Using patient feedback to adapt intervention materials based on acceptance and commitment therapy for people receiving renal dialysis

Background Theory-based intervention materials must be carefully adapted to meet the needs of users with specific physical conditions. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) has been adapted successfully for cancer, chronic pain, diabetes, irritable bowel syndrome, multiple sclerosis, and a range of other conditions, but not so far for people receiving renal haemodialysis. This paper presents findings from a study to adapt ACT-based intervention materials specifically for renal dialysis. Methods Draft written materials consisting of four stories depicting fictitious individuals who used ACT-related techniques to help overcome different challenges and difficulties related to dialysis were adapted using a systematic patient consultation process. The participants were 18 people aged 19–80 years, with chronic kidney disease and receiving renal dialysis. Individual, semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit participants’ views about how the content of the draft materials should be adapted to make them more realistic and relevant for people receiving renal dialysis and about how the materials should be presented and delivered to people receiving renal dialysis. The interview transcripts were analysed using a qualitative adaptation of the Delphi method in which themes are used as a framework for translating feedback into proposals for modifications. Results The analysis of patient feedback supported the use of patient stories but suggested they should be presented by video and narrated by real dialysis patients. They also indicated specific adaptations to make the stories more credible and realistic. Participant feedback was translated into proposals for change that were considered along with clinical, ethical and theoretical factors. The outcome was a design for a video-based intervention that separated the stories about individuals from the explanations of the specific ACT techniques and provided greater structure, with material organised into smaller chunks. This intervention is adapted specifically for people receiving renal dialysis while retaining the distinctive theoretical principles of ACT. Conclusions The study shows the value of consulting patients in the development of intervention materials and illustrates a process for integrating patient feedback with theoretical, clinical and practical considerations in intervention design.

Evaluation of an electronic psycho-oncological adaptive screening program (EPAS) with immediate patient feedback: findings from a German cluster intervention study

Purpose Distress screening has become mandatory and essential in comprehensive cancer care. We evaluated an electronic psycho-oncological adaptive screening (EPAS) which assesses objective indicators of care needs and subjectively perceived care needs and subsequently provides patient feedback with individualized recommendations about psychosocial care services. Methods Patients were assessed within clusters, i.e., different oncological facilities of the competence network of the University Cancer Center Hamburg (UCCH). Patients in the intervention arm underwent the screening, controls received standard care. Patients were assessed at baseline (t0), 3-month (t1), and 6-month (t2) follow-up. Outcomes included information level and use of/access to nine psychosocial services at UCCH, well-being (GAD-7, PHQ-9, SF-8), and treatment satisfaction (SCCC). Conditional linear and logistic regressions were used to identify screening effects at t1 and t2. Results Of 1320 eligible patients across 11 clusters, 660 were included (50%). The average age was 60 years; 46% were female. The intervention was associated with increased information level for all psychosocial services at t1 and t2 (all p < .001), increased use in some of these services at t1 and t2, respectively (p ≤ .02), and better evaluation of access (e.g., more recommendations for services provided by physicians, p < .01). At t2, the intervention was associated with a lower level of satisfaction with disease-related information (p = .02). Conclusions EPAS may improve information about psychosocial services as well as utilization of and access to these services. The effect on information level seems not to be generalizable to other aspects of oncological care. Future studies should incorporate novel technologies and condense the procedure to its core factors. Implications for Cancer Survivors: The screening may help to enhance self-management competencies among cancer survivors. Trial registration The trial was retrospectively registered (2/2021) at ClinicalTrials.gov (number: NCT04749056).

SP4.1.6 Introduction of Concentric digital and remote consent into clinical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction Paper-based consent processes are associated with errors of omission, illegibility and unwarranted variation. During the COVID-19 pandemic the Royal College of Surgeons (England) released guidelines supporting the use of remote consent. The aim was to evaluate the introduction of Concentric, a digital consent application, into clinical practice. Method Between April 2020-Jan 2021, Concentric was used optionally for medical consent during registered service evaluations. Data was obtained from Concentric analytics. User and patient feedback was obtained via optional satisfaction surveys. Results 3417 Concentric consent episodes for 356 unique procedures were performed by 170 clinicians across 16 specialties from 13 healthcare providers. Patients were aged 7-101years, (median 58, IQR 30). Of the completed consent episodes (n = 2799), consent was given; remotely in 23% of episodes, and on the day of surgery in 67%. Consent form information was shared digitally with 82% of patients. Average patient user experience was 8.8 out of 10 (1 very poor - 10 excellent, n = 594). 546/594 (91.9%) patients agreed that Concentric provided all the information they needed to know. Clinicians (n = 23) rated the quality of the consent process with Concentric as 4.8 out of 5 with all supporting the use of Concentric across the Trust. Conclusion Concentric has been successfully introduced into clinical practice. Patients and clinicians report high satisfaction scores. Remote consent is feasible and trends in consent practice, such as day of surgery consent can be easily identified and can guide quality improvement work. The introduction of digital consent solutions should be considered for all units.

EP.WE.17Surgical Telemedicine Clinics during the Covid-19 Pandemic – Patient-Reported Outcomes Report

Aims The primary aim was to obtain patient feedback about surgical telemedicine clinics. The secondary endpoint was to investigate any factors influencing the patient’s feedback. Methods A retrospective qualitative study was undertaken, during the period between June – September 2020, at Darent Valley Hospital in West Kent. Telephone and online feedback were obtained using a 5 point questionnaire designed to assess their experience and preference for future consultations. Variables such as ‘demographics’, ‘first or follow-up clinic appointment’ and ‘physician-grade’, were analysed for any influence on patients feedback. Results A total of 200 patients responded to the questionnaire (telephone = 133, online = 77). The median age was 67 years (IQR 44 – 79) and male: female ratio 1. About 35.9% were a new referral and 42.7% has had some face-to-face appointment in the hospital before the pandemic. During the period of the study, about 42.7% had more than one telemedicine appointments. About 83.2% were consulted by surgical registrars. A rating from good to excellent for ‘overall experience’, ‘opportunity to express own concern’ and ‘how well the doctor addressed their concerns’ was given at 90%, 93.1% and 89.4%, respectively. About 80.2% felt reassured and 21.7% would prefer telemedicine for future consultations. There was no association between the variables studied and patient responses. Conclusions A high percentage of patients reported satisfactory service provision via telemedicine clinics. A majority of patients felt reassured. However, given the option, the face-to-face clinic would be the prefered option for the majority.

GP Practice Online Reviews before and after the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Longitudinal Observational Study (Preprint)

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has brought new challenges to in-person encounters with general practitioners (GPs) and has fostered the use of digital health tools. Patient online reviews (PORs) of health care experience offer a method for patients to feedback on the quality of their care. OBJECTIVE This study sought to determine the latest trends in patient feedback for English GP practices in the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS Publicly available PORs for English GP practices between January 2019 and February 2021 were identified and scraped from the NHS website. PORs were characterized based on numerical star ratings (ranging from one to five) and the polarity of their comments. These measures were also calculated at GP practice level to understand whether patients’ perceptions of their practices are constant across time. RESULTS Of the 58,970 PORs posted between February 2019 and February 2021, 64·6% were positive (defined as a star rating of four or five out of five). After the lockdown measures imposed in April 2020, the share of encounters with GPs rated positively by customers increased. General practices were less likely to reply to their patients’ reviews after April 2020. The relative rank of practices based on their average star rating remained rather constant after the start of the lockdown measures. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates how PORs can be used to detect instances of particularly good or bad practice. Since GP Patient Survey has been disrupted during the COVID-19 period, this could be another measure for policy makers to track practice quality.