Background Patient engagement (PE) in health‐care planning and improvement is a growing practice. We lack evidence‐based guidance for PE, particularly in hospital settings. This study explored how to optimize PE in hospitals. Methods This study was based on qualitative interviews with individuals in various roles at hospitals with high PE capacity. We asked how patients were engaged, rationale for approaches chosen and solutions for key challenges. We identified themes using content analysis. Results Participants included 40 patient/family advisors, PE managers, clinicians and executives from 9 hospitals (2 < 100 beds, 4 100 + beds, 3 teaching). Hospitals most frequently employed collaboration (standing committees, project teams), followed by blended approaches (collaboration + consultation), and then consultation (surveys, interviews). Those using collaboration emphasized integrating perspectives into decisions; those using consultation emphasized capturing diverse perspectives. Strategies to support engagement included engaging diverse patients, prioritizing what benefits many, matching patients to projects, training patients and health‐care workers, involving a critical volume of patients, requiring at least one patient for quorum, asking involved patients to review outputs, linking PE with the Board of Directors and championing PE by managers, staff and committee/team chairs. Conclusion This research generated insight on concrete approaches and strategies that hospitals can use to optimize PE for planning and improvement. On‐going research is needed to understand how to recruit diverse patients and best balance blended consultation/collaboration approaches. Patient or public contribution Three patient research partners with hospital PE experience informed study objectives and interview questions.
Purpose: Given barriers of patient-centred care (PCC) among physicians and trainees, this study assessed how medical schools addressed PCC in curriculum. Method: The authors used content analysis to describe PCC in publicly-available curriculum documents of Canadian medical schools guided by McCormack's PCC Framework, and reported results using summary statistics and text examples. Results: The authors retrieved 1459 documents from 16 medical schools (median 49.5, range 16-301). Few mentioned PCC (301, 21.2%), and even fewer thoroughly or accurately described PCC. Significantly more clerkship versus pre-clerkship (24.0% vs 12.6%, p < 0.00001), and elective compared with core course descriptions (24.7% vs 14.9%, p < 0.00001) mentioned PCC. The domain of foster a healing relationship was common (79.0%) compared with other domains: address concerns (16.5%), exchange information (14.9%), enable self-care (10.4%), share decisions (4.5%), and manage uncertainty (1.3%). Conclusions: Overall, few documents mentioned or described PCC or related concepts. This varied by school, and was more frequent in clerkship and elective courses, suggesting that student exposure may be brief and variable. Thus, it remains unclear if medical students are fully exposed to what PCC means and how to implement it. Future research is needed to confirm if PCC content in medical curriculum is lacking.
Background Women’s health (WH) includes a broad array of concerns and challenges that affect health across the lifespan. Considerable research shows that women continue to experience disparities in access to and quality of care. Apart from surveys of medical trainees and faculty, little research and none in Canada examined medical curriculum for WH. This study assessed how Canadian medical schools integrate WH in their curriculum. Methods We used deductive and summative content analysis to describe instances and the nature of WH topics in program and course descriptions that were publicly-available on web sites of Canadian medical schools. We reported results using summary statistics and text examples. We employed a framework, tested in our prior research, that included mention of women’s health principles and practices relevant to any health concern or condition including factors (e.g. sex, gender, social determinants) that influence health, and access to or quality of care. Results We retrieved 1459 documents from 16 medical schools (median 49.5, range 16 to 301). Few mentioned WH (125, 8.6 %), and the quantity of mentions varied by school (range 0.0–37.5 %). Pre-clerkship course documents more frequently mentioned WH (61/374, 17.3 %, chi square 43.2, p < 0.00001) compared with clerkship course documents (58/1067, 5.4 %). Core course documents more frequently mentioned WH (72/542, 13.3 %, chi square 29.0, p < 0.00001) compared with elective course documents WH (47/899, 5.2 %). Overall, documents more frequently referred to the WH domain of social determinants of health (88, 70.4 %). Few documents addressed women’s health (21, 16.8 %), sex or gender (19, 15.2 %), other considerations (15.2 %) or principles/components of women’s health (2, 1.6 %). Most documents that mentioned WH provided little detail about what those concepts referred to or how to optimize WH. Conclusions Based on program and course descriptions, WH may not be well-integrated at Canadian medical schools, and future physicians may not be consistently exposed to the full breadth of WH. This reveals opportunities for enhancing WH in the medical curriculum. Future research is needed to engage stakeholders including women in developing, implementing and evaluating competencies and corresponding curriculum that reflect the full range of WH concepts and practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.