scholarly journals Online patient feedback: a scoping review and stakeholder consultation to guide health policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Boylan ◽  
Veronika Williams ◽  
John Powell
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Stakeholder Consultation ◽  
Patient Feedback ◽  
Current Evidence Base ◽  
Online Feedback

Objective To provide a synthesis of the current evidence base of online patient feedback using a scoping review and a consultation of stakeholders in England, UK. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Social Science Citation Index and conducted hand searches up to January 2018. We included primary studies of internet-based reviews and other online feedback (e.g. social media and blogs) from patients, carers or the public about health care providers (individuals, services or organizations). Key findings were extracted and tabulated for further synthesis guided by the themes arising from a stakeholder consultation. Results The review found that awareness and usage of online feedback is increasing. Most feedback is about physicians, and is typically positive. Online reviews and ratings are used by some service users to inform choice of provider or treatment while providers tend to be concerned about the validity and representativeness of feedback. Reviewed studies found that those who post feedback are generally not representative of the general population, tending to be younger and more educated, but online feedback does broadly correlate with some other measures of health care quality. Conclusions In an increasingly digital society, where citizens provide and use feedback for a range of goods and services, online patient feedback can offer a convenient, low cost and widely accessible mechanism to capture experiences of health care, while being mindful to avoid issues of digital exclusion. This review provides important insights to inform policy development seeking to harness the opportunities offered by online feedback.

scholarly journals Using online patient feedback to improve NHS services: the INQUIRE multimethod study

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (38) ◽  
pp. 1-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Powell ◽  
Helen Atherton ◽  
Veronika Williams ◽  
Fadhila Mazanderani ◽  
Farzana Dudhwala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Service Improvement ◽  
Patient Feedback ◽  
Questionnaire Surveys ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Online Feedback

Background Online customer feedback has become routine in many industries, but it has yet to be harnessed for service improvement in health care. Objectives To identify the current evidence on online patient feedback; to identify public and health professional attitudes and behaviour in relation to online patient feedback; to explore the experiences of patients in providing online feedback to the NHS; and to examine the practices and processes of online patient feedback within NHS trusts. Design A multimethod programme of five studies: (1) evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation; (2) questionnaire survey of the public; (3) qualitative study of patients’ and carers’ experiences of creating and using online comment; (4) questionnaire surveys and a focus group of health-care professionals; and (5) ethnographic organisational case studies with four NHS secondary care provider organisations. Setting The UK. Methods We searched bibliographic databases and conducted hand-searches to January 2018. Synthesis was guided by themes arising from consultation with 15 stakeholders. We conducted a face-to-face survey of a representative sample of the UK population (n = 2036) and 37 purposively sampled qualitative semistructured interviews with people with experience of online feedback. We conducted online surveys of 1001 quota-sampled doctors and 749 nurses or midwives, and a focus group with five allied health professionals. We conducted ethnographic case studies at four NHS trusts, with a researcher spending 6–10 weeks at each site. Results Many people (42% of internet users in the general population) read online feedback from other patients. Fewer people (8%) write online feedback, but when they do one of their main reasons is to give praise. Most online feedback is positive in its tone and people describe caring about the NHS and wanting to help it (‘caring for care’). They also want their feedback to elicit a response as part of a conversation. Many professionals, especially doctors, are cautious about online feedback, believing it to be mainly critical and unrepresentative, and rarely encourage it. From a NHS trust perspective, online patient feedback is creating new forms of response-ability (organisations needing the infrastructure to address multiple channels and increasing amounts of online feedback) and responsivity (ensuring responses are swift and publicly visible). Limitations This work provides only a cross-sectional snapshot of a fast-emerging phenomenon. Questionnaire surveys can be limited by response bias. The quota sample of doctors and volunteer sample of nurses may not be representative. The ethnographic work was limited in its interrogation of differences between sites. Conclusions Providing and using online feedback are becoming more common for patients who are often motivated to give praise and to help the NHS improve, but health organisations and professionals are cautious and not fully prepared to use online feedback for service improvement. We identified several disconnections between patient motivations and staff and organisational perspectives, which will need to be resolved if NHS services are to engage with this source of constructive criticism and commentary from patients. Future work Intervention studies could measure online feedback as an intervention for service improvement and longitudinal studies could examine use over time, including unanticipated consequences. Content analyses could look for new knowledge on specific tests or treatments. Methodological work is needed to identify the best approaches to analysing feedback. Study registration The ethnographic case study work was registered as Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33095169. Funding This project was funded by the National institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 7, No. 38. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

scholarly journals What Do Patients Say About Doctors Online? A Systematic Review of Studies on Patient Online Reviews (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Alicia Hong ◽  
Chen Liang ◽  
Tiffany A Radcliff ◽  
Lisa T Wigfall ◽  
Richard L Street
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Study Characteristics

BACKGROUND The number of patient online reviews (PORs) has grown significantly, and PORs have played an increasingly important role in patients’ choice of health care providers. OBJECTIVE The objective of our study was to systematically review studies on PORs, summarize the major findings and study characteristics, identify literature gaps, and make recommendations for future research. METHODS A major database search was completed in January 2019. Studies were included if they (1) focused on PORs of physicians and hospitals, (2) reported qualitative or quantitative results from analysis of PORs, and (3) peer-reviewed empirical studies. Study characteristics and major findings were synthesized using predesigned tables. RESULTS A total of 63 studies (69 articles) that met the above criteria were included in the review. Most studies (n=48) were conducted in the United States, including Puerto Rico, and the remaining were from Europe, Australia, and China. Earlier studies (published before 2010) used content analysis with small sample sizes; more recent studies retrieved and analyzed larger datasets using machine learning technologies. The number of PORs ranged from fewer than 200 to over 700,000. About 90% of the studies were focused on clinicians, typically specialists such as surgeons; 27% covered health care organizations, typically hospitals; and some studied both. A majority of PORs were positive and patients’ comments on their providers were favorable. Although most studies were descriptive, some compared PORs with traditional surveys of patient experience and found a high degree of correlation and some compared PORs with clinical outcomes but found a low level of correlation. CONCLUSIONS PORs contain valuable information that can generate insights into quality of care and patient-provider relationship, but it has not been systematically used for studies of health care quality. With the advancement of machine learning and data analysis tools, we anticipate more research on PORs based on testable hypotheses and rigorous analytic methods. CLINICALTRIAL International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42018085057; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=85057 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76ddvTZ1C)

Can the "Yelp Effect" Be Reversed? Dealing with Patients' Expectations for Antibiotics (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monique Mitchell Turner ◽  
Hyeson Choung ◽  
Quoc-Ha Hannah Mai Bui ◽  
Paige Beck ◽  
Hera Ashraf
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Antibiotic Resistance ◽  
Online Reviews ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Antibiotics Resistance ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Unrealistic Expectation ◽  
Emotional Appeals ◽  
Online Feedback ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND The overuse of antibiotics has rapidly made antimicrobial resistance a global public health challenge. There is an emerging trend where providers who perceive that their patients expect antibiotics are more likely to prescribe antibiotics unprompted or upon request.1 Particularly, health care providers have expressed concern that dissatisfied patients will provide disparaging online reviews therefore threatening the reputation of the practice.2 To better deal with the negative reviews and inform patients, some health care staff directly respond to patients' online feedback.3 Engaging with patients’ online reviews gives providers an opportunity to prevent reputational damage and improve patients’ understanding of the antibiotic resistance problem. OBJECTIVE We aim to suggest and test the effectiveness of different response strategies to the negative patient online reviews on the readers’ perceptions of the health care provider and their perceptions related to antibiotics resistance. METHODS Two experimental surveys were conducted to examine the impact of message tactics (apologizing, inducing fear or guilt) that can be employed by healthcare providers when responding to patients’ negative online feedback related to not receiving an antibiotic. RESULTS Overall, our results demonstrated positive impacts of responding to patients’ online reviews. In Study 1, we found an apologetic messaging and using emotional appeals in the response were effective in making readers feel more favorable toward the message. Readers also expressed greater credibility perception toward the provider when emotional appeals were used. Findings from study 2 largely supported the effectiveness of fear-inducing response in improving the readers’ misconception and unrealistic expectation for antibiotics. CONCLUSIONS This paper demonstrated that a strategic response to patient online complaints can prevent reputational damage and help to minimize the potential negative impacts of the review. The results also glean insight into the step toward developing a novel intervention--crafting a persuasive response to patients’ negative feedback that can help to improve the understanding of antibiotic resistance problems.

scholarly journals Use and Evaluation of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems for Early Detection of Sepsis in Hospitals: Protocol for a Scoping Review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ling Li ◽  
Khalia Ackermann ◽  
Jannah Baker ◽  
Johanna Westbrook
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Current Evidence Base

BACKGROUND Sepsis is a leading cause of death in hospitals, with high associated costs for both patients and health care systems worldwide. Early detection followed by timely intervention is critical for successful sepsis management and, hence, can save lives. Health care institutions are increasingly leveraging clinical data captured in electronic health records for the development of <i>computerized clinical decision support</i> (CCDS) systems aimed at enhancing the early detection of sepsis. However, a comprehensive evidence base regarding sepsis CCDS systems to inform clinical practice, research, and policy is currently lacking. OBJECTIVE This scoping review aims to systematically describe studies reporting on the use and evaluation of CCDS systems for early detection of sepsis in hospitals. METHODS The methodology for conducting scoping reviews presented by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) will be used and adapted as guides. A comprehensive literature search of 10 electronic databases will be conducted to identify all empirical quantitative and qualitative studies that investigate the use of CCDS systems for early detection of sepsis in hospitals. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria have been developed. Two reviewers will independently screen all articles based on these criteria. Any discrepancies will be resolved through discussion and further review by a third researcher if required. RESULTS Electronic database searches have retrieved 12,139 references after removing 10,051 duplicates. As of the submission date of this protocol, we have completed the title and abstract screening. A total of 372 references will be included for full-text screening. Only 15.9% (59/372) of these studies were focused on children: 11.0% (41/372) for pediatric and 4.8% (18/372) for neonatal patients. The scoping review and the manuscript will be completed by December 2020. CONCLUSIONS Results of this review will guide researchers in determining gaps and shortcomings in the current evidence base for CCDS system use and evaluation in the early detection of sepsis. The findings will be shared with key stakeholders in clinical care, research, policy, and patient advocacy. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT PRR1-10.2196/24899

scholarly journals Use and Evaluation of Computerized Clinical Decision Support Systems for Early Detection of Sepsis in Hospitals: Protocol for a Scoping Review

10.2196/24899 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e24899
Author(s):  
Ling Li ◽  
Khalia Ackermann ◽  
Jannah Baker ◽  
Johanna Westbrook
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Support ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Clinical Decision Support ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Scoping Reviews ◽  
Current Evidence Base

Background Sepsis is a leading cause of death in hospitals, with high associated costs for both patients and health care systems worldwide. Early detection followed by timely intervention is critical for successful sepsis management and, hence, can save lives. Health care institutions are increasingly leveraging clinical data captured in electronic health records for the development of computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) systems aimed at enhancing the early detection of sepsis. However, a comprehensive evidence base regarding sepsis CCDS systems to inform clinical practice, research, and policy is currently lacking. Objective This scoping review aims to systematically describe studies reporting on the use and evaluation of CCDS systems for early detection of sepsis in hospitals. Methods The methodology for conducting scoping reviews presented by the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual and the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) will be used and adapted as guides. A comprehensive literature search of 10 electronic databases will be conducted to identify all empirical quantitative and qualitative studies that investigate the use of CCDS systems for early detection of sepsis in hospitals. Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria have been developed. Two reviewers will independently screen all articles based on these criteria. Any discrepancies will be resolved through discussion and further review by a third researcher if required. Results Electronic database searches have retrieved 12,139 references after removing 10,051 duplicates. As of the submission date of this protocol, we have completed the title and abstract screening. A total of 372 references will be included for full-text screening. Only 15.9% (59/372) of these studies were focused on children: 11.0% (41/372) for pediatric and 4.8% (18/372) for neonatal patients. The scoping review and the manuscript will be completed by December 2020. Conclusions Results of this review will guide researchers in determining gaps and shortcomings in the current evidence base for CCDS system use and evaluation in the early detection of sepsis. The findings will be shared with key stakeholders in clinical care, research, policy, and patient advocacy. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/24899

Social media and peer-to-peer support for individuals with health care needs and their caregivers: a scoping review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Kelly ◽  
Shelley Doucet ◽  
Alison Luke ◽  
Rima Azar ◽  
William Montelpare
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Peer Support ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Emotional Support ◽  
Peer To Peer ◽  
Health Care Needs ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Care Needs ◽  
The Many

BACKGROUND Individuals with health care needs and their caregivers require substantial informational and emotional support. Providing this support is a major challenge for care providers, who are often not able to adequately address barriers and may not be aware of available services and programs. Online P2P support offers an accessible and inexpensive source of support; however, the breadth of these supports on social media has not been previously documented. OBJECTIVE This study was a scoping review of research examining the use of peer-to-peer support on social media by individuals with health care needs and their caregivers. METHODS This review used the PRISMA-SR method to search for articles from 1997 to 2019. RESULTS A total of 94 articles were included. Patients and caregivers use many social media websites for P2P interaction, including: Facebook (n = 19), Twitter (n = 7), and YouTube (n = 6). Providing and receiving informational and emotional support were important uses of social media for P2P support; however, the specific needs and experiences of patients and caregivers appeared to change as knowledge regarding the condition(s) improved. Despite the many benefits associated with participating in online P2P groups, concerns related to ethics, privacy, and the potential to spread misinformation are outlined as risks associated with its use. CONCLUSIONS This study revealed that patients and caregivers engage in P2P support on social media to receive informational and emotional support from peers, despite known risks and limitations. Social networking websites were revealed to be particularly suited for P2P support communication.

scholarly journals Benefit-risk of Patients' Online Access to their Medical Records: Consensus Exercise of an International Expert Group

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (01) ◽  
pp. 156-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harshana Liyanage ◽  
Siaw-Teng Liaw ◽  
Emmanouela Konstantara ◽  
Freda Mold ◽  
Richard Schreiber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Informatics ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Panel Discussion ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Consensus Statements ◽  
Online Access ◽  
The Impact

Background: Patients' access to their computerised medical records (CMRs) is a legal right in many countries. However, little is reported about the benefit-risk associated with patients' online access to their CMRs. Objective: To conduct a consensus exercise to assess the impact of patients' online access to their CMRs on the quality of care as defined in six domains by the Institute of Medicine (IoM), now the National Academy of Medicine (NAM). Method: A five-round Delphi study was conducted. Round One explored experts' (n = 37) viewpoints on providing patients with access to their CMRs. Round Two rated the appropriateness of statements arising from Round One (n = 16). The third round was an online panel discussion of findings (n = 13) with the members of both the International Medical Informatics Association and the European Federation of Medical Informatics Primary Health Care Informatics Working Groups. Two additional rounds, a survey of the revised consensus statements and an online workshop, were carried out to further refine consensus statements. Results: Thirty-seven responses from Round One were used as a basis to initially develop 15 statements which were categorised using IoM's domains of care quality. The experts agreed that providing patients online access to their CMRs for bookings, results, and prescriptions increased efficiency and improved the quality of medical records. Experts also anticipated that patients would proactively use their online access to share data with different health care providers, including emergencies. However, experts differed on whether access to limited or summary data was more useful to patients than accessing their complete records. They thought online access would change recording practice, but they were unclear about the benefit-risk of high and onerous levels of security. The 5-round process, finally, produced 16 consensus statements. Conclusion: Patients' online access to their CMRs should be part of all CMR systems. It improves the process of health care, but further evidence is required about outcomes. Online access improves efficiency of bookings and other services. However, there is scope to improve many of the processes of care it purports to support, particularly the provision of a more effective interface and the protection of the vulnerable.

On the Margins of Death: A Scoping Review on Palliative Care and Schizophrenia

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Relyea ◽  
Brooke MacDonald ◽  
Christina Cattaruzza ◽  
Denise Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Access To Care ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
End Of Life Care ◽  
Psychosocial Interventions ◽  
Life Care ◽  
Care Providers

Schizophrenia is a serious chronic mental illness that results in marginalization and stigma for sufferers. It is the seventh leading cause for disability worldwide. The symptoms of the illness, including hallucinations, delusions, and extremely disordered thinking and behavior, may also introduce barriers to accessing treatment, education, housing, and employment. Little is known about end-of-life care for individuals with schizophrenia. To address this gap, a scoping review was conducted to enhance understanding of hospice and palliative care for patients with schizophrenia. From this scoping review, 342 unique titles and abstracts were identified through a search of 20 databases, including 11 social science databases, 6 medical databases, and 3 gray literature databases. A total of 32 articles met the inclusion criteria and the following 4 themes were identified: Stigma affecting quality of care and access to care; Issues related to consent and capacity for the patient’s end-of-life care decisions and to appoint substitute decision makers; Best practices for psychosocial interventions, pharmacology, family and health-care collaborations, goals of care, setting, and smoking; and Barriers to care, including setting, communication, provider education, and access to care. The review suggests the importance of mandatory interdisciplinary training practices and policy standards outlining cooperative communication across health-care providers. It highlights gaps in evidence-based research on psychosocial interventions and collaborative frameworks to enable the provision of quality end-of-life care for individuals with schizophrenia.

scholarly journals Reducing Alert Fatigue by Sharing Low-Level Alerts With Patients and Enhancing Collaborative Decision Making Using Blockchain Technology: Scoping Review and Proposed Framework (MedAlert) (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Kengfai Wan ◽  
Abylay Satybaldy ◽  
Lizhen Huang ◽  
Halvor Holtskog ◽  
Mariusz Nowostawski
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Alert Fatigue ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Future Work

BACKGROUND Clinical decision support (CDS) is a tool that helps clinicians in decision making by generating clinical alerts to supplement their previous knowledge and experience. However, CDS generates a high volume of irrelevant alerts, resulting in alert fatigue among clinicians. Alert fatigue is the mental state of alerts consuming too much time and mental energy, which often results in relevant alerts being overridden unjustifiably, along with clinically irrelevant ones. Consequently, clinicians become less responsive to important alerts, which opens the door to medication errors. OBJECTIVE This study aims to explore how a blockchain-based solution can reduce alert fatigue through collaborative alert sharing in the health sector, thus improving overall health care quality for both patients and clinicians. METHODS We have designed a 4-step approach to answer this research question. First, we identified five potential challenges based on the published literature through a scoping review. Second, a framework is designed to reduce alert fatigue by addressing the identified challenges with different digital components. Third, an evaluation is made by comparing MedAlert with other proposed solutions. Finally, the limitations and future work are also discussed. RESULTS Of the 341 academic papers collected, 8 were selected and analyzed. MedAlert securely distributes low-level (nonlife-threatening) clinical alerts to patients, enabling a collaborative clinical decision. Among the solutions in our framework, Hyperledger (private permissioned blockchain) and BankID (federated digital identity management) have been selected to overcome challenges such as data integrity, user identity, and privacy issues. CONCLUSIONS MedAlert can reduce alert fatigue by attracting the attention of patients and clinicians, instead of solely reducing the total number of alerts. MedAlert offers other advantages, such as ensuring a higher degree of patient privacy and faster transaction times compared with other frameworks. This framework may not be suitable for elderly patients who are not technology savvy or in-patients. Future work in validating this framework based on real health care scenarios is needed to provide the performance evaluations of MedAlert and thus gain support for the better development of this idea. CLINICALTRIAL

Creating Optimal Healing Environments

2014 ◽  
pp. 84-100
Author(s):  
Terri Zborowsky ◽  
Mary Jo Kreitzer
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Safety ◽  
Built Environment ◽  
Health Care Quality ◽  
Care Quality ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Design Elements ◽  
Healing Environment ◽  
Care Processes ◽  
Healing Environments

Creating an optimal healing environment requires attentiveness to the built environment as well as care processes, culture, and competencies of care providers and leadership. There are over 1,000 studies that link the physical environment to outcomes such as health care quality, patient safety, reduction of stress and improvements in patient safety. Key design elements highlighted include access to nature, access to daylight, positive distractions, and the ambient environment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document