Open Research Newcastle
Browse

Collaborative patient-centered quality improvement: a cross-sectional survey comparing the types and numbers of quality initiatives selected by patients and health professionals

Download (1013.77 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2025-05-09, 12:26 authored by Elizabeth A. Fradgley, Christine PaulChristine Paul, Jamie BryantJamie Bryant, Nicholas CollinsNicholas Collins, Stephen AcklandStephen Ackland, Douglas Bellamy, Christopher LeviChristopher Levi
Identification of patients' and health professionals' quality improvement preferences is an essential first step in collaborative improvement models. This includes experience-based codesign (EBCD), where service change is strategically introduced following stakeholder consultation. This study compared the number and types of improvement initiatives selected by outpatients and health professionals. Using electronic surveys designed to inform EBCD studies, 541 outpatients (71.1% consent) and 124 professionals (47.1% response) selected up to 23 general initiatives. On average, outpatients selected 2.4 (median = 1, interquartile range = 1-3) initiatives and professionals selected 10.7 (median = 10; interquartile range = 6-15) initiatives. Outpatients demonstrated a strong preference for improvements to clinic organization, such as appointment scheduling and clinic contact. Outpatients selected relatively fewer initiatives potentially reducing the complexity of service change and resources required to address preferences. Comparatively, professionals indicated a greater degree of change is needed and selected initiatives related to communication with patients and other professionals, including coordinating multidisciplinary care. Improvements to information provision were commonly selected by both groups and offered a strategic opportunity to address patients' and professionals' preferences. By quantifying the ways in which preferences differed, this study emphasizes the need for collaborative approaches to health service change and may be used to initiate an informed discussion on patients' and professionals' quality improvement preferences in tertiary care.

History

Journal title

Evaluation and the Health Professions

Volume

39

Issue

4

Pagination

475-495

Publisher

Sage

Language

  • en, English

College/Research Centre

Faculty of Health and Medicine

School

School of Medicine and Public Health

Usage metrics

    Publications

    Categories

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC