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

IF 2.6 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":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896061/pdf/","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.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
横断面调查分析患者和家属的知识,信心和感知障碍报告患者恶化。
背景:医疗保健消费者识别急性临床恶化和适当升级担忧的知识、信心和技能在很大程度上仍未确定。尽管国际上广泛采用了消费者升级系统,以便在患者和家属担心自己或亲属住院期间病情恶化时,向他们提供升级担忧的途径,但仍存在这一差距。目的:探讨患者和家属对急性临床恶化的认识,以及他们的信心和感知障碍。设计:横断面,面对面,消费者调查横跨澳大利亚急性成人医院。该研究特定的调查工具是通过一个多阶段流程开发的,在创建和测试期间有医疗保健消费者的输入。方法:探讨保健消费者的知识、信心和感知障碍与急性临床恶化、认识到恶化和不断升级的担忧。完成了描述性和推理分析,建立了知识、信心和障碍评分。使用多变量线性回归评估得分与消费者类型、性别、年龄、教育水平、临床恶化或快速反应小组审查的既往经验以及过去12个月的住院史之间的关系。结果:共完成问卷调查133份。受访者的知识得分各不相同。对当地消费者升级系统的认识很低。知识和信心之间存在正相关关系,随着障碍分数的增加而减弱。障碍与信心之间存在很强的负相关关系。基于消费者类型、性别、教育水平、既往恶化经验或快速反应小组审查或住院史,知识、信心或障碍评分无显著差异。结论:患者和家属知识的局限性可能会阻碍消费者升级系统的成功。增加知识可以增强患者和家属识别病情恶化和加剧担忧的信心。然而,消费者升级的障碍降低了这种潜力。因此,增加消费者知识的干预措施应与尽量减少障碍的战略相结合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Socioeconomic, physical and mental health impacts of climate change among informal outdoor workers in sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review protocol. Influence of environmental factors and tributaries on toxic cyanobacterial growth. Implementing substance use services into acute care settings for pregnant and birthing people: A systematic scoping review of implementation and quality improvement strategies. Comparative analysis of stress markers, metabolic health, and gut microbiota in healthy and disabled dogs in long-term shelters in Thailand. Chabazite-supported ZnO and CeO2 nanoparticles with structural stability and enhanced antibacterial action.
×
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:604180095
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