A cross-sectional survey analysis of patient and family knowledge, confidence, and perceived barriers to reporting patient deterioration.

IF 2.9 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-03-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0319546
Lisa Thiele, Arthas Flabouris, Campbell Thompson
{"title":"A cross-sectional survey analysis of patient and family knowledge, confidence, and perceived barriers to reporting patient deterioration.","authors":"Lisa Thiele, Arthas Flabouris, Campbell Thompson","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0319546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The knowledge, confidence, and skills of healthcare consumers to identify acute clinical deterioration and appropriately escalate concerns remain largely undetermined. This gap is despite the widespread international introduction of consumer escalation systems intended to provide patients and family an avenue to escalate their concerns if worried about deterioration in their own or relative's condition during a hospital stay.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore patient and family knowledge of acute clinical deterioration, and their confidence and perceived barriers to escalating their concerns.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional, in-person, consumer surveys across an Australian acute adult hospital. The study specific survey tool was developed through a multistage process with healthcare consumer input during creation and testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Questions explored healthcare consumer knowledge, confidence, and perceived barriers in association with acute clinical deterioration, recognising deterioration, and escalating concerns. Descriptive and inferential analysis was completed, and knowledge, confidence, and barrier scores established. Association between scores and consumer type, gender, age, education level, prior experience with clinical deterioration or rapid response team review, and hospitalisation history in the last 12 months were assessed using multivariable linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>133 surveys were completed. Knowledge scores varied across respondents. Awareness of the local consumer escalation system was low. A positive association was identified between knowledge and confidence that diminished with increasing barrier scores. A strong negative correlation was present between barriers and confidence. No significant difference existed in knowledge, confidence, or barrier scores based on consumer type, gender, education level, previous experience with deterioration or rapid response team review, or hospitalisation history.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Limitations in patient and family knowledge may impede consumer escalation system success. Increasing knowledge may enhance patient and family confidence to identify deterioration and escalate concerns. However, barriers to consumer escalation decrease this potential. Interventions to increase consumer knowledge should therefore be accompanied by strategies to minimise barriers.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 3","pages":"e0319546"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0319546","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The knowledge, confidence, and skills of healthcare consumers to identify acute clinical deterioration and appropriately escalate concerns remain largely undetermined. This gap is despite the widespread international introduction of consumer escalation systems intended to provide patients and family an avenue to escalate their concerns if worried about deterioration in their own or relative's condition during a hospital stay.

Aim: To explore patient and family knowledge of acute clinical deterioration, and their confidence and perceived barriers to escalating their concerns.

Design: Cross-sectional, in-person, consumer surveys across an Australian acute adult hospital. The study specific survey tool was developed through a multistage process with healthcare consumer input during creation and testing.

Methods: Questions explored healthcare consumer knowledge, confidence, and perceived barriers in association with acute clinical deterioration, recognising deterioration, and escalating concerns. Descriptive and inferential analysis was completed, and knowledge, confidence, and barrier scores established. Association between scores and consumer type, gender, age, education level, prior experience with clinical deterioration or rapid response team review, and hospitalisation history in the last 12 months were assessed using multivariable linear regression.

Results: 133 surveys were completed. Knowledge scores varied across respondents. Awareness of the local consumer escalation system was low. A positive association was identified between knowledge and confidence that diminished with increasing barrier scores. A strong negative correlation was present between barriers and confidence. No significant difference existed in knowledge, confidence, or barrier scores based on consumer type, gender, education level, previous experience with deterioration or rapid response team review, or hospitalisation history.

Conclusions: Limitations in patient and family knowledge may impede consumer escalation system success. Increasing knowledge may enhance patient and family confidence to identify deterioration and escalate concerns. However, barriers to consumer escalation decrease this potential. Interventions to increase consumer knowledge should therefore be accompanied by strategies to minimise barriers.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
期刊最新文献
Conditioned medium of engineering macrophages combined with soluble microneedles promote diabetic wound healing. Comparison between Go-GutDx, a novel diagnostic stool test kit with potential impact in low-income countries, and BioFire test. The causal effects of inflammatory bowel disease on its ocular manifestations: A Mendelian randomization study. Coping with chronic periprosthetic joint infection after failed revision of total knee and hip arthroplasty: a qualitative study on patient's experiences in treatment and healing. Correction: LightGBM hybrid model based DEM correction for forested areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1