急救医疗专业人员自我反馈的普遍性、预测因素和结果:一项混合方法日记研究

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q1 EMERGENCY MEDICINE BMC Emergency Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-13 DOI:10.1186/s12873-024-01082-y
Caitlin Wilson, Luke Budworth, Gillian Janes, Rebecca Lawton, Jonathan Benn
{"title":"急救医疗专业人员自我反馈的普遍性、预测因素和结果:一项混合方法日记研究","authors":"Caitlin Wilson, Luke Budworth, Gillian Janes, Rebecca Lawton, Jonathan Benn","doi":"10.1186/s12873-024-01082-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Providing feedback to healthcare professionals and organisations on performance or patient outcomes may improve care quality and professional development, particularly in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) where professionals make autonomous, complex decisions and current feedback provision is limited. This study aimed to determine the content and outcomes of feedback in EMS by measuring feedback prevalence, identifying predictors of receiving feedback, categorising feedback outcomes and determining predictors of feedback efficacy. An observational mixed-methods study was used. EMS professionals delivering face-to-face patient care in the United Kingdom’s National Health Service completed a baseline survey and diary entries between March-August 2022. Diary entries were event-contingent and collected when a participant identified they had received feedback. Self-reported data were collected on feedback frequency, environment, characteristics and outcomes. Feedback environment was measured using the Feedback Environment Scale. Feedback outcomes were categorised using hierarchical cluster analysis. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess which variables predicted feedback receipt and efficacy. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. 299 participants completed baseline surveys and 105 submitted 538 diary entries. 215 (71.9%) participants had received feedback in the last 30 days, with patient outcome feedback the most frequent (n = 149, 42.8%). Feedback format was predominantly verbal (n = 157, 73.0%) and informal (n = 189, 80.4%). Significant predictors for receiving feedback were a paramedic role (aOR 3.04 [1.14, 8.00]), a workplace with a positive feedback-seeking culture (aOR 1.07 [1.04, 1.10]) and white ethnicity (aOR 5.68 [1.01, 29.73]). Feedback outcomes included: personal wellbeing (closure, confidence and job satisfaction), professional development (clinical practice and knowledge) and service outcomes (patient care and patient safety). Feedback-seeking behaviour and higher scores on the Feedback Environment Scale were statistically significant predictors of feedback efficacy. Solicited feedback improved wellbeing (aOR 3.35 [1.68, 6.60]) and professional development (aOR 2.58 [1.10, 5.56]) more than unsolicited feedback. Feedback for EMS professionals was perceived to improve personal wellbeing, professional development and service outcomes. EMS workplaces need to develop a culture that encourages feedback-seeking to strengthen the impact of feedback for EMS professionals on clinical decision-making and staff wellbeing.","PeriodicalId":9002,"journal":{"name":"BMC Emergency Medicine","volume":"234 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prevalence, predictors and outcomes of self-reported feedback for EMS professionals: a mixed-methods diary study\",\"authors\":\"Caitlin Wilson, Luke Budworth, Gillian Janes, Rebecca Lawton, Jonathan Benn\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12873-024-01082-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Providing feedback to healthcare professionals and organisations on performance or patient outcomes may improve care quality and professional development, particularly in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) where professionals make autonomous, complex decisions and current feedback provision is limited. This study aimed to determine the content and outcomes of feedback in EMS by measuring feedback prevalence, identifying predictors of receiving feedback, categorising feedback outcomes and determining predictors of feedback efficacy. An observational mixed-methods study was used. EMS professionals delivering face-to-face patient care in the United Kingdom’s National Health Service completed a baseline survey and diary entries between March-August 2022. Diary entries were event-contingent and collected when a participant identified they had received feedback. Self-reported data were collected on feedback frequency, environment, characteristics and outcomes. Feedback environment was measured using the Feedback Environment Scale. Feedback outcomes were categorised using hierarchical cluster analysis. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess which variables predicted feedback receipt and efficacy. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. 299 participants completed baseline surveys and 105 submitted 538 diary entries. 215 (71.9%) participants had received feedback in the last 30 days, with patient outcome feedback the most frequent (n = 149, 42.8%). Feedback format was predominantly verbal (n = 157, 73.0%) and informal (n = 189, 80.4%). Significant predictors for receiving feedback were a paramedic role (aOR 3.04 [1.14, 8.00]), a workplace with a positive feedback-seeking culture (aOR 1.07 [1.04, 1.10]) and white ethnicity (aOR 5.68 [1.01, 29.73]). Feedback outcomes included: personal wellbeing (closure, confidence and job satisfaction), professional development (clinical practice and knowledge) and service outcomes (patient care and patient safety). Feedback-seeking behaviour and higher scores on the Feedback Environment Scale were statistically significant predictors of feedback efficacy. Solicited feedback improved wellbeing (aOR 3.35 [1.68, 6.60]) and professional development (aOR 2.58 [1.10, 5.56]) more than unsolicited feedback. Feedback for EMS professionals was perceived to improve personal wellbeing, professional development and service outcomes. EMS workplaces need to develop a culture that encourages feedback-seeking to strengthen the impact of feedback for EMS professionals on clinical decision-making and staff wellbeing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9002,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Emergency Medicine\",\"volume\":\"234 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Emergency Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-024-01082-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12873-024-01082-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

向医疗保健专业人员和组织提供有关绩效或患者治疗效果的反馈意见可以提高医疗质量和专业发展,尤其是在急救医疗服务(EMS)中,专业人员需要做出自主、复杂的决定,而目前提供的反馈意见非常有限。本研究旨在通过测量反馈的普遍程度、确定接受反馈的预测因素、对反馈结果进行分类以及确定反馈效果的预测因素,来确定急救医疗服务中反馈的内容和结果。研究采用了观察法和混合方法。英国国民医疗服务机构中提供面对面病人护理服务的急救医疗专业人员在 2022 年 3 月至 8 月期间完成了一项基线调查和日记记录。日记条目与事件相关,在参与者确认收到反馈时收集。收集的自我报告数据包括反馈频率、反馈环境、反馈特征和反馈结果。反馈环境采用反馈环境量表进行测量。反馈结果采用分层聚类分析法进行分类。多层次逻辑回归用于评估哪些变量可预测反馈接收情况和反馈效果。定性数据采用内容分析法进行分析。299 名参与者完成了基线调查,105 名参与者提交了 538 篇日记。215名参与者(71.9%)在过去30天内收到过反馈,其中患者疗效反馈最多(149人,42.8%)。反馈形式主要是口头反馈(n = 157,73.0%)和非正式反馈(n = 189,80.4%)。辅助医务人员(aOR 3.04 [1.14, 8.00])、具有积极寻求反馈文化的工作场所(aOR 1.07 [1.04, 1.10])和白人(aOR 5.68 [1.01, 29.73])是获得反馈的重要预测因素。反馈结果包括:个人福祉(关闭、自信和工作满意度)、专业发展(临床实践和知识)和服务成果(患者护理和患者安全)。从统计学角度看,寻求反馈行为和反馈环境量表得分越高,对反馈效果的预测越有意义。与未经请求的反馈相比,主动反馈更能改善福利(aOR 3.35 [1.68, 6.60])和专业发展(aOR 2.58 [1.10, 5.56])。急救医疗服务专业人员认为,反馈可改善个人福祉、专业发展和服务成果。急救医疗工作场所需要建立一种鼓励寻求反馈的文化,以加强急救医疗专业人员反馈对临床决策和员工福利的影响。
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
Prevalence, predictors and outcomes of self-reported feedback for EMS professionals: a mixed-methods diary study
Providing feedback to healthcare professionals and organisations on performance or patient outcomes may improve care quality and professional development, particularly in Emergency Medical Services (EMS) where professionals make autonomous, complex decisions and current feedback provision is limited. This study aimed to determine the content and outcomes of feedback in EMS by measuring feedback prevalence, identifying predictors of receiving feedback, categorising feedback outcomes and determining predictors of feedback efficacy. An observational mixed-methods study was used. EMS professionals delivering face-to-face patient care in the United Kingdom’s National Health Service completed a baseline survey and diary entries between March-August 2022. Diary entries were event-contingent and collected when a participant identified they had received feedback. Self-reported data were collected on feedback frequency, environment, characteristics and outcomes. Feedback environment was measured using the Feedback Environment Scale. Feedback outcomes were categorised using hierarchical cluster analysis. Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess which variables predicted feedback receipt and efficacy. Qualitative data were analysed using content analysis. 299 participants completed baseline surveys and 105 submitted 538 diary entries. 215 (71.9%) participants had received feedback in the last 30 days, with patient outcome feedback the most frequent (n = 149, 42.8%). Feedback format was predominantly verbal (n = 157, 73.0%) and informal (n = 189, 80.4%). Significant predictors for receiving feedback were a paramedic role (aOR 3.04 [1.14, 8.00]), a workplace with a positive feedback-seeking culture (aOR 1.07 [1.04, 1.10]) and white ethnicity (aOR 5.68 [1.01, 29.73]). Feedback outcomes included: personal wellbeing (closure, confidence and job satisfaction), professional development (clinical practice and knowledge) and service outcomes (patient care and patient safety). Feedback-seeking behaviour and higher scores on the Feedback Environment Scale were statistically significant predictors of feedback efficacy. Solicited feedback improved wellbeing (aOR 3.35 [1.68, 6.60]) and professional development (aOR 2.58 [1.10, 5.56]) more than unsolicited feedback. Feedback for EMS professionals was perceived to improve personal wellbeing, professional development and service outcomes. EMS workplaces need to develop a culture that encourages feedback-seeking to strengthen the impact of feedback for EMS professionals on clinical decision-making and staff wellbeing.
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
BMC Emergency Medicine
BMC Emergency Medicine Medicine-Emergency Medicine
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
8.00%
发文量
178
审稿时长
29 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Emergency Medicine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all urgent and emergency aspects of medicine, in both practice and basic research. In addition, the journal covers aspects of disaster medicine and medicine in special locations, such as conflict areas and military medicine, together with articles concerning healthcare services in the emergency departments.
期刊最新文献
Elderly patients re-transferred from long-term care hospitals to emergency departments within 48 h. Prehospital telemedicine support for urban stroke care: Analysis of current state of care and conceptualization. Outcomes of ED chest pain visits: the prognostic value of negative but measurable high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) levels. Triage processes in primary, secondary, and tertiary health care facilities in the Kathmandu Valley, Nepal: a mixed-methods study. Outcome of video laryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for emergency tracheal intubation in emergency department: a propensity score matching analysis.
×
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