ObjectivesThe shift to the patient-centred care (PCC) model as a healthcare delivery paradigm calls for systematic measurement and evaluation. In an attempt to develop patient-centred quality indicators (PC-QIs), this study aimed to identify quality indicators that can be used to measure PCC.MethodsDesign: scoping review. Data Sources: studies were identified through searching seven electronic databases and the grey literature. Search terms included quality improvement, quality indicators, healthcare quality and PCC. Eligibility Criteria: articles were included if they mentioned development and/or implementation of PC-QIs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: extracted data included study characteristics (country, year of publication and type of study/article), patients’ inclusion in the development of indicators and type of patient populations and point of care if applicable (eg, in-patient, out-patient and primary care).ResultsA total 184 full-text peer-reviewed articles were assessed for eligibility for inclusion; of these, 9 articles were included in this review. From the non–peer-reviewed literature, eight documents met the criteria for inclusion in this study. This review revealed the heterogeneity describing and defining the nature of PC-QIs. Most PC-QIs were presented as PCC measures and identified as guidelines, surveys or recommendations, and therefore cannot be classified as actual PC-QIs. Out of 502 ways to measure PCC, only 25 were considered to be actual PC-QIs. None of the identified articles implemented the quality indicators in care settings.ConclusionThe identification of PC-QIs is a key first step in laying the groundwork to develop evidence-based PC-QIs. Research is needed to continue the development and implementation of PC-QIs for healthcare quality improvement.

No abstract

With our findings, we indicate areas in which pediatric inpatient care is being delivered well, as well as targeted areas for quality improvement. Our results may be highlighted in future comparisons among others who have adopted the Child HCAHPS.

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to identify patient-centred quality indicators (PC-QI) and measures for measuring cultural competence in healthcare.DesignScoping review.SettingAll care settings.Search strategyA search of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts and SocINDEX, and the grey literature was conducted to identify relevant studies. Studies were included if they reported indicators or measures for cultural competence. We differentiated PC-QIs from measures: PC-QIs were identified as a unit of measurement of the performance of the healthcare system, which reflects what matters to patients and families, and to any individual that is in contact with healthcare services. In contrast, measures evaluate delivery of patient-centred care, in the form of a survey and/or checklist. Data collected included publication year and type, country, ethnocultural groups and mention of quality indicator and/or measures for cultural competence.ResultsThe search yielded a total of 786 abstracts and sources, of which 16 were included in the review. Twelve out of 16 sources reported measures for cultural competence, for a total of 10 measures. Identified domains from the measures included: physical environment, staff awareness of attitudes and values, diversity training and communication. Two out of 16 sources reported PC-QIs for cultural competence (92 structure and process indicators, and 48 outcome indicators). There was greater representation of structure and process indicators and measures for cultural competence, compared with outcome indicators.ConclusionMonitoring and evaluating patient-centred care for ethnocultural communities allows for improvements to be made in the delivery of culturally competent healthcare. Future research should include development of PC-QIs for measuring cultural competence that also reflect cultural humility, and the involvement of ethnocultural communities in the development and implementation of these indicators.

Albertans4HealthResearch, supported by the Alberta Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research Patient Engagement Team, hosted a virtual round table discussion to develop a list of considerations for successful partnerships in patient-oriented research. The group, which consists of active patient partners across the Canadian province of Alberta and some research staff engaged in patient-oriented research, considered advice for academic researchers on how to best partner with patients and community members on health research projects. The group identified four main themes, aligned with the national strategy for patient-oriented research (SPOR) patient engagement framework, highlighting important considerations for researchers from the patient perspective, providing practical ways to implement SPOR’s key principles: inclusiveness, support, mutual respect, and co-building. This commentary considers the process behind this engagement exercise and offers advice directly from active patient research partners on how to fulfill the operational patient engagement mandate. Academic research teams can use this guidance when considering how to work together with patient partners and community members.

A positive and successful transition into University is crucial if students are to stay the course in higher education and experience successful outcomes. However, challenges exist in ensuring a connected transition from secondary and further education to higher education that is inclusive and supports the diversity in our current undergraduate student body. We set out to explore the diverse experiences that first year students report about their recent transition to a post-1992 University. We were particularly interested in how these experiences and challenges differed by ethnicity. This is incredibly important given the disparity, recognised in the sector, in the attainment of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) students compared to their White counterparts and particularly pertinent that this trend reverses attainment patterns in secondary education. This paper summarises some of our key findings in determining the challenges facing students from different backgrounds in their transition to university. It argues that Universities will have to change their transition and wider offer to ensure that diverse students feel welcomed and develop a sense belonging in Higher Education in order for them to achieve successful outcomes.

Background In patient-oriented research (POR), patients contribute their valuable knowledge and lived-experiences to work together as active research partners at all stages of the health research cycle. However, research looking to understand how patient research partners (PRPs) and researchers work together in meaningful and collaborative ways remains limited. This study aims to evaluate patient engagement with the RePORT Patient Advisory Council (PAC) and to identify barriers and facilitators to meaningful patient engagement encountered within research partnerships involving patient research partners and researchers. Methods The RePORT PAC members included nine PRPs and nine researchers (clinician-researchers, research staff, patient engagement experts) from both Alberta and British Columbia. All members were contacted and invited to complete an anonymous online survey (Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation (PPEET) tool) at two different project times points. The PAC was invited for a semi-structured interview to gain in-depth understanding of their experiences working together. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and the data was thematically analyzed with the support of a qualitative analysis software, NVivo. Results A total of nine PRPs (100%) and three researchers (33%) participated in the baseline survey in February 2022 while six PRPs (67%) responded and three researchers (33%) completed the follow up survey in May 2022. For the semi-structured interviews, nine PRPs (100%) and six researchers (67%) participated. According to the survey results, PAC members agreed that the supports (e. g. training, compensation) needed to contribute to the project were available throughout the project. The survey responses also showed that most members of the PAC felt their opinions and views were heard. Responses to the survey regarding diversity within the PAC were mixed. There were many suggestions for improving diversity and collaboration provided by PAC members during the semi-structured interviews. PAC members mentioned that PAC PRPs informed the co-development of research materials such as recruitment posters and interview guides for the RePORT study. Conclusions Through fostering a collaborative environment, we can engage a diverse group of people to work together meaningfully in health research. We have identified what works well, and areas for improvement within our research partnership involving PRPs and researchers as well as recommendations for POR projects more broadly, going forward.

BackgroundPalliative care is an approach that improves the quality of life of patients and families facing challenges associated with life-threatening illness. In order to effectively deliver palliative care, patient and caregiver priorities need to be incorporated in advanced cancer care.AimThis study identified experiences of patients living with advanced colorectal cancer and their caregivers to inform the development of an early palliative care pathway.DesignQualitative patient-oriented study.Settings/participantsPatients receiving care at two cancer centres were interviewed using semistructured telephone interviews to explore their experiences with cancer care services received prior to a new developed pathway. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and the data were thematically analysed.ResultsFrom our study, we identified gaps in advanced cancer care that would benefit from an early palliative approach to care. 15 patients and 7 caregivers from Edmonton and Calgary were interviewed over the phone. Participants identified the following gaps in advanced cancer care: poor communication of diagnosis, lack of communication between healthcare providers, role and involvement of the family physician, lack of understanding of palliative care and advance care planning.ConclusionsEarly palliative approaches to care should consider consistent and routine delivery of palliative care information, collaborations among different disciplines such as oncology, primary care and palliative care, and engagement of patients and family caregivers in the development of care pathways.