Literature DB >> 25733439

Developing patient reference groups within general practice: a mixed-methods study.

Jane Smiddy1, Joanne Reay2, Stephen Peckham3, Lorraine Williams4, Patricia Wilson3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) are required to demonstrate meaningful patient and public engagement and involvement (PPEI). Recent health service reforms have included financial incentives for general practices to develop patient reference groups (PRGs). AIM: To explore the impact of the patient participation direct enhanced service (DES) on development of PRGs, the influence of PRGs on decision making within general practice, and their interface with CCGs. DESIGN AND
SETTING: A mixed-methods approach within three case study sites in England.
METHOD: Three case study sites were tracked for 18 months as part of an evaluation of PPEI in commissioning. A sub-study focused on PRGs utilising documentary and web-based analysis; results were mapped against findings of the main study.
RESULTS: Evidence highlighted variations in the establishment of PRGs, with the number of active PRGs via practice websites ranging from 27% to 93%. Such groups were given a number of descriptions such as patient reference groups, patient participation groups, and patient forums. Data analysis highlighted that the mode of operation varied between virtual and tangible groups and whether they were GP- or patient-led, such analysis enabled the construction of a typology of PRGs. Evidence reviewed suggested that groups functioned within parameters of the DES with activities limited to practice level. Data analysis highlighted a lack of strategic vision in relation to such groups, particularly their role within an overall patient and PPEI framework).
CONCLUSION: Findings identified diversity in the operationalisation of PRGs. Their development does not appear linked to a strategic vision or overall PPEI framework. Although local pragmatic issues are important to patients, GPs must ensure that PRGs develop strategic direction if health reforms are to be addressed. © British Journal of General Practice 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  general practice; incentives; patient groups; typology

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25733439      PMCID: PMC4337306          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp15X683989

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  7 in total

1.  Involving the public in general practice in an urban district: levels and type of activity and perceptions of obstacles.

Authors:  Ian Brown
Journal:  Health Soc Care Community       Date:  2000-07

2.  Primary care-led commissioning: applying lessons from the past to the early development of clinical commissioning groups in England.

Authors:  Kath Checkland; Anna Coleman; Imelda McDermott; Julia Segar; Rosalind Miller; Christina Petsoulas; Andrew Wallace; Stephen Harrison; Stephen Peckham
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  The BMJ and the Big Society.

Authors:  Trisha Greenhalgh
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-06-14

4.  Patient participation groups.

Authors:  Shobhana Nagraj; Stephen Gillam
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-04-21

5.  Sidestepping questions of legitimacy: how community representatives manoeuvre to effect change in a health service.

Authors:  Sally Nathan; Niamh Stephenson; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  Health (London)       Date:  2013-01-30

6.  How does satisfaction with the health-care system relate to patient experience?

Authors:  Sara N Bleich; Emre Ozaltin; Christopher K L Murray
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 9.408

7.  Patient participation groups in general practice in the National Health Service.

Authors:  Ian Brown
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.318

  7 in total
  5 in total

1.  Challenges Facing Healthwatch, a New Consumer Champion in England.

Authors:  Pam Carter; Graham Martin
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2016-01-21

2.  "They heard our voice!" patient engagement councils in community-based primary care practices: a participatory action research pilot study.

Authors:  Julie Haesebaert; Isabelle Samson; Hélène Lee-Gosselin; Sabrina Guay-Bélanger; Jean-François Proteau; Guy Drouin; Chantal Guimont; Luc Vigneault; Annie Poirier; Priscille-Nice Sanon; Geneviève Roch; Marie-Ève Poitras; Annie LeBlanc; France Légaré
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2020-09-21

Review 3.  Public governance of medical artificial intelligence research in the UK: an integrated multi-scale model.

Authors:  Francis McKay; Bethany J Williams; Graham Prestwich; Darren Treanor; Nina Hallowell
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2022-05-21

Review 4.  Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.

Authors:  Dianne Lowe; Rebecca Ryan; Lina Schonfeld; Bronwen Merner; Louisa Walsh; Lisa Graham-Wisener; Sophie Hill
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-15

5.  How to engage patients in research and quality improvement in community-based primary care settings: protocol for a participatory action research pilot study.

Authors:  Julie Haesebaert; Isabelle Samson; Hélène Lee-Gosselin; Sabrina Guay-Bélanger; Jean-François Proteau; Guy Drouin; Chantal Guimont; Luc Vigneault; Annie Poirier; Priscille-Nice Sanon; Geneviève Roch; Marie-Ève Poitras; Annie LeBlanc; France Légaré
Journal:  Res Involv Engagem       Date:  2018-10-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.