安大略省患者体验评估的障碍和可靠性:医疗保健提供者、管理者和决策者的观点

IF 1.8 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES International Journal of Health Governance Pub Date : 2022-04-11 DOI:10.1108/ijhg-08-2021-0083
Moutasem A. Zakkar, C. Janes, S. Meyer
{"title":"安大略省患者体验评估的障碍和可靠性:医疗保健提供者、管理者和决策者的观点","authors":"Moutasem A. Zakkar, C. Janes, S. Meyer","doi":"10.1108/ijhg-08-2021-0083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposePatient experience (PE) evaluation can identify critical issues in healthcare quality. Various methods are used for PE evaluation in the healthcare system in Ontario; however, evidence suggests that PE evaluation is not systematically performed and has not received substantial buy-in from healthcare providers. This study explores the perspectives of healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario on PE evaluation methods, barriers, utility and reliability.Design/methodology/approachThe study used a qualitative descriptive design. Twenty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario between April 2018 and May 2019. The authors used thematic analysis to analyze the data. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research quality criteria were used.FindingsBarriers to PE evaluation include evaluation cost and the time and effort required to collect and analyze the data. Several factors affect the reliability of the evaluation, resulting in an unrealistically high level of patient satisfaction. These include the inclusivity of evaluation, the subjective nature of patient feedback, patients' concerns about health service continuity and the anonymity of evaluation. Participants were skeptical about the meaningfulness of evaluation because it may only yield general information that cannot be acted upon by healthcare providers, managers and policymakers for quality improvement.Originality/valueThis paper reveals that many healthcare providers, managers and policymakers do not see a tangible value in PE evaluation, regardless of Ontario's patient-centeredness and “patient first” rhetoric. An improvement in evaluation methods and a cultural change in the healthcare system regarding the value of PE are required to foster a better appreciation of the benefits of PE evaluation.","PeriodicalId":42859,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Governance","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers and reliability of patient experience evaluation in Ontario: perspectives of healthcare providers, managers, and policymakers\",\"authors\":\"Moutasem A. Zakkar, C. Janes, S. Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ijhg-08-2021-0083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposePatient experience (PE) evaluation can identify critical issues in healthcare quality. Various methods are used for PE evaluation in the healthcare system in Ontario; however, evidence suggests that PE evaluation is not systematically performed and has not received substantial buy-in from healthcare providers. This study explores the perspectives of healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario on PE evaluation methods, barriers, utility and reliability.Design/methodology/approachThe study used a qualitative descriptive design. Twenty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario between April 2018 and May 2019. The authors used thematic analysis to analyze the data. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research quality criteria were used.FindingsBarriers to PE evaluation include evaluation cost and the time and effort required to collect and analyze the data. Several factors affect the reliability of the evaluation, resulting in an unrealistically high level of patient satisfaction. These include the inclusivity of evaluation, the subjective nature of patient feedback, patients' concerns about health service continuity and the anonymity of evaluation. Participants were skeptical about the meaningfulness of evaluation because it may only yield general information that cannot be acted upon by healthcare providers, managers and policymakers for quality improvement.Originality/valueThis paper reveals that many healthcare providers, managers and policymakers do not see a tangible value in PE evaluation, regardless of Ontario's patient-centeredness and “patient first” rhetoric. An improvement in evaluation methods and a cultural change in the healthcare system regarding the value of PE are required to foster a better appreciation of the benefits of PE evaluation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Health Governance\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Health Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhg-08-2021-0083\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijhg-08-2021-0083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的患者体验(PE)评估可以识别医疗质量中的关键问题。各种方法用于PE评估在安大略省的医疗保健系统;然而,有证据表明,PE评估没有系统地进行,也没有得到医疗保健提供者的大量支持。本研究探讨安大略省医疗保健提供者、管理人员和政策制定者对PE评估方法、障碍、效用和可靠性的看法。设计/方法/方法本研究采用定性描述性设计。2018年4月至2019年5月期间,对安大略省的医疗保健提供者、管理人员和政策制定者进行了21次半结构化访谈。作者采用主题分析法对数据进行分析。采用定性研究综合报告标准质量标准。体育评估的障碍包括评估成本、收集和分析数据所需的时间和精力。有几个因素影响评估的可靠性,导致患者满意度高得不切实际。这些因素包括评价的包容性、患者反馈的主观性、患者对保健服务连续性的关切以及评价的匿名性。与会者对评估的意义持怀疑态度,因为它可能只产生一般信息,而医疗保健提供者、管理人员和决策者无法根据这些信息采取行动以提高质量。原创性/价值这篇论文揭示了许多医疗保健提供者、管理者和政策制定者没有看到体育评估的有形价值,不管安大略省以患者为中心和“患者第一”的修辞。评估方法的改进和医疗系统中关于体育价值的文化变革是促进更好地认识体育评估的好处所必需的。
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
Barriers and reliability of patient experience evaluation in Ontario: perspectives of healthcare providers, managers, and policymakers
PurposePatient experience (PE) evaluation can identify critical issues in healthcare quality. Various methods are used for PE evaluation in the healthcare system in Ontario; however, evidence suggests that PE evaluation is not systematically performed and has not received substantial buy-in from healthcare providers. This study explores the perspectives of healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario on PE evaluation methods, barriers, utility and reliability.Design/methodology/approachThe study used a qualitative descriptive design. Twenty-one semistructured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, managers and policymakers in Ontario between April 2018 and May 2019. The authors used thematic analysis to analyze the data. The Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research quality criteria were used.FindingsBarriers to PE evaluation include evaluation cost and the time and effort required to collect and analyze the data. Several factors affect the reliability of the evaluation, resulting in an unrealistically high level of patient satisfaction. These include the inclusivity of evaluation, the subjective nature of patient feedback, patients' concerns about health service continuity and the anonymity of evaluation. Participants were skeptical about the meaningfulness of evaluation because it may only yield general information that cannot be acted upon by healthcare providers, managers and policymakers for quality improvement.Originality/valueThis paper reveals that many healthcare providers, managers and policymakers do not see a tangible value in PE evaluation, regardless of Ontario's patient-centeredness and “patient first” rhetoric. An improvement in evaluation methods and a cultural change in the healthcare system regarding the value of PE are required to foster a better appreciation of the benefits of PE evaluation.
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
International Journal of Health Governance
International Journal of Health Governance HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: International Journal of Health Governance (IJHG) is oriented to serve those at the policy and governance levels within government, healthcare systems or healthcare organizations. It bridges the academic, public and private sectors, presenting case studies, research papers, reviews and viewpoints to provide an understanding of health governance that is both practical and actionable for practitioners, managers and policy makers. Policy and governance to promote, maintain or restore health extends beyond the clinical care aspect alone.
期刊最新文献
The response of regional general hospitals in Indonesia to COVID-19 Editorial: Time to treat the climate and nature crisis as one indivisible global health emergency IJHG review 28.4 Management of gallstone disease and chronic liver diseases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Ukraine: an ecological study Transforming food systems: a case of Eat Right India
×
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