How do frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement? Findings from an ethnographic case study evaluation

Abstract

Objectives Improving patient experience is widely regarded as a key component of health care quality. However, while a considerable amount of data are collected about patient experience, there are concerns this information is not always used to improve care. This study explored whether and how frontline staff use patient experience data for service improvement. Methods We conducted a year-long ethnographic case study evaluation, including 299 hours of observations and 95 interviews, of how frontline staff in six medical wards at different hospital sites in the United Kingdom used patient experience data for improvement. Results In every site, staff undertook quality improvement projects using a range of data sources. Teams of health care practitioners and ancillary staff engaged collectively in a process of sense-making using formal and informal sources of patient experience data. While survey data were popular, ‘soft’ intelligence – such as patients’ stories, informal comments and observations – also informed staff’s improvement plans, without always being recognized as data. Teams with staff from different professional backgrounds and grades tended to make more progress than less diverse teams, being able to draw on a wider net of practical, organizational and social resources, support and skills, which we describe as team-based capital. Conclusions Organizational recognition, or rejection, of specific forms of patient experience intelligence as ‘data’ affects whether staff feel the data are actionable. Teams combining a diverse range of staff generated higher levels of ‘team-based capital’ for quality improvement than those adopting a single disciplinary approach. This may be a key mechanism for achieving person-centred improvement in health care.

'Team capital’ in quality improvement teams: findings from an ethnographic study of front-line quality improvement in the NHS

“…Our analysis responds directly to Rowland et al's call above by introducing the concept of 'team capital' to explain how teams effect change in QI projects. While we have referred to this concept elsewhere, 12 in this paper, we develop the theoretical basis of our findings, and illustrate this with empirical examples.…”

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

“…Our model differs from patient advisory councils reported in the literature in two components [4][5][6]: systematic attendance by a member of the governing board and a member of the healthcare team of the clinic, and facilitation by patient-experts who were not affiliated with the clinic. These two components, both mentioned as strengths of the model by participants, are not found in patient councils reported in the literature [7][8][9].…”

“…At the beginning of the study (N = 22) 5 (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10) At the end of the study (N = 15) 8 (4-9)…”

Whose data is it anyway? Patient experience and service improvement

“…report on an ethnographic study of how frontline staff in six NHS hospitals in England might use patient experience data to improve the quality of health care. 1 The study findings are an important contribution to understanding the practical, everyday work undertaken by teams of frontline staff to improve the quality of the care and services they provide. They also suggest how staff might be better supported to work towards person-centred quality improvement.…”