The use of patient experience survey data by out-of-hours primary care services: a qualitative interview study

Background English National Quality Requirements mandate out-of-hours primary care services to routinely audit patient experience, but do not state how it should be done.

Objectives We explored how providers collect patient feedback data and use it to inform service provision. We also explored staff views on the utility of out-of-hours questions from the English General Practice Patient Survey (GPPS).

Methods A qualitative study was conducted with 31 staff (comprising service managers, general practitioners and administrators) from 11 out-of-hours primary care providers in England, UK. Staff responsible for patient experience audits within their service were sampled and data collected via face-to-face semistructured interviews.

Results Although most providers regularly audited their patients’ experiences by using patient surveys, many participants expressed a strong preference for additional qualitative feedback. Staff provided examples of small changes to service delivery resulting from patient feedback, but service-wide changes were not instigated. Perceptions that patients lacked sufficient understanding of the urgent care system in which out-of-hours primary care services operate were common and a barrier to using feedback to enable change. Participants recognised the value of using patient experience feedback to benchmark services, but perceived weaknesses in the out-of-hours items from the GPPS led them to question the validity of using these data for benchmarking in its current form.

Conclusions The lack of clarity around how out-of-hours providers should audit patient experience hinders the utility of the National Quality Requirements. Although surveys were common, patient feedback data had only a limited role in service change. Data derived from the GPPS may be used to benchmark service providers, but refinement of the out-of-hours items is needed.

Risks to patient confidentiality when communicating health information to blind and partially sighted patients.

The research reports on a survey of 228 blind and partially sighted persons in 15 health authorities across Scotland. The survey reports data on patient experience of receiving health information in accessible reading formats. Data indicated that about 90% of blind and partially sighted persons did not receive communications from various NHS health departments in a format that they could read by themselves. The implications for patient privacy, confidentiality and wider impact on life and health care are highlighted. The implications for professional ethical medical practice and for public policy are also discussed. Recommendations for improved practice are made.

Surveillance for ocular hypertension: An evidence synthesis and economic evaluation

OBJECTIVES: To determine effective and efficient monitoring criteria for ocular hypertension [raised intraocular pressure (IOP)] through (i) identification and validation of glaucoma risk prediction models; and (ii) development of models to determine optimal surveillance pathways.

DESIGN: A discrete event simulation economic modelling evaluation. Data from systematic reviews of risk prediction models and agreement between tonometers, secondary analyses of existing datasets (to validate identified risk models and determine optimal monitoring criteria) and public preferences were used to structure and populate the economic model.

SETTING: Primary and secondary care.

PARTICIPANTS: Adults with ocular hypertension (IOP > 21 mmHg) and the public (surveillance preferences).

INTERVENTIONS: We compared five pathways: two based on National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines with monitoring interval and treatment depending on initial risk stratification, 'NICE intensive' (4-monthly to annual monitoring) and 'NICE conservative' (6-monthly to biennial monitoring); two pathways, differing in location (hospital and community), with monitoring biennially and treatment initiated for a ≥ 6% 5-year glaucoma risk; and a 'treat all' pathway involving treatment with a prostaglandin analogue if IOP > 21 mmHg and IOP measured annually in the community.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glaucoma cases detected; tonometer agreement; public preferences; costs; willingness to pay and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS: The best available glaucoma risk prediction model estimated the 5-year risk based on age and ocular predictors (IOP, central corneal thickness, optic nerve damage and index of visual field status). Taking the average of two IOP readings, by tonometry, true change was detected at two years. Sizeable measurement variability was noted between tonometers. There was a general public preference for monitoring; good communication and understanding of the process predicted service value. 'Treat all' was the least costly and 'NICE intensive' the most costly pathway. Biennial monitoring reduced the number of cases of glaucoma conversion compared with a 'treat all' pathway and provided more QALYs, but the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was considerably more than £30,000. The 'NICE intensive' pathway also avoided glaucoma conversion, but NICE-based pathways were either dominated (more costly and less effective) by biennial hospital monitoring or had a ICERs > £30,000. Results were not sensitive to the risk threshold for initiating surveillance but were sensitive to the risk threshold for initiating treatment, NHS costs and treatment adherence.

LIMITATIONS: Optimal monitoring intervals were based on IOP data. There were insufficient data to determine the optimal frequency of measurement of the visual field or optic nerve head for identification of glaucoma. The economic modelling took a 20-year time horizon which may be insufficient to capture long-term benefits. Sensitivity analyses may not fully capture the uncertainty surrounding parameter estimates.

CONCLUSIONS: For confirmed ocular hypertension, findings suggest that there is no clear benefit from intensive monitoring. Consideration of the patient experience is important. A cohort study is recommended to provide data to refine the glaucoma risk prediction model, determine the optimum type and frequency of serial glaucoma tests and estimate costs and patient preferences for monitoring and treatment.

FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Creating an eLearning Resource to Improve Knowledge and Understanding of Pregnancy in the Context of HIV Infection

Patient narratives have much to teach healthcare professionals about the experience of living with a chronic condition. While the biomedical narrative of HIV treatment is hugely encouraging, the narrative of living with HIV continues to be overshadowed by a persuasive perception of stigma. This paper presents how we sought to translate the evidence from a qualitative study of the perspectives of HIV affected pregnant women and expectant fathers on the care they received, from the pre conception to post natal period, into educational material for maternity care practice. Narrative scripts were written based on the original research interviews, with care taken to reflect the key themes from the research. We explore the way in which the qualitative findings bring to life patient and partner experiences and what it means for nurses, midwives and doctors to be prepared to care for couples affected by HIV. In so doing, we challenge the inequity between the dominance of biomedical knowledge over understanding the patient experience in the preparation of health professionals to care for HIV affected women and men who are having a baby or seeking to have a baby.

Assisted standing for Duchenne muscular dystrophy

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: To assess the effects of standing devices and orthoses on musculoskeletal impairments (such as pain, contracture, scoliosis development and bone density) in people with DMD, and secondarily to determine their effect on quality of life, participation in activities, and patient experience.

The view from over there:reframing the OSCE through the experience of standardised patient raters

Ratings awarded by standardised patients (SPs) in UK objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are typically based on humanistic (non-technical) skills and are complementary to clinician-examiner ratings. In psychometric terms, SP ratings appear to differ from examiner ratings and improve reliability. For the first time, we used qualitative methods from a constructivist perspective to explore SP experiences of rating, and consider how these impact our understanding of assessment.

Medical Education Podcast: The view from over there: reframing the OSCE through the experience of standardised patient raters

Podcast

Establishing a population-based patient-reported outcomes study (PROMs) using national cancer registries across two jurisdictions: The Prostate Cancer Treatment, your experience (PiCTure) study

Objective: To establish an international patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) study among prostate cancer survivors, up to 18 years postdiagnosis, in two countries with different healthcare systems and ethical frameworks. Design: A cross-sectional, postal survey of prostate cancer survivors sampled and recruited via two population-based cancer registries. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) evaluated patients for eligibility to participate. Questionnaires contained validated instruments to assess health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, including QLQ-C30, QLQPR-25, EQ-5D-5L, 21-question Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and the Decisional Regret Scale. Setting: Republic of Ireland (RoI) and Northern Ireland (NI). Primary outcome measures: Registration completeness, predictors of eligibility and response, data missingness, unweighted and weighted PROMs. Results: Prostate cancer registration was 80% (95% CI 75% to 84%) and 91% (95% CI 89% to 93%) complete 2 years postdiagnosis in NI and RoI, respectively. Of 12 322 survivors sampled from registries, 53% (n=6559) were classified as eligible following HCP screening. In the multivariate analysis, significant predictors of eligibility were: being ≤59 years of age at diagnosis (p<0.001), short-term survivor (<5 years postdiagnosis; p<0.001) and from RoI (p<0.001). 3348 completed the questionnaire, yielding a 54% adjusted response rate. 13% of men or their families called the study freephone with queries for assistance with questionnaire completion or to talk about their experience. Significant predictors of response in multivariate analysis were: being ≤59 years at diagnosis (p<0.001) and from RoI (p=0.016). Mean number of missing questions in validated instruments ranged from 0.12 (SD 0.71; EQ-5D-5L) to 3.72 (SD 6.30; QLQ-PR25). Weighted and unweighted mean EQ-5D-5L, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25 scores were similar, as were the weighted and unweighted prevalences of depression, anxiety and distress. Conclusions: It was feasible to perform PROMs studies across jurisdictions, using cancer registries as sampling frames; we amassed one of the largest, international, population-based data set of prostate cancer survivors. We highlight improvements which could inform future PROMs studies, including utilising general practitioners to assess eligibility and providing a freephone service.