Patient participation in pulmonary interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications following cardiac surgery

McTier, Lauren; Botti, Mari; Duke, Maxine

doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2015.04.001

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This resulted in a higher proportion of participants in the passive control preference group (44%, n=22) than the active (30.8%, n=16) and shared control preference groups (25%, n=13). In this study, the proportion of patients with passive control preference for participation in medical decision-making was higher than previously reported in samples of acute medical patients (30%–34%)33 and postoperative cardiac surgery patients (preference for decisions about postoperative exercises) (22%) 20. Alternatively, higher proportions of patients with acute cancer (58%)27 and infectious diseases (61%)29 have reported passive control preference for participation in decisions about symptom management and medical care, respectively.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 71%

Patient participation in inpatient ward rounds on acute inpatient medical wards: a descriptive study

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMeaningful partnering with patients is advocated to enhance care delivery. Little is known about how this is operationalised at the point of care during hospital ward rounds, where decision-making concerning patient care frequently occurs.ObjectiveDescribe participation of patients, with differing preferences for participation, during ward rounds in acute medical inpatient services.MethodsNaturalistic, multimethod design. Data were collected using surveys and observations of ward rounds at two hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Using convenience sampling, a stratified sample of acute general medical patients were recruited. Prior to observation and interview, patient responses to the Control Preference Scale were used to stratify them into three groups representing diverse participation preferences: active control where the patient makes decisions; shared control where the patient prefers to make decisions jointly with clinicians; and passive control where the patient prefers clinicians make decisions.ResultsOf the 52 patients observed over 133 ward rounds, 30.8% (n=16) reported an active control preference for participation in decision-making during ward rounds, 25% (n=13) expressed shared control preference and 44.2% (n=23) expressed low control preference. Patients’ participation was observed in 75% (n=85) of ward rounds, but few rounds (18%, n=20) involved patient contribution to decisions about their care. Clinicians prompted patient participation in 54% of rounds; and in 15% patients initiated their own participation. Thematic analysis of qualitative observation and patient interview data revealed two themes, supporting patient capability and clinician-led opportunity, that contributed to patient participation or non-participation in ward rounds.ConclusionsParticipation in ward rounds was similar for patients irrespective of control preference. This study demonstrates the need to better understand clinician roles in supporting strategies that promote patient participation in day-to-day hospital care.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 71%

Patient participation in inpatient ward rounds on acute inpatient medical wards: a descriptive study

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular, the frequent interaction between patients and nurses, which builds the nurse–patient relationship, places nurses in a key role to foster patient engagement (24). Yet, researchers have demonstrated that nurses’ encouragement of patient engagement is sporadic (25) and nursing interventions to promote patient engagement are not always individualised to patients, instead following a standardised approach (26). Thus, examining how nurses can action the Interactive Care Model could in turn improve patient engagement in practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting patient engagement: a scoping review of actions that align with the interactive care model

Tobiano

Jerofke‐Owen

Marshall

2020

Scandinavian Caring Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Conceptual clarity for the term patient engagement is growing. However, there is variability in patient engagement in healthcare, which could be due to the absence of models to guide practice or a myriad of organisational, nurse and patient factors. The recently developed ‘Interactive Care Model’ provides guidance on how to genuinely promote individualised patient engagement. An understanding of how to action this model in nursing is required. Aims The aim of this scoping review was to examine actions in the published scientific literature that align with the Interactive Care Model, in the context of nursing care of hospitalised patients. Data sources In 2018, searches of CINAHL, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and PsycInfo were undertaken, for literature published between 2008 and 2018. This was followed by citation tracking. Review methods Two researchers screened and selected studies using prespecified criteria. Data were charted into a pre‐established tool and collated and summarised using numerical summaries and deductive content analysis. For content analysis, categories were generated from the ‘Interactive Care Model’. Findings Forty‐three studies were included in the review, 33 noninterventional and 10 interventional studies. Publications on the topic are increasing in number over time, with most conducted in Europe with patient or nurse participants. Forty‐two actions were found in the literature that aligned with the ‘Interactive Care Model’. The actions uncovered differed between intervention and noninterventional studies; in interventional studies actions were formalised. Conclusions This review provides an overview of actions that promote patient engagement and could inform implementation of the Interactive Care Model and the design and testing of patient engagement interventions to support the model. There are opportunities to explore latter phases of the Interactive Care Model to foster patient engagement in self‐management and to motivate patients’ management of healthcare beyond hospitalisation. Further, there is a need to rigorously evaluate patient engagement interventions.

show abstract

“…The value of patient participation has been recognized in health care worldwide as a means of enhancing quality of care (Jangland, Carlsson, Lundgren, & Gunningberg, ) and ensuring patient safety (Andersson, Frank, Willman, Sandman, & Hansebo, ; McTier, Botti, & Duke, ). However, the concept of patient participation is unclear (Li, Li, & Yang, ; Schoeb & Bürge, ) and there is emerging evidence of a lack of congruence between patients' and clinicians' understanding of participation (Eldh, Ekman, & Ehnfors, ; Papastavrou et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptions of patient participation in symptom management: A qualitative study with cancer patients, doctors, and nurses

Chen

Cohen

Livingston

et al. 2018

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Patient participation in pulmonary interventions to reduce postoperative pulmonary complications following cardiac surgery

Cited by 13 publications

References 29 publications

Patient participation in inpatient ward rounds on acute inpatient medical wards: a descriptive study

Patient participation in inpatient ward rounds on acute inpatient medical wards: a descriptive study

Promoting patient engagement: a scoping review of actions that align with the interactive care model

Perceptions of patient participation in symptom management: A qualitative study with cancer patients, doctors, and nurses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About