Annegret F Hannawa1, Albert W Wu2, Anastasia Kolyada3, Anastasia Potemkina4, Liam J Donaldson5. 1. Center for the Advancement of Healthcare Quality & Patient Safety (CAHQS), Faculty of Communication, Culture & Society, Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), Via G. Buffi 13, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland. Electronic address: hannawaa@usi.ch. 2. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Hampton House 653, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. Electronic address: awu@jhu.edu. 3. Center for the Advancement of Healthcare Quality & Patient Safety (CAHQS), Faculty of Communication, Culture & Society, Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), Via G. Buffi 13, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland. Electronic address: stacy-7@hotmail.com. 4. Center for the Advancement of Healthcare Quality & Patient Safety (CAHQS), Faculty of Communication, Culture & Society, Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), Via G. Buffi 13, 6900 Lugano, Switzerland. Electronic address: apotemkina@mail.ru. 5. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel Street, London WC1E 7HT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: liam.donaldson@lshtm.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Existing quality of care frameworks insufficiently integrate the perspectives of physicians, nurses and patients. We collected narrative accounts from these three groups to explore if their perspectives might add new content to these existing definitions. METHODS: Ninety-seven descriptions of "good" and "poor" care episodes were collected from a convenience sample of physicians, nurses and outpatients at eight regional hospitals. Two coders classified the narrative contents into themes related to structures, processes and outcomes of care. RESULTS: The physicians, nurses and patients raised the following "quality of care" aspects: Successful communication among staff, with patients and care companions; staff motivation; frequency of knowledge errors; prioritization of patient-preferred outcomes; institutional emphasis on building "quality cultures"; and organizational implementation of fluid system procedures. CONCLUSION: Respondents primarily referred to care processes in their descriptions of "quality of care." "Hippocratic pride" (in response to care successes) and "Rapid reactivity" (in response to (near) failures) emerged as two new outcome indicators of high-quality care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study provides a first qualitative fundament for understanding the components of "quality of care" from a triangulated frontline perspective. Future research needs to validate our findings with quantitative data to explore their usefulness for completing existing quality frameworks.
OBJECTIVE: Existing quality of care frameworks insufficiently integrate the perspectives of physicians, nurses and patients. We collected narrative accounts from these three groups to explore if their perspectives might add new content to these existing definitions. METHODS: Ninety-seven descriptions of "good" and "poor" care episodes were collected from a convenience sample of physicians, nurses and outpatients at eight regional hospitals. Two coders classified the narrative contents into themes related to structures, processes and outcomes of care. RESULTS: The physicians, nurses and patients raised the following "quality of care" aspects: Successful communication among staff, with patients and care companions; staff motivation; frequency of knowledge errors; prioritization of patient-preferred outcomes; institutional emphasis on building "quality cultures"; and organizational implementation of fluid system procedures. CONCLUSION: Respondents primarily referred to care processes in their descriptions of "quality of care." "Hippocratic pride" (in response to care successes) and "Rapid reactivity" (in response to (near) failures) emerged as two new outcome indicators of high-quality care. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This study provides a first qualitative fundament for understanding the components of "quality of care" from a triangulated frontline perspective. Future research needs to validate our findings with quantitative data to explore their usefulness for completing existing quality frameworks.