatric Palliative Care Consultation Processes. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Care 2021, 38, 1457–1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stockdale, S.E.; Zuchowski, J.; Rubenstein, L.V.; Sapir, N.; Yano, E.M.; Altman, L.; Fickel, J.J.; McDougall, S.; Dresselhaus, T.; Hamilton, A.B. Fostering Evidence-Based Quality Improvement for Patient-Centered Medical Homes: Initiating Local Quality Councils to Transform Primary Care. Health Care Manag. Rev. 2018, 43, 168–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Du, G.; Clouser, J.M.; Stromberg, A.; Mays, G.; Sorra, J.; Brock, J.; Davis, T.; Mitchell, S.; Nguyen, H.Q.; et al. Improving Evidence-Based Grouping of Transitional Care Strategies in Hospital Implementation Using Statistical Tools and Expert Review. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2021, 21, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Agha, A.Z.; Werner, R.M.; Keddem, S.; Huseman, T.L.; Long, J.A.; Shea, J.A. Improving Patient-Centered Care: How Clinical Staff Overcome Barriers to Patient Engagement at the VHA. Med. Care 2018, 56, 1009–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xin, H.; Kilgore, M.L.; Sen, B.P. Is Access to and Use of Primary Care Practices That Patients Perceive as Having Essential Qualities of a Patient-Centered Medical Home Associated with Positive Patient Experience? Empirical Evidence from a U.S. Nationally Representative Sample. J. Healthc. Qual. 2017, 39, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hwang, A.; Warshaw, G. Joint AGS-CCEHI Survey Offers Insights into Patient Engagement in Geriatric Clinical Settings: Joint Ags-Ccehi Survey. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2019, 67, 1791–1794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alidina, S.; Martelli, P.F.; Singer, S.J.; Aveling, E.-L. Optimizing Patient Partnership in Primary Care Improvement: A Qualitative Study: A Qualitative Study. Health Care Manag. Rev. 2019, 46, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creutzfeldt, C.J.; Engelberg, R.A.; Healey, L.; Cheever, C.S.; Becker, K.J.; Holloway, R.G.; Curtis, J.R. Palliative Care Needs in the Neuro-ICU. Crit. Care Med. 2015, 43, 1677–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Federman, A.D.; Sanchez-Munoz, A.; Jandorf, L.; Salmon, C.; Wolf, M.S.; Kannry, J. Patient and Clinician Perspectives on the Outpatient After-Visit Summary: A Qualitative Study to Inform Improvements in Visit Summary Design. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 2017, 24, e61–e68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Groller, K.D.; Teel, C.; Stegenga, K.H.; El Chaar, M. Patient Perspectives about Bariatric Surgery Unveil Experiences, Education, Satisfaction, and Recommendations for Improvement. Surg. Obes. Relat. Dis. 2018, 14, 785–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsu, C.; Cruz, S.; Placzek, H.; Chapdelaine, M.; Levin, S.; Gutierrez, F.; Standish, S.; Maki, I.; Carl, M.; Orantes, M.R.; et al. Patient Perspectives on Addressing Social Needs in Primary Care Using a Screening and Resource Referral Intervention. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2020, 35, 481–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmer Kelly, E.; Agne, J.L.; Meara, A.; Pawlik, T.M. Reciprocity within Patient-Physician and Patient-Spouse/Caregiver Dyads: Insights into Patient-Centered Care. Support. Care Cancer 2019, 27, 1237–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardenas, V.; Rahman, A.; Zhu, Y.; Enguidanos, S. Reluctance to Accept Palliative Care and Recommendations for Improvement: Findings from Semi-Structured Interviews with Patients and Caregivers. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Care 2022, 39, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clarke, M.A.; Moore, J.L.; Steege, L.M.; Koopman, R.J.; Belden, J.L.; Canfield, S.M.; Kim, M.S. Toward a Patient-Centered Ambulatory after-Visit Summary: Identifying Primary Care Patients’ Information Needs. Inform. Health Soc. Care 2017, 43, 248–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, A.M.; Li, J.; Oyewole-Eletu, S.; Nguyen, H.Q.; Gass, B.; Hirschman, K.B.; Mitchell, S.; Hudson, S.M.; Williams, M.V.; Project ACHIEVE Team. Understanding Facilitators and Barriers to Care Transitions: Insights from Project ACHIEVE Site Visits. Jt. Comm. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 2017, 43, 433–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nowacki, K.; Gonzalez, T.; Mehnert, J.; Jacquemard, A.; Tyler, A. Using Patient Whiteboards to Engage Families in Harm Prevention and Care Planning: A Quality Improvement Study. Hosp. Pediatr. 2018, 8, 345–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Grob, R.; Schlesinger, M.; Barre, L.R.; Bardach, N.; Lagu, T.; Shaller, D.; Parker, A.M.; Martino, S.C.; Finucane, M.L.; Cerully, J.L.; et al. What Words Convey: The Potential for Patient Narratives to Inform Quality Improvement. Milbank Q. 2019, 97, 176–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Martínez-Guiu, J.; Arroyo-Fernández, I.; Rubio, R. Impact of Patients’ Attitudes and Dynamics in Needs and Life Experiences during Their Journey in COPD: An Ethnographic Study. Expert Rev. Respir. Med. 2022, 16, 121–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- LaMonica, H.M.; Davenport, T.A.; Roberts, A.E.; Hickie, I.B. Understanding Technology Preferences and Requirements for Health Information Technologies Designed to Improve and Maintain the Mental Health and Well-Being of Older Adults: Participatory Design Study. JMIR Aging 2021, 4, e21461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Peters, D.; Davis, S.; Calvo, R.A.; Sawyer, S.M.; Smith, L.; Foster, J.M. Young People’s Preferences for an Asthma Self-Management App Highlight Psychological Needs: A Participatory Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2017, 19, e113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fradgley, E.A.; Paul, C.L.; Bryant, J.; Oldmeadow, C. Getting Right to the Point: Identifying Australian Outpatients’ Priorities and Preferences for Patient-Centred Quality Improvement in Chronic Disease Care. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2016, 28, 470–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Song, H.J.; Dennis, S.; Levesque, J.-F.; Harris, M. How to Implement Patient Experience Surveys and Use Their Findings for Service Improvement: A Qualitative Expert Consultation Study in Australian General Practice. Integr. Health J. 2020, 2, e000033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hall, A.; Bryant, J.; Sanson-Fisher, R.; Grady, A.; Proietto, A.; Doran, C.M. Top Priorities for Health Service Improvements among Australian Oncology Patients. Patient Relat. Outcome Meas. 2021, 12, 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schäfer, W.L.A.; Boerma, W.G.W.; Murante, A.M.; Sixma, H.J.M.; Schellevis, F.G.; Groenewegen, P.P. Assessing the Potential for Improvement of Primary Care in 34 Countries: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Bull. World Health Organ. 2015, 93, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Continent | Countries | Count | Total (%) |
---|---|---|---|
Africa | Ghana | 1 [15] | 2 (2.99%) |
Nigeria | 1 [28] | ||
Europe | Belgium | 1 [29] | 25 (37.31%) |
Denmark | 1 [30] | ||
France | 1 [16] | ||
Germany | 1 [17] | ||
Netherlands | 3 [12,31,32] | ||
Norway | 1 [7] | ||
Sweden | 4 [13,33,34,35] | ||
Switzerland | 1 [36] | ||
UK | 11 [37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47] | ||
Denmark/Netherlands | 1 [48] | ||
North America | Canada | 8 [14,21,49,50,51,52,53,54] | 32 (47.76%) |
USA | 24 [55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78] | ||
South America | Spain | 1 [79] | 1 (1.49%) |
Australia | Australia | 6 [1,80,81,82,83,84] | 6 (8.96%) |
Multiple continents | 34 countries | 1 [85] | 1 (1.49%) |
Total | - | 67 | 67 (100%) |
Study Subjects | Count (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Focusing on patient data collection and use | The use of PE data | 5 | 9 (13.43%) |
Capturing feedback/gathering data from patients | 4 | ||
User involvement | User engagement for QI | 14 | 24 (35.82%) |
Reciprocity/communication among users | 10 | ||
Identifying user needs | User perception/satisfaction to care | 10 | 24 (35.82%) |
Unmet needs among users | 14 | ||
Care services/intervention | Care services to be improved | 5 | 8 (11.94%) |
Intervention for improvement | 3 | ||
Patient education | Patient education | 2 | 2 (2.99%) |
Total | 67 | 67 (100%) |
Study Focus | User-Focused | Tool-Focused | System-Focused | User/Tool-Focused |
---|---|---|---|---|
Count (%) | 32 (47.76%) [1,7,15,28,30,31,32,33,34,35,37,40,43,45,47,48,49,51,52,56,65,67,68,71,72,73,74,78,79,80,82,84] | 21 (31.34%) [12,13,14,16,17,29,36,39,44,46,50,53,55,57,58,59,62,66,70,75,77] | 12 (17.91%) [21,38,41,42,54,60,61,63,64,76,83,85] | 2 (2.99%) [69,81] |
Total | 67 (100%) |
DT Stage | Discover | Define | Develop | Deliver | Count (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Involve one stage | [7,12,41,85] | 4 (5.97%) | |||
[1,15,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,40,42,45,48,54,60,65,66,67,68,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,78,79,82,83,84] | 31 (46.27%) | ||||
[13,14] | 2 (2.99%) | ||||
[16,17,36,39,46,50,53,55,58,61,62,63] | 12 (17.91%) | ||||
Involve two stages | [21,35,37,43,44,49,51,52,56,57,64,69,80,81] | 14 (20.89%) | |||
Involve three stages | [38,47,77] | 3 (4.48%) | |||
Total | 67 (100%) |
User Types | Count (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Involving patients/families | Patients | 18 | 23 (34.33%) |
Patients/caregivers | 4 | ||
Caregivers (families) | 1 | ||
Involving medical staff | Medical staff | 7 | 12 (17.91%) |
Medical staff/caregivers | 2 | ||
Medical staff/professionals/researchers | 3 | ||
Involving professionals | Professionals/leaders/society members | 4 | 4 (5.97%) |
Involving patients/medical staff | Patients/medical staff | 12 | 26 (38.81%) |
Patients/caregivers/medical staff | 8 | ||
Patients/medical staff/professionals | 4 | ||
Patients/medical staff/development team (designers) | 2 | ||
Involving Patients/professionals | Patients/professionals | 1 | 2 (2.98%) |
Patients/caregivers/professionals | 1 | ||
Total | - | 67 (100%) |
Category | Result | Count (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Purpose of user focus | User understanding | [1,7,15,28,30,31,32,33,34,35,40,45,48,49,65,67,68,69,71,72,73,74,78,79,82,84] | 26 (38.80%) | 67 (100%) |
User involvement | [12,13,14,16,17,21,29,36,38,39,41,42,44,46,50,51,53,54,55,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,66,70,75,76,77,83,85] | 34 (50.75%) | ||
User understanding and involvement | [37,43,47,52,56,80,81] | 7 (10.45%) | ||
User engagement | Consultation | [1,12,15,16,17,21,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,40,41,45,46,48,49,50,53,54,55,56,58,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,78,79,82,83,84,85] | 48 (71.64%) | 67 (100%) |
Collaboration | [7,13,14,28,36,42,59] | 7 (10.45%) | ||
Blended (co-creation) | [37,38,39,43,44,47,51,52,57,77,80,81] | 12 (17.91%) |
Perspective | Description | Count (n) | |
---|---|---|---|
Framed problem | Users’ needs/barriers/pain points/preferences/satisfactions | 33 | 62 |
Current/existing tool or system | 19 | ||
Users’ perception/knowledge/attitudes/emotions | 6 | ||
Potential improvement of the current system | 4 | ||
Methods used to define the problem | Interviews | 34 | 73 |
Focus group | 11 | ||
Workshop | 4 | ||
Survey (Delphi) | 21 | ||
Checklist | 1 | ||
Observation | 2 | ||
Users involved | Patients | 21 | 58 |
Patients/caregivers | 4 | ||
Caregivers | 3 | ||
Patients/medical staff | 10 | ||
Patients/caregivers/medical staff | 3 | ||
Medical staff | 9 | ||
Professionals | 2 | ||
Medical staff/professionals | 6 | ||
Patients/caregivers/medical staff/professionals | 3 |
Perspective | Description | Count (n) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Visualization approach | Visualization of suggestions/strategies | 7 | 21 | |
Storyboarding ideas for tool/system development | 4 | |||
Mapping the needs for priority setting | 4 | |||
Provide/develop detailed specifications | 3 | |||
Develop prototypes | 3 | |||
Result types | Software | Mobile app | 4 | 19 |
Visual structure of suggestions/strategies | 7 | |||
Film | 1 | |||
Tool/program | 4 | |||
Process/model | 1 | |||
Intervention | 1 | |||
Hardware | Whiteboard | 1 | 1 | |
Methods used to visualize the ideas | Interviews | 4 | 22 | |
Focus group | 6 | |||
Workshop | 10 | |||
Survey | 2 | |||
Users involved | Patients | 3 | 21 | |
Patients/caregivers | 1 | |||
Patients/medical staff | 1 | |||
Patients/professionals | 1 | |||
Patients/caregivers/medical staff | 5 | |||
Patients/medical staff/professionals | 1 | |||
Medical staff | 3 | |||
Professionals (design team) | 4 | |||
Medical staff/professionals | 1 |
Perspective | Description | Count (n) | |
---|---|---|---|
Experimentation approach | Provide feedback for improvement of the existing tool | 4 | 20 |
Test the feasibility of the program/tool | 5 | ||
Discuss the prototypes for improvement | 5 | ||
Evaluate the values of the results (prototypes) | 5 | ||
Rate and prioritize the recommendations | 1 | ||
Method used to evaluate the solution | In-person meeting | 1 | 26 |
Focus group | 5 | ||
Feedback session | 1 | ||
Survey (Delphi) | 8 | ||
Checklist | 1 | ||
Audit | 1 | ||
Interview | 5 | ||
Workshop | 1 | ||
Prototype test as a trial | 3 | ||
Users involved | Patients | 5 | 19 |
Patients/caregivers/medical staff | 3 | ||
Patients/medical staff | 2 | ||
Patients/professionals | 1 | ||
Patients/medical staff/professionals | 2 | ||
Medical staff | 2 | ||
Medical staff/caregivers | 2 | ||
Caregivers | 1 | ||
Professionals | 1 |
Perspective | Description | General Count | EBCD Count | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recruitment approach | Internal recruitment | 15 | 6 | ||
External recruitment | 52 | 13 | |||
Users Involved | Direct stakeholders | Patients | 20 | 51 | 14 |
Patients/caregivers/medical staff | 8 | ||||
Patients/medical staff | 10 | ||||
Patients/caregivers | 3 | ||||
Caregivers/medical staff | 2 | ||||
Medical staff | 7 | ||||
Caregivers | 1 | ||||
Indirect stakeholders | Interprofessional team (non-clinical team) | 1 | 4 | 1 | |
Professionals | 3 | ||||
Mixed stakeholders | Patients/caregivers/medical staff/professionals | 2 | 8 | 1 | |
Medical staff/professionals | 4 | ||||
Patients/medical staff/professionals | 2 | ||||
Multidisciplinary perspectives | Multidisciplinary team (adolescents, health informaticians, medical anthropologist, psychiatrist, gaming and digital media researcher) | 1 | 4 | 3 | |
Patients/medical staff/design team | 1 | ||||
Patients/professionals (digital game researcher) | 1 | ||||
Patients/medical staff/program development team | 1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kim, E.-J.; Nam, I.-C.; Koo, Y.-R. Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 9163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159163
Kim E-J, Nam I-C, Koo Y-R. Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(15):9163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159163
Chicago/Turabian StyleKim, Eun-Jeong, Inn-Chul Nam, and Yoo-Ri Koo. 2022. "Reframing Patient Experience Approaches and Methods to Achieve Patient-Centeredness in Healthcare: Scoping Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 15: 9163. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159163