Exploring patient participation in reducing health-care-related safety risks
Exploring patient participation in reducing health-care-related safety risks
Exploring patient participation in reducing health-care-related safety risks
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Explor<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>patient</strong> <strong>participation</strong> <strong>in</strong> reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>health</strong>-<strong>care</strong>-<strong>related</strong> <strong>safety</strong> <strong>risks</strong><br />
136<br />
Provid<strong>in</strong>g these is the responsibility of professionals. Aga<strong>in</strong>, <strong>patient</strong> experience surveys<br />
can be used to monitor professionals’ efforts to empower <strong>patient</strong>s and to improve their<br />
self-management skills. The CAHPS Item Set for Address<strong>in</strong>g Health Literacy or the<br />
Patient Activation Measure serve as good examples of these k<strong>in</strong>ds of surveys.<br />
Recommendation 6 – Comb<strong>in</strong>e quantitative data with qualitative narratives<br />
It should be borne <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d that the least-literate <strong>patient</strong>s are also least capable of fill<strong>in</strong>g<br />
out questionnaires. It is obvious that a certa<strong>in</strong> level of literacy is required for <strong>patient</strong>s to be<br />
able to complete questionnaires about their experiences with <strong>health</strong> <strong>care</strong> <strong>safety</strong>. Even when<br />
older people respond, they have higher rates of miss<strong>in</strong>g items (100). Questionnaires can be<br />
difficult to understand for <strong>patient</strong>s with low literacy levels. K<strong>in</strong>g et al. therefore suggest that<br />
future <strong>patient</strong> report<strong>in</strong>g systems should balance closed-ended questions for cause analysis<br />
and classification, and open-ended narratives to allow for <strong>patient</strong>s’ limited understand<strong>in</strong>g of<br />
term<strong>in</strong>ology (101). Patient stories are not only a rich source of <strong>in</strong>formation, they can also<br />
serve as a powerful tool to <strong>in</strong>fluence and change professionals’ behaviour (85).<br />
References<br />
1. Rathert C, Brandt J, Williams ES. Putt<strong>in</strong>g the “<strong>patient</strong>” <strong>in</strong> <strong>patient</strong> <strong>safety</strong>:<br />
a qualitative study of consumer experiences. Health Expectations, 2012,<br />
15(3):327−336.<br />
2. Rathert C, May DR, Williams ES. Beyond service quality: the mediat<strong>in</strong>g role of<br />
<strong>patient</strong> <strong>safety</strong> perceptions <strong>in</strong> the <strong>patient</strong> experience-satisfaction relationship. Health<br />
Care Management Review, 2011, 36(4):359–368.<br />
3. Taylor BB et al. Do medical <strong>in</strong><strong>patient</strong>s who report poor service quality experience<br />
more adverse events and medical errors? Medical Care, 2008, 46(2):224–228.<br />
4. Simi S, Patoia L. The importance of be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>patient</strong>. Journal of Ambulatory Care<br />
Management, 2010, 33(3):257–264.<br />
5. Greenberg LG, Battles JB, Haskell H. Learn<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>patient</strong>s’ experience: enhanc<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>patient</strong> <strong>safety</strong> event report<strong>in</strong>g systems. Cirugia y Cirujanos, 2010, 78(5):463–468.<br />
6. Rathert C, Huddleston N, Pak Y. Acute <strong>care</strong> <strong>patient</strong>s discuss the <strong>patient</strong> role <strong>in</strong><br />
<strong>patient</strong> <strong>safety</strong>. Health Care Management Review, 2011, 36(2):134–144.<br />
7. Patients for Patient Safety [web site]. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2013<br />
(http://www.who.<strong>in</strong>t/<strong>patient</strong><strong>safety</strong>/<strong>patient</strong>s_for_<strong>patient</strong>/en/, accessed 1 May 2012).<br />
8. Hall J et al. Effectiveness of <strong>in</strong>terventions designed to promote <strong>patient</strong> <strong>in</strong>volvement<br />
to enhance <strong>safety</strong>: a systematic review. BMJ Quality and Safety <strong>in</strong> Health Care, 2010,<br />
19(5):e10.<br />
9. Schwappach DL. Review: engag<strong>in</strong>g <strong>patient</strong>s as vigilant partners <strong>in</strong> <strong>safety</strong>: a<br />
systematic review. Medical Care Research and Review, 2010, 67(2):119–148.<br />
10. Fredericks JE, Bunt<strong>in</strong>g RF Jr. Implementation of a <strong>patient</strong>-friendly medication<br />
schedule to improve <strong>patient</strong> <strong>safety</strong> with<strong>in</strong> a <strong>health</strong><strong>care</strong> system. Journal of Health<strong>care</strong><br />
Risk Management, 2010, 29(4):22–27.<br />
11. Bergal LM et al. Patient <strong>participation</strong> <strong>in</strong> surgical site mark<strong>in</strong>g: can this be an<br />
additional tool to help avoid wrong-site surgery? Journal of Patient Safety, 2010,<br />
6(4):221–225.<br />
12. European Commission. Patient <strong>safety</strong> and quality of <strong>care</strong>. Special Eurobarometer,<br />
2010, 327 (Wave 72.2; http://ec.europa.eu/public_op<strong>in</strong>ion/archives/ebs/<br />
ebs_327_en.pdf, accessed 2 May 2011).