绘制择期手术中的患者教育图:一项队列研究和横断面调查。

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMJ Open Quality Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002810
James Booker, Jack Penn, Chan Hee Koh, Nicola Newall, David Rowland, Siddharth Sinha, John G Hanrahan, Simon C Williams, Parag Sayal, Hani J Marcus
{"title":"绘制择期手术中的患者教育图:一项队列研究和横断面调查。","authors":"James Booker, Jack Penn, Chan Hee Koh, Nicola Newall, David Rowland, Siddharth Sinha, John G Hanrahan, Simon C Williams, Parag Sayal, Hani J Marcus","doi":"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Develop a process map of when patients learn about their proposed surgery and what resources patients use to educate themselves.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A mixed methods design, combining semistructured stakeholder interviews, quantitative validation using electronic healthcare records (EHR) in a retrospective cohort and a cross-sectional patient survey.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A single surgical centre in the UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Fourteen members of the spinal multidisciplinary team were interviewed to develop the process map.This process map was validated using the EHR of 50 patients undergoing elective spine surgery between January and June 2022. Postprocedure, feedback was gathered from 25 patient surveys to identify which resources they used to learn about their spinal procedure. Patients below the age of 18 or who received emergency surgery were excluded.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Elective spine surgery and patient questionnaires given postoperatively either on the ward or in follow-up clinic.</p><p><strong>Primary and secondary outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that was present at encounters on the process map. Key timepoints were defined if >80% of patients were present. The secondary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that used educational resources listed in the patient questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 342 encounters which occurred across the cohort, with 16 discrete event categories identified. The initial surgical clinic (88%), anaesthetic preoperative assessment (96%) and admission for surgery (100%) were identified as key timepoints. Surveys identified that patients most used verbal information from their surgeon (100%) followed by written information from their surgeon (52%) and the internet (40%) to learn about their surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Process mapping is an effective method of illustrating the patient pathway. The initial surgical clinic, anaesthetic preoperative assessment and surgical admission are key timepoints where patients receive information. This has future implications for guiding patient education interventions to focus at key timepoints.</p>","PeriodicalId":9052,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Quality","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11131119/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping patient education encounters in elective surgery: a cohort study and cross-sectional survey.\",\"authors\":\"James Booker, Jack Penn, Chan Hee Koh, Nicola Newall, David Rowland, Siddharth Sinha, John G Hanrahan, Simon C Williams, Parag Sayal, Hani J Marcus\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Develop a process map of when patients learn about their proposed surgery and what resources patients use to educate themselves.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A mixed methods design, combining semistructured stakeholder interviews, quantitative validation using electronic healthcare records (EHR) in a retrospective cohort and a cross-sectional patient survey.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>A single surgical centre in the UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Fourteen members of the spinal multidisciplinary team were interviewed to develop the process map.This process map was validated using the EHR of 50 patients undergoing elective spine surgery between January and June 2022. Postprocedure, feedback was gathered from 25 patient surveys to identify which resources they used to learn about their spinal procedure. Patients below the age of 18 or who received emergency surgery were excluded.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Elective spine surgery and patient questionnaires given postoperatively either on the ward or in follow-up clinic.</p><p><strong>Primary and secondary outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that was present at encounters on the process map. Key timepoints were defined if >80% of patients were present. The secondary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that used educational resources listed in the patient questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 342 encounters which occurred across the cohort, with 16 discrete event categories identified. The initial surgical clinic (88%), anaesthetic preoperative assessment (96%) and admission for surgery (100%) were identified as key timepoints. Surveys identified that patients most used verbal information from their surgeon (100%) followed by written information from their surgeon (52%) and the internet (40%) to learn about their surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Process mapping is an effective method of illustrating the patient pathway. The initial surgical clinic, anaesthetic preoperative assessment and surgical admission are key timepoints where patients receive information. This has future implications for guiding patient education interventions to focus at key timepoints.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11131119/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Quality\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002810\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Quality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2024-002810","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:绘制一份流程图,说明患者何时了解其拟接受的手术,以及患者利用哪些资源进行自我教育:绘制一份流程图,说明患者何时了解其拟进行的手术,以及患者利用哪些资源进行自我教育:采用混合方法设计,结合半结构式利益相关者访谈、在回顾性队列中使用电子医疗记录(EHR)进行定量验证以及横断面患者调查:地点:英国一家外科中心:为绘制流程图,对脊柱多学科团队的 14 名成员进行了访谈。该流程图通过 2022 年 1 月至 6 月间接受脊柱择期手术的 50 名患者的电子病历进行了验证。手术后,我们从 25 份患者调查中收集了反馈信息,以确定他们使用了哪些资源来了解脊柱手术。未满18岁或接受急诊手术的患者除外:干预措施:选择性脊柱手术,术后在病房或随访诊所发放患者问卷:主要结果是研究队列中出现在流程图上的相遇点的百分比。如果有超过 80% 的患者在场,则定义为关键时间点。次要结果是使用患者调查问卷中列出的教育资源的研究对象的百分比:研究组共发生了 342 次事件,确定了 16 个离散事件类别。初始手术门诊(88%)、麻醉术前评估(96%)和入院手术(100%)被确定为关键时间点。调查发现,患者最常使用外科医生的口头信息(100%),其次是外科医生的书面信息(52%)和互联网信息(40%)来了解手术信息:流程图是说明患者路径的有效方法。初始手术门诊、麻醉术前评估和手术入院是患者接受信息的关键时间点。这对今后指导患者教育干预措施重点关注关键时间点具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Mapping patient education encounters in elective surgery: a cohort study and cross-sectional survey.

Objective: Develop a process map of when patients learn about their proposed surgery and what resources patients use to educate themselves.

Design: A mixed methods design, combining semistructured stakeholder interviews, quantitative validation using electronic healthcare records (EHR) in a retrospective cohort and a cross-sectional patient survey.

Setting: A single surgical centre in the UK.

Participants: Fourteen members of the spinal multidisciplinary team were interviewed to develop the process map.This process map was validated using the EHR of 50 patients undergoing elective spine surgery between January and June 2022. Postprocedure, feedback was gathered from 25 patient surveys to identify which resources they used to learn about their spinal procedure. Patients below the age of 18 or who received emergency surgery were excluded.

Interventions: Elective spine surgery and patient questionnaires given postoperatively either on the ward or in follow-up clinic.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that was present at encounters on the process map. Key timepoints were defined if >80% of patients were present. The secondary outcome was the percentage of the study cohort that used educational resources listed in the patient questionnaire.

Results: There were 342 encounters which occurred across the cohort, with 16 discrete event categories identified. The initial surgical clinic (88%), anaesthetic preoperative assessment (96%) and admission for surgery (100%) were identified as key timepoints. Surveys identified that patients most used verbal information from their surgeon (100%) followed by written information from their surgeon (52%) and the internet (40%) to learn about their surgery.

Conclusions: Process mapping is an effective method of illustrating the patient pathway. The initial surgical clinic, anaesthetic preoperative assessment and surgical admission are key timepoints where patients receive information. This has future implications for guiding patient education interventions to focus at key timepoints.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ Open Quality Nursing-Leadership and Management
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Achieving and sustaining reduction in hospital-acquired complications in an Australian local health service. Click and learn: a longitudinal interprofessional case-based sepsis education curriculum. Increasing the uptake of advance care directives through staff education and one-on-one support for people facing end-of-life. Community breast pain clinics can provide safe, quality care for women presenting with breast pain. Implementing a multisite shared haemodialysis care programme.
×
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