scholarly journals The Impact of Applying Quality Management Practices on Patient Centeredness in Jordanian Public Hospitals: Results of Predictive Modeling

2018 ◽  
Vol 55 ◽  
pp. 004695801875473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heba H. Hijazi ◽  
Heather L. Harvey ◽  
Mohammad S. Alyahya ◽  
Hussam A. Alshraideh ◽  
Rabah M. Al abdi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Accreditation Process ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Patient Centeredness ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
The Impact

Targeting the patient’s needs and preferences has become an important contributor for improving care delivery, enhancing patient satisfaction, and achieving better clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine the impact of applying quality management practices on patient centeredness within the context of health care accreditation and to explore the differences in the views of various health care workers regarding the attributes affecting patient-centered care. Our study followed a cross-sectional survey design wherein 4 Jordanian public hospitals were investigated several months after accreditation was obtained. Total 829 clinical/nonclinical hospital staff members consented for study participation. This sample was divided into 3 main occupational categories to represent the administrators, nurses, as well as doctors and other health professionals. Using a structural equation modeling, our results indicated that the predictors of patient-centered care for both administrators and those providing clinical care were participation in the accreditation process, leadership commitment to quality improvement, and measurement of quality improvement outcomes. In particular, perceiving the importance of the hospital’s engagement in the accreditation process was shown to be relevant to the administrators (gamma = 0.96), nurses (gamma = 0.80), as well as to doctors and other health professionals (gamma = 0.71). However, the administrator staff (gamma = 0.31) was less likely to perceive the influence of measuring the quality improvement outcomes on the delivery of patient-centered care than nurses (gamma = 0.59) as well as doctors and other health care providers (gamma = 0.55). From the nurses’ perspectives only, patient centeredness was found to be driven by building an institutional framework that supports quality assurance in hospital settings (gamma = 0.36). In conclusion, accreditation is a leading factor for delivering patient-centered care and should be on a hospital’s agenda as a strategy for continuous quality improvement.

scholarly journals The Impact of Job Role on Health-Care Workers’ Definitions of Patient-Centered Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1634-1641
Author(s):  
Jessica L Moreau ◽  
Alison B Hamilton ◽  
Elizabeth M Yano ◽  
Lisa V Rubenstein ◽  
Susan E Stockdale
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Workers ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
System Level ◽  
Patient Contact ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Care Workers ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
The Impact

While patient-centered care (PCC) is a widely accepted aspect of health-care quality, its definition is still the subject of debate. We investigated health-care workers’ definitions of PCC by level of patient contact in job roles. Our qualitative study involved semi-structured interviews with key stakeholder employees (n = 66) at 6 Veterans’ Affairs health-care locations in Southern California. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded for definitions of PCC, and analyzed by participants’ self-described level of patient contact. Stakeholders whose role primarily involved patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient as a person, patient preferences, and shared decision-making. Stakeholders whose role did not primarily involve patient contact tended to define PCC through: patient-centered redesign, customer service, and access to services. Stakeholders with more patient contact emphasized patient-level and interpersonal concepts, while those with less patient contact emphasized system-level and business-oriented concepts. The focus on PCC-as-access may reflect influence of changing institutional climate on definitions of PCC for some stakeholders. To facilitate successful PCC efforts, health-care systems may need to leverage differing but complementary definitions of PCC within its workforce.

scholarly journals More Than Numbers: Discourses of Health Care Quality in Finland

SAGE Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 215824402098001
Author(s):  
Tiina J. Peltola ◽  
Hanna Tiirinki
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Patient Centeredness ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Centered Care

Finnish institute for health and welfare is developing national health care quality registers for the ongoing project in 2018–2020, which covers seven disease pilot registers. This article describes professionals’ and patient associations’ cultural health care quality conceptions at developing process, reflecting to Weick’s sensemaking theory and patient-centered care. Research data ( N = 13) were collected by individual thematic semi-structured interviews from pilot registers’ professionals and patient associations. Data were analyzed using the discursive approach. Six main discourses on the shared sociocultural meanings of health care quality were constructed: confidence and reliability, information and understanding, safety and medical effectiveness, support, benchmarking and utility, and requirement and justice. Health care quality is built-in culture and action to achieve patient-centered care and is complex to define. Patient–clinician interaction, understanding, and support are constructive elements to make sense of quality registers’ necessity and data collection. The importance of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and Patient-Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) measures is recognized to strengthen the patient-centeredness, which reflects to all health care decision-making, processes, and care. The data publication should be designed clearly and visually versatile. The study can offer new aspects for selecting valid quality indicators to produce comprehensive information for health care quality registers.

Patient-Centered Care and Autonomy: Shared Decision-Making in Practice and a Suggestion for Practical Application in the Critically Ill

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (11) ◽  
pp. 1352-1355
Author(s):  
Marianna V. Mapes ◽  
Peter A. DePergola ◽  
William T. McGee
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Care Service ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Patient Centeredness ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Centered Care

Decision-making for the hospitalized dying and critically ill is often characterized by an understanding of autonomy that leads to clinical care and outcomes that are antithetical to patients’ preferences around suffering and quality of life. A better understanding of autonomy will facilitate the ultimate goal of a patient-centered approach and ensure compassionate, high-quality care that respects our patients’ values. We reviewed the medical literature and our experiences through the ethics service, palliative care service, and critical care service of a large community teaching hospital. The cumulative experience of a senior intensivist was filtered through the lens of a medical ethicist and the palliative care team. The practical application of patient-centered care was discerned from these interactions. We determined that a clearer understanding of patient-centeredness would improve the experience and outcomes of care for our patients as well as our adherence to ethical practice. The practical applications of autonomy and patient-centered care were evaluated by the authors through clinical interactions on the wards to ascertain problems in understanding their meaning. Clarification of autonomy and patient-centeredness is provided using specific examples to enhance understanding and application of these principles in patient-centered care.

scholarly journals Reframing the Medication Experience in Pharmacy Using Seminal Concepts of Patient-Centered Care—Implications for Practice

Pharmacy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
Brian Isetts ◽  
Anthony Olson ◽  
Jon Schommer
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Relationship ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Patient Centeredness ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Medication Experience

Team-based, Patient-Centered Care is essential to chronic disease prevention and management but there are differing ideas about the concept’s meaning across healthcare populations, settings and professions. This commentary’s objective is to empirically evaluate the theoretical relationships of the [a] Medication Experience, [b] Patient-Centeredness and other relevant component concepts from pharmaceutical care (i.e., [c] Therapeutic Relationship, [d] Patient-specific preferences for achieving goals of therapy and resolving drug therapy problems) so as to provide practice-based insights. This is achieved using a secondary analysis of 213 excerpts generated from in-depth semi-structured interviews with a national sample of pharmacists and patients about Patient-Centeredness in pharmacist practice. The four component concepts (i.e., a–d) related to the objective were examined and interpreted using a novel 3-archetype heuristic (i.e., Partner, Client and Customer) revealing common practice-based themes related to care preferences and expectations in collaborative goal setting, enduring relationships, value co-creation and evolving patient expectations during challenging medical circumstances. Most practice-based insights were generated within the Partner archetype, likely reflecting high congruence with pharmacist and patient responses related to the Medication Experience and Therapeutic Relationship. The practice-based insights may be especially useful for new practitioners and students accelerating their advancement in providing effective and efficient Patient-Centered Care.

scholarly journals Concordance and Patient-Centered Care in Medicaid Enrollees’ Care Experience With Providers

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 237437352110340
Author(s):  
Iwimbong Kum Ghabowen ◽  
Neeraj Bhandari
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Care Experience ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Privately Insured

Patient-centered care is at the nexus of several overlapping institutional reforms to improve health care system performance. However, we know little regarding Medicaid patients’ experience with their doctors along several key dimensions of patient-centered care, and how their experience compares with Medicare and privately insured patients. We studied 4 outcomes using the 2017 National Health Interview Survey: patient–provider concordance on racial/sexual/cultural identity, respectful provider attitude, solicitation of patient opinion/beliefs during the care encounter, and patient-centered communication (PCC). The primary independent variable was Medicaid enrollee status. We dichotomized responses and ran multivariate logistic regressions for each type of care experience outcome, controlling for sociodemographic factors, health care access, and health care utilization of respondents. Compared to Medicare and privately insured enrollees, Medicaid enrollees reported much lower odds of seeing providers who treated them with respect (OR = 1.91, P < .001; OR = 1.62, P < .01) and who offered PCC (OR = 1.35, P < .05; OR = 1.35, P < .01), but similar odds of seeing concordant providers (OR = 0.78, P = .96; OR = 0.96, P = .72). Importantly, Medicaid enrollees reported higher odds of seeing providers who solicited their opinion/beliefs/preferences than their Medicare or privately insured counterparts (OR = 0.82, P < .05; OR = 0.87 P < .10). Medicaid enrollees report less patient-centered experiences in some important facets of their provider interaction than their Medicare or privately insured counterparts. Federal, state, and local policies and practices directed at improving these facets of patient–provider interaction are needed and should be aimed squarely at Medicaid providers, especially those working in geographic areas and settings with a disproportionate number of racial, gender, cultural, and linguistic minorities.

scholarly journals Unique Challenges for Otolaryngology Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2020 ◽  
pp. 019459982095483
Author(s):  
Melissa Ghulam-Smith ◽  
Yeyoon Choi ◽  
Heather Edwards ◽  
Jessica R. Levi
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Delivery ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Intimate Contact ◽  
Respiratory Mucosa ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
Upper Respiratory

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has drastically altered health care delivery and utilization. The field of otolaryngology in particular has faced distinct challenges and an increased risk of transmission as day-to-day procedures involve intimate contact with a highly infectious upper respiratory mucosa. While the difficulties for physicians have been thoroughly discussed, the unique challenges of patients have yet to be considered. In this article, we present challenges for patients of otolaryngology that warrant thoughtful consideration and propose solutions to address these challenges to maintain patient-centered care both during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

scholarly journals Facilitating Team-Based Care Coordination and Collaboration in Myelofibrosis: Findings from a Quality Improvement Study in Three US Community Oncology Systems

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 32-33
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Anne Jacobson ◽  
Jeffrey D Carter ◽  
Tamar Sapir
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Patient Education ◽  
Care Coordination ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Practice Patterns ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Community Oncology ◽  
Centered Care

Background Care coordination can be especially challenging in the setting of rare malignancies such as myelofibrosis (MF), where hematology/oncology teams have limited experience working together to implement rapidly evolving standards of care. In this quality improvement (QI) initiative, we assessed barriers to patient-centered MF care in 3 community oncology systems and conducted team-based audit-feedback (AF) sessions within each system to facilitate improved care coordination. Methods Between 1/2020 and 3/2020, 31 hematology/oncology healthcare professionals (HCPs) completed surveys designed to characterize self-reported practice patterns, challenges, and barriers to collaborative MF care in 3 community oncology systems (Table 1). Building on findings from the team-based surveys, 39 HCPs from these centers participated in AF sessions to reflect on their own practice patterns and to prioritize areas for improved MF care delivery. Participants developed team-based action plans to overcome identified challenges, including barriers to effective risk stratification, care coordination, and shared decision-making (SDM) for patients with MF. Surveys conducted before and after the small-group AF sessions evaluated changes in participants' beliefs and confidence in delivering collaborative, patient-centered MF care. Results Team-Based Surveys: HCPs identified managing MF-associated anemia and other disease symptoms (42%), providing individualized care despite highly variable clinical presentations (29%), and developing institutional expertise despite low patient numbers (16%) as the most pressing challenges in MF care. For patients who are candidates for JAK inhibitor therapy, HCPs reported most commonly relying on current guidelines (71%) and clinical evidence (61%) to guide treatment selection. HCPs also considered drug safety/tolerability profiles (55%), personal or institutional experience (13%), and out-of-pocket costs for patients (13%); no participants (0%) reported incorporating patient preference into their decision-making. Teams were underutilizing SDM and patient-centered care resources; fewer than 50% reported providing tools to support adherence (48%), visual aids for patient education (47%), financial toxicity counseling (40%), resources for managing MF-related fatigue (36%), or counseling to reduce risk factors for CVD, bleeding, and thrombosis (26%). Small-Group AF Sessions: Across the 3 oncology centers, teams participating in the AF sessions (Table 1) shared a self-reported caseload of 97 patients with MF per month. HCPs reported a meaningful shift in beliefs regarding the importance of collaborative care: following the AF sessions, 100% of HCPs agreed or strongly agreed that collaboration across the extended oncology care team is essential for achieving MF treatment goals, an increase from 71% prior to the AF sessions (Figure 1). Participants also reported increased confidence in their ability to perform each of 6 aspects of evidence-based, collaborative, patient-centered care (Figure 2). In selecting which aspects of patient-centered care to address with their clinical teams, HCPs most commonly prioritized individualizing treatment decision-making based on patient- and disease-related factors (57%), followed by providing adequate patient education about treatment options and potential side effects (24%) and engaging patients in SDM (18%). To achieve these goals, 73% of HCPs committed to sharing their action plans with additional clinical team members; others committed to creating a quality task force to oversee action-plan implementation (15%) and securing buy-in from leadership and stakeholders (9%). Conclusions As a result of participating in this community-based QI initiative, hematology/oncology HCPs demonstrated increased confidence in their ability to deliver patient-centered MF care and improved commitment to team-based collaboration. Remaining practice gaps and challenges can inform future QI programs. Study Sponsor Statement The study reported in this abstract was funded by an independent educational grant from Incyte Corporation. The grantors had no role in the study design, execution, analysis, or reporting. Disclosures Verstovsek: ItalPharma: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding.

scholarly journals The evolution of quality improvement in healthcare: Patient-centered care and health information technology applications

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 62 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Cantiello ◽  
Panagiota Kitsantas ◽  
Shirley Moncada ◽  
Sabiheen Abdul
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Health Information Technology ◽  
Health Information ◽  
Patient Centered Care ◽  
Healthcare Industry ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Technology Applications ◽  
Centered Care

Objective: Quality improvement in the healthcare industry has evolved over the past few decades. In recent years, an increased focus on coordination of care efforts and the introduction of health information technology has been of high importance in improving the quality of patient care.Methods: In this review, we present a history of quality improvement efforts, discuss quality improvement in the healthcare industry, and examine quality improvement strategies with a focus on patient-centered care and information technology applications via patient registries.Results: Evidence shows that the key to quality improvement efforts in the healthcare industry is the coordination of patient care efforts through better data evaluation processes. By utilizing patient registries that can be linked to electronic health records (EHRs) and the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) framework, the quality of care provided to patients can be improved.Conclusions: While many healthcare organizations have quality improvement departments or teams in place that may be able to handle these types of efforts, it is important for organizations to be familiar with processes and frameworks that employees at different levels of the organization can be involved in. In order to ensure successful outcomes from quality improvement initiatives, managers and clinicians should work together in identifying problems and developing solutions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document