Literature DB >> 30477354

Patient and public involvement in the design, administration and evaluation of patient feedback tools, an example in psychiatry: a systematic review and critical interpretative synthesis.

Rebecca Baines1, John Donovan2, Sam Regan de Bere3, Julian Archer4, Ray Jones5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patient feedback is considered integral to healthcare design, delivery and reform. However, while there is a strong policy commitment to evidencing patient and public involvement (PPI) in the design of patient feedback tools, it remains unclear whether this happens in practice.
METHODS: A systematic review using thematic analysis and critical interpretative synthesis of peer-reviewed and grey literature published between 2007 and 2017 exploring the presence of PPI in the design, administration and evaluation of patient feedback tools for practising psychiatrists. The research process was carried out in collaboration with a volunteer mental health patient research partner.
RESULTS: Fourteen articles (10 peer-reviewed, four grey literature) discussing the development of nine patient feedback tools were included. Six of the nine tools reviewed were designed from a professional perspective only. Tool content and its categorization primarily remained at the professional's discretion. Patient participation rates, presence of missing data and psychometric validation were used to determine validity and patient acceptability. In most instances, patients remained passive recipients with limited opportunity to actively influence change at any stage. No article reviewed reported PPI in all aspects of tool design, administration or evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patient feedback tools are designed, administered and evaluated from the professional perspective only. Existing tools appear to assume that: professional and patient agendas are synonymous; psychometric validation is indicative of patient acceptability; and psychiatric patients do not have the capacity or desire to be involved. Future patient feedback tools should be co-produced from the outset to ensure they are valued by all those involved. A reconsideration of the purpose of patient feedback, and what constitutes valid patient feedback, is also required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  health policy; mental health; patient and public involvement; patient experience; psychiatry; systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30477354     DOI: 10.1177/1355819618811866

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy        ISSN: 1355-8196


  2 in total

1.  The quality in psychiatric care-Addiction outpatient instrument: Psychometric properties and patient views of the quality of care.

Authors:  Agneta Schröder; Kurt Skårberg; Lars-Olov Lundqvist
Journal:  Nurs Open       Date:  2021-03-15

2.  A psychological intervention for suicide applied to non-affective psychosis: the CARMS (Cognitive AppRoaches to coMbatting Suicidality) randomised controlled trial protocol.

Authors:  Patricia A Gooding; Daniel Pratt; Yvonne Awenat; Richard Drake; Rachel Elliott; Richard Emsley; Charlotte Huggett; Steven Jones; Navneet Kapur; Fiona Lobban; Sarah Peters; Gillian Haddock
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 3.630

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.