Standardising personalised diabetes care across European health settings: A person-centred outcome set agreed in a multinational Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE: Standardised person-reported outcomes (PRO) data can contextualise clinical outcomes enabling precision diabetes monitoring and care. Comprehensive outcome sets can guide this process, but their implementation in routine diabetes care has remained challenging and unsuccessful at international level. We aimed to address this by developing a person-centred outcome set for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, using a methodology with prospects for increased implementability and sustainability in international health settings. METHODS: We used a three-round questionnaire-based Delphi study to reach consensus on the outcome set. We invited key stakeholders from 19 countries via purposive snowball sampling, namely people with diabetes (N = 94), healthcare professionals (N = 65), industry (N = 22) and health authorities (N = 3), to vote on the relevance and measurement frequency of 64 previously identified clinical and person-reported outcomes. Subsequent consensus meetings concluded the study. RESULTS: The list of preliminary outcomes was shortlisted via the consensus process to 46 outcomes (27 clinical outcomes and 19 PROs). Two main collection times were recommended: (1) linked to a medical visit (e.g. diabetes-specific well-being, symptoms and psychological health) and (2) annually (e.g. clinical data, general well-being and diabetes self management-related outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: PROs are often considered in a non-standardised way in routine diabetes care. We propose a person-centred outcome set for diabetes, specifically considering psychosocial and behavioural aspects, which was agreed by four international key stakeholder groups. It guides standardised collection of meaningful outcomes at scale, supporting individual and population level healthcare decision making. It will be implemented and tested in Europe as part of the H2O project.

Medicine in the marketplace: clinician and patient views on commercial influences on assisted reproductive technology.

RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the views and experiences of patient and expert stakeholders on the positive and negative impacts of commercial influences on the provision of assisted reproductive technology (ART) services, and what are their suggestions for governance reforms? DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 ART industry experts from across Australia and New Zealand and 25 patients undergoing ART from metropolitan and regional Australia, between September 2020 and September 2021. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Expert and patient participants considered that commercial forces influence the provision of ART in a number of positive ways - increasing sustainability, ensuring consistency in standards and providing patients with greater choice. Participants also considered commercial forces to have a number of negative impacts, including increased costs to government and patients; the excessive use of interventions that lack sufficient evidence to be considered part of standard care; inadequately informed consent (particularly with regard to financial information); and threats to patient-provider relationships and patient-centred care. Participants varied in whether they believed that professional self-regulation is sufficient. While recognizing the benefits of commercial investment in healthcare, many considered that regulatory reforms, as well as organizational cultural initiatives, are needed as means to ensure the primacy of patient well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The views expressed in this study should be systematically and critically examined to derive insights into how best to govern ART. These insights may also inform the design and delivery of other types of healthcare that are provided in the private sector.

Self-management support with the Respiratory Adherence Care Enhancer instrument in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: An implementation trial.

AIM: Suboptimal self-management with controller inhalation therapy in asthma and COPD is frequently observed with poor treatment outcomes. The developed 'Respiratory Adherence Care Enhancer' (RACE) instrument identifies and addresses individual barriers to self-management with a theoretical underpinning. This study investigates the feasibility of pharmaceutical support with this instrument. METHODS: An implementation trial was conducted with asthma and COPD patients in 5 community pharmacies in the Netherlands. Patients were allocated to standard care or add-on support with the RACE instrument. Patients were invited to complete the RACE questionnaire at baseline, 5-week and 10-week follow-up. Barrier profiles were accessible for the intervention group with subsequent consultations at baseline and 5-weeks. Experiences were collected from patients and consultants with a questionnaire and reported findings. Primary endpoints focused on the acceptability, practicality and implementation process. Secondary endpoints included between-group differences in barrier and disease control outcomes from baseline at 10-weeks follow-up. RESULTS: In total, 84 patients were included; 48 were assigned to intervention and 36 to standard care. Patient satisfaction of support with the RACE instrument was high (71%). Patients felt motivated, reassured and more confident about their disease management. Consultants reported an increase in awareness of patient barriers. Patient recognition of barrier profiles was 83.9% (±12.9%). The barrier inhaler techniques decreased significantly for the intervention group at follow-up with odds ratio 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.91). No significant differences were observed for changes in number of barriers and disease control. CONCLUSION: Self-management support with the RACE instrument is feasible and appreciated, facilitating behaviour change with patient-centred pharmaceutical care in asthma and COPD.

Understanding the extent to which PROMs and PREMs used with older people with severe frailty capture their multidimensional needs: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Older people with severe frailty are nearing the end of life but their needs are often unknown and unmet. Systematic ways to capture and measure the needs of this group are required. Patient reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) & Patient reported Experience Measures (PREMs) are possible tools to assist this. AIM: To establish whether, and in what ways, the needs of older people living with severe frailty are represented within existing PROMs and PREMs and to examine the extent to which the measures have been validated with this patient group. DESIGN: The scoping review follows the method of Arksey and O'Malley. RESULTS: Seventeen papers from 9 countries meeting the inclusion criteria and 18 multi-dimensional measures were identified: 17 PROMs, and 1 PROM with PREM elements. Seven out of the 18 measures had evidence of being tested for validity with those with frailty. No measure was developed specifically for a frail population. Using the adapted framework of palliative need, five measures covered all five domains of palliative need (IPOS, ICECAP-SCM, PDI, WHOQOL-BREF, WHOQOL-OLD). The coverage of items within the domains varied between the measures. CONCLUSION: Existing PROMs and PREMs are not well designed for what we know about the needs of older people with severe frailty. Future research should firstly focus on adapting and validating the existing measures to ensure they are fit for purpose, and secondly on developing a better understanding of how measures are used to deliver/better person-centred care.

When addressing resources is not enough: lessons learned from a respectful maternal and neonatal care provider training intervention evaluation in Kenya and Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Respectful Maternal and Neonatal Care (RMNC) maintains and respects a pregnant person's dignity, privacy, informed choice, and confidentiality free from harm and mistreatment. It strives for a positive pregnancy and post-pregnancy care experiences for pregnant people and their families, avoiding any form of obstetric violence. Though RMNC is now widely accepted as a priority in obstetric care, there is a gap in resources and support tools for healthcare wproviders to clearly understand the issue and change long-established practices such as non-humanized caesarean sections. MSI Reproductive Choices (MSI) manages 31 maternities across 7 countries with a zero-tolerance approach towards disrespectful maternity care and obstetric violence. MSI developed and implemented a hybrid training package, which includes an online module and 1-day in-person workshop that allows healthcare providers to explore their beliefs and attitudes towards RMNC. It leverages methodologies used in Values-Clarification-Attitudes-Transformation (VCAT) workshops and behaviour change approaches. METHODS: The impact of this training intervention was measured from the healthcare providers' and patients' perspectives. Patient experience of (dis)respectful care was collected from a cross-sectional survey of antenatal and postnatal patients attending MSI maternities in Kenya and Tanzania before and following the RMNC training intervention. Healthcare providers completed pre- and post-workshop surveys at day 1, 90 and 180 to measure any changes in their knowledge, attitudes and perception of intended behaviours regarding RMNC. RESULTS: The results demonstrate that healthcare provider knowledge, attitudes and perceived RMNC practices can be improved with this training interventions. Patients also reported a more positive experience of their maternity care following the training. CONCLUSION: RMNC is a patient-centred care priority in all MSI maternities. The training bridges the gap in resources currently available to support changes in healthcare wproviders' attitudes and behaviours towards provision of RMNC. Ensuring health system infrastructure supports compassionate obstetric care represents only the first step towards ensuring RMNC. The results from the evaluation of this RMNC provider training intervention demonstrates how healthcare provider knowledge and attitudes may represent a bottleneck to ensuring RMNC that can be overcome using VCAT and behaviour change approaches.

Shared decision-making performance of general practice residents: an observational study combining observer, resident, and patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is considered fundamental to person-centred care. However, applying SDM may be a challenge for residents in general practice, since it is a complex competence that requires the integration of knowledge and skills from several competency domains. OBJECTIVE: To support learning of SDM during medical residency, we aimed to gain insight in Dutch residents' observed and perceived SDM performance in general practice. METHODS: We evaluated residents' SDM performance from an observer, resident, and patient perspective. Consultations of first- and third-year residents were recorded. Trained observers used the validated Observing Patient Involvement (OPTION5) scale to assess observed SDM performance of residents in 98 actual recorded consultations. Perceived SDM performance was evaluated by residents and patients completing validated SDM questionnaires, supplemented with questions about (the context of) the consultation and perceived relevance of SDM immediately after the consultation. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (mean, SD, minimums, and maximums) and explorative bivariate analyses. RESULTS: The residents' observed mean SDM performance was 19.1 (range, 0-100, SD = 10.9), mean resident self-reported SDM performance was 56.9 (range, 0-100, SD = 18.5), and mean patient-reported SDM performance was 73.3 (range, 0-100, SD = 26.8). We found a significant and positive correlation between observed SDM performance and residents' perceived relevance of SDM for the consultation (t = 4.571, P ≤ 0.001) and the duration of the consultation (r = 0.390, P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that there is room for increasing awareness of the potential incongruence between observed and perceived SDM performance during medical residency, in order to facilitate the implementation of SDM in clinical practice.

THE PROBLEM: Shared decision making is an important process in which healthcare professional and patient work together to reach a decision on how to solve a health problem. This decision should include patients' needs and what matters most to them. We investigated if consultations between general practitioners in training (i.e. residents) and their patients demonstrate shared decision making. The research methods: We asked the residents and patients to respond to questions on their experience of shared decision making right after the consultation. We recorded 98 consultations of residents with their patients. Two researchers rated to what extent residents demonstrated shared decision-making behaviours during these consultations. THE RESULTS: The patients reported more shared decision making than the residents (patients: 73 versus residents: 57 on a 0­100 scale). The researchers observed low levels of SDM during the consultations (19 on a 0­100 scale). Our conclusion: Residents should be aware that shared decision making does not yet frequently occur in practice. To improve the extent to which residents share decisions with their patients in general practice, residents should learn why, when, and how to involve patients in decision making during consultations.

Qualitative Exploration of Speech Pathologists' Experiences and Priorities for Aphasia Service Design: Initial Stage of an Experience-Based Co-Design Project to Improve Aphasia Services.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Stroke survivors with aphasia (impaired language/communication) have poor outcomes and gaps in the clinical implementation of best practice contribute to this. Little is known, however, about speech pathologist perspectives on the touchpoints (key moments shaping experiences) in the clinical care pathway that have the greatest impact on service delivery nor how this varies by geographical location. We explored the experiences of speech pathologists who provide aphasia services to establish priorities for improvement and design. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is the initial experience gathering and priority identification stage of an experience-based co-design (EBCD) project. Speech pathologists were recruited from 21 geographically diverse Hospital and Health Services in Queensland, Australia. Speech pathologists working in acute, rehabilitation and community services shared positive and negative experiences of delivering aphasia care in interviews and focus groups. Experiential data were analysed using qualitative thematic analysis to determine touchpoints. Priorities for service design were identified using an adapted nominal group technique. RESULTS: Speech pathologists (n = 62) participated in 16 focus groups and nine interviews and shared 132 experiences of delivering aphasia care. Providing care in teams with poor awareness of the impacts of aphasia was identified as a key challenge, as poor patient-provider communication was perceived to increase risk of adverse outcomes for patients. Speech pathologists identified areas for improvement related to their own professional needs (e.g., greater access to clinical supervision); collaborative health care (e.g., better coordination and interdisciplinary care to increase therapy time); and the service context and environment (e.g., psychological services able to support diverse communication needs). CONCLUSIONS: Speech pathologist delivery of aphasia services could be improved through increased access to clinical supervision, opportunities for peer debriefing and interdisciplinary care. Priorities for service design varied by geographical location and included: education to support care transitions (remote areas), improved referral pathways and service linkage (regional areas) and dedicated aphasia staffing (metropolitan areas). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A consumer advisory committee comprising people with aphasia (n = 3, authors K.M., K.D. and B.A.), their significant others (n = 2, authors J.D. and P.M.), and a Cultural Capability Officer (author G.B.) guided this research. The team: (1) reviewed participant information; (2) co-designed surveys and workshop resources; (3) copresented research outcomes and contributed to publications. Research questions and study design (e.g., analysis methods and assessment measures) were developed by the research team (authors L.A., V.J.P., D.A.C. and S.J.W.).

Insights and recommendations for working collaboratively and improving care in Alzheimer's disease: Learnings from the Finding Alzheimer's Solutions Together (F.A.S.T.) Council.

BACKGROUND: Collaborations between patient organisations (POs) and the pharmaceutical industry can help identify and address the unmet needs of people living with a disease. In Alzheimer's disease (AD), the scale and complexity of the current unmet needs call for a broad and cross-sectoral collaboration, including people living with Alzheimer's (PLWA), their care partners and the wider research community. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe learnings from the Finding Alzheimer's Solutions Together (F.A.S.T.) Council, a collaboration between POs and Roche, convened to better understand the unmet needs of PLWA and their care partners. RESULTS: 1. Learnings from the collaboration, including clarifying objectives and members' expectations upfront, and establishing a set of guiding values and engagement principles. 2. Insights and recommendations for improving care in AD, including a wide range of unmet needs and potential solutions, systematically captured throughout the PLWA journey. These have resulted in several published reports and other outcomes, including (1) 'Portraits of care', highlighting the role of care partners, and the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on care; (2) Clinical trial guidebook, recommending how PLWA and care partner experience can be incorporated into trial design; (3) 'Commitments Catalogue', highlighting progress by governmental organisations in achieving their commitments; and (4) a report to guide policy on improving diversity, equity and inclusion in clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Close collaboration between POs and the pharmaceutical industry in AD can enable effective research, in which PLWA and care partners are engaged as 'experts through experience' to help identify key unmet needs and co-create solutions with the wider AD research community. This paper and the work undertaken by the F.A.S.T. Council may act as a blueprint for meaningful collaboration between POs and the pharmaceutical industry. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The paper reports the collaboration between POs, the F.A.S.T. Council and Roche to progress towards a future in which PLWA can live fulfilling lives with their disease managed well. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Patient and public involvement in the development of the digital tool MyBoT to support communication between young people with a chronic condition and care providers.

INTRODUCTION: To guide good practices in patient and public involvement (PPI), several calls have been made to share detailed accounts of practical experiences. We describe our collaboration with young people with a chronic condition (YPCC) in the development, testing and implementation of the digital communication tool MyBoT (Map your Burden of Treatment). METHODS: MyBoT was developed by a team of academic researchers, some of whom were practising care providers, YPCC and designers. In addition to the two co-researchers in the research team, various groups of YPCC were involved in decision-making through participation in a design session, workshops and a dialogue session. The Involvement Matrix was used to reflect on the PPI of all YPCC. RESULTS: Initially, the two co-researchers were involved in the roles of informer and co-thinker, but their decision-making power within the study increased over time. In the final stages of the study, the co-researchers and researchers became partners. The other YPCC who participated in the different sessions and workshops were co-thinkers in all stages of the study. CONCLUSION: The PPI of two YPCCs as co-researchers within the research team ensured continuous involvement, whereas the PPI of various groups of YPCCs guaranteed a representative and inclusive approach. Researchers play an essential role in bringing all perspectives together, integrating them within the technical and financial constraints and ultimately building a tool that is tailored to its users' needs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: YPCC played a significant role in the present study. Two YPCC-who are also co-authors of this paper-were involved in all stages of this project as members of the research team. In addition, various YPCCs were involved in the development, testing and implementation stage of MyBoT by organizing design sessions, workshops and a dialogue session.

Lost in the System: Responsibilisation and Burden for Women With Multiple Long-Term Health Conditions During Pregnancy.

INTRODUCTION: Over a fifth of pregnant women are living with multiple long-term health conditions, which is associated with increased risks of adverse outcomes for mothers and infants. While there are many examples of research exploring individuals' experiences and care pathways for pregnancy with a single health condition, evidence relating to multiple health conditions is limited. This study aimed to explore experiences and care of women with multiple long-term health conditions around the time of pregnancy. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted between March 2022 and May 2023 with women with multiple long-term health conditions who were at least 28 weeks pregnant or had had a baby in the last 2 years, and healthcare professionals with experience of caring for these women. Participants were recruited from across the United Kingdom. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-seven women and 51 healthcare professionals participated. Five themes were identified. Women with long-term health conditions and professionals recognised that it takes a team to avoid inconsistent care and communication, for example, medication management. Often, women were required to take a care navigation role to link up their healthcare providers. Women described mixed experiences regarding care for their multiple identities and the whole person. Postnatally, women and professionals recognised a downgrade in care, particularly for women's long-term health conditions. Some professionals detailed the importance of engaging with women's knowledge, and recognising their own professional boundaries of expertise. Many participants described difficulties in providing informational continuity and subsequent impacts on care. Specifically, the setup of care systems made it difficult for everyone to access necessary information, especially when care involved multiple sites. CONCLUSION: Pregnant women with long-term health conditions can experience a substantial burden of responsibility to maintain communication with their care team, often feeling vulnerable, patronised, and let down by a lack of acknowledgement of their expertise. These results will be used to inform the content of coproduction workshops aimed at developing a list of care recommendations for affected women. It will also inform future interventional studies aimed at improving outcomes for these women and their babies. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our Patient and Public Involvement group were involved in the design of the study and the analysis and interpretation of the data, and a public study investigator was part of the author group.

Public perception of participation in low-risk clinical trials in critical care using waived consent: a Canadian national survey.

PURPOSE: The acceptability of waiver of consent for participation in clinical research in intensive care unit (ICU) settings is uncertain. We sought to survey the Canadian public to assess levels of support, comfort, and acceptability for waived consent for low-risk clinical trials. METHODS: We performed a prospective cross-sectional survey of the Canadian public aged 18 yr or older. The survey was conducted by Ipsos between 19 and 23 November 2020. The survey content was derived from a literature review and in consultation with a patient and family partnership committee. The survey focused on attitudes and beliefs on waived consent for participation in low-risk clinical trials in ICU settings. The survey contained 35 items focused on sociodemographics, general health status, participation in medical research, and levels of support and comfort with research and with waived consent. The survey used a case study of a low-risk clinical trial intervention in ICU patients. Analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: We included 2,000 participants, 38% of whom reported experience with ICU and 16% with medical research. Participation in medical research was more common among those with postsecondary education, those with chronic disease, and those who were employed in health care. Most (80%) would support a model of waived consent for low-risk clinical trials, citing medical benefits (36%) and low perceived risk (34%). Most (77%) were comfortable with personally participating in a low-risk clinical trial. Most (80%) believed waived consent approaches were acceptable. Half (52%) believed the waived consent process should provide information about the research and include the option of opting out. When asked whether participants should always give full informed consent, regardless of the practicality or level of risk, 74% and 72% agreed, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is public support for models of waived consent for participation in low-risk pragmatic clinical trials in ICU settings in Canada; however, this is not universal. This information can inform and guide education, ethics, policy, and legal discussion on consent models.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'acceptabilité de la renonciation au consentement pour la participation à la recherche clinique à l'unité de soins intensifs (USI) est incertaine. Nous avons cherché à sonder la population canadienne afin d'évaluer les niveaux de soutien, de confort et d'acceptabilité de la renonciation au consentement pour les études cliniques à faible risque. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé un sondage transversal prospectif auprès de la population canadienne âgée de 18 ans et plus. Le sondage a été réalisé par Ipsos entre le 19 et le 23 novembre 2020. Le contenu du sondage a été élaboré à partir d'une revue de la littérature et en consultation avec un comité de partenariat composé de patient·es et de familles. Le sondage portait sur les attitudes et les croyances à l'égard de la renonciation au consentement pour participer à des études cliniques à faible risque dans les unités de soins intensifs. Le sondage comportait 35 questions axées sur les données sociodémographiques, l'état de santé général, la participation à la recherche médicale et les niveaux de soutien et de confort à l'égard de la recherche et de la renonciation au consentement. Le sondage s'est appuyé sur une étude de cas d'une intervention d'étude clinique à faible risque chez des patient·es des soins intensifs. L'analyse était descriptive. RéSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 2000 personnes, dont 38 % ont déclaré avoir eu des expériences en soins intensifs et 16 % en recherche médicale. La participation à la recherche médicale était plus fréquente chez les personnes ayant fait des études postsecondaires, celles atteintes de maladies chroniques et celles qui travaillaient dans le domaine des soins de santé. La plupart d'entre elles (80 %) appuieraient un modèle de renonciation au consentement pour les études cliniques à faible risque, citant les avantages médicaux (36 %) et le faible risque perçu (34 %). La majorité des personnes répondantes (77 %) étaient à l'aise à l'idée de participer personnellement à une étude clinique à faible risque. La plupart d'entre elles (80 %) croyaient que les approches fondées sur la renonciation au consentement étaient acceptables. La moitié (52 %) estimaient que le processus de renonciation au consentement devrait fournir des renseignements sur la recherche et inclure la possibilité de se retirer. Lorsqu'on leur a demandé si les participant·es devraient toujours donner un consentement éclairé complet, quel que soit l'aspect pratique ou le niveau de risque, 74 % et 72 % ont répondu par l'affirmative, respectivement. CONCLUSION: Il y a un appui public pour les modèles de renonciation au consentement quant à la participation à des études cliniques pragmatiques à faible risque dans les unités de soins intensifs au Canada; cet appui n'est toutefois pas universel. Ces renseignements peuvent éclairer et orienter l'éducation, l'éthique, les politiques et les discussions juridiques sur les modèles de consentement.

Policies in Canada fail to address disparities in access to person-centred osteoarthritis care: a content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women are disproportionately impacted by osteoarthritis (OA) but less likely than men to access OA care, particularly racialized women. One way to reduce inequities is through policies that can influence healthcare services. We examined how OA-relevant policies in Canada address equitable, person-centred OA care for women. METHODS: We used content analysis to extract data from English-language OA-relevant documents referred to as policies or other synonymous terms published in 2000 or later identified by searching governmental and other web sites. We used summary statistics to describe policy characteristics, person-centred care using McCormack's six-domain framework, and mention of OA prevalence, barriers and strategies to improve equitable access to OA care among women. RESULTS: We included 14 policies developed from 2004 to 2021. None comprehensively addressed all person-centred care domains, and few addressed individual domains: enable self-management (50%), share decisions (43%), exchange information (29%), respond to emotions (14%), foster a healing relationship (0%) and manage uncertainty (0%). Even when mentioned, content offered little guidance for how to achieve person-centred OA care. Few policies acknowledged greater prevalence of OA among women (36%), older (29%) or Indigenous persons (29%) and those of lower socioeconomic status (14%); or barriers to OA care among those of lower socioeconomic status (50%), in rural areas (43%), of older age (37%) or ethno-cultural groups (21%), or women (21%). Four (29%) policies recommended strategies for improving access to OA care at the patient (self-management education material in different languages and tailored to cultural norms), clinician (healthcare professional education) and system level (evaluate OA service equity, engage lay health leaders in delivering self-management programs, and offer self-management programs in a variety of formats). Five (36%) policies recommended research on how to improve OA care for equity-seeking groups. CONCLUSIONS: Canadian OA-relevant policies lack guidance to overcome disparities in access to person-centred OA care for equity-seeking groups including women. This study identified several ways to strengthen policies. Ongoing research must identify the needs and preferences of equity-seeking persons with OA, and evaluate the impact of various models of service delivery, knowledge needed to influence OA-relevant policy.

Experiences of participants in the co-design of a community-based health service for people with high healthcare service use.

BACKGROUND: Incorporating perspectives of health consumers, healthcare workers, policy makers and stakeholders through co-design is essential to design services that are fit for purpose. However, the experiences of co-design participants are poorly understood. The aim of this study is to explore the experiences and perceptions of people involved in the co-design of a new service for people with high healthcare service utilisation. METHODS: A methodology informed by the principles of grounded theory was used in this qualitative study to evaluate the experiences and perceptions of co-design participants. Participants were healthcare professionals, health managers and leaders and health consumers involved in the co-design of the new service in Tasmania, Australia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and data were iteratively and concurrently collected and analysed using constant comparative analysis. Audio/audio-visual recordings of interviews were transcribed verbatim. Transcripts, memos, and an audit trail were coded for experiences and perspectives of participants. RESULTS: There were thirteen participants (5 health professionals, 6 health managers and leaders, and 2 health consumers). Codes were collapsed into six sub-themes and six themes. Themes were bureaucracy hinders co-design, importance of consumers and diversity, importance of a common purpose, relationships are integral, participants expectations inform their co-design experience and learning from co-design. CONCLUSION: Most participants reported positive aspects such as having a common purpose, valuing relationships, and having a personal motivation for participating in co-design. However, there were factors which hindered the adaptation of co-design principles and the co-design process. Our research highlights that bureaucracy can hinder co-design, that including people with lived experience is essential and the need to consider various types of diversity when assembling co-design teams. Future co-design projects could use these findings to improve the co-design experience for participants, and ultimately the outcome for communities.

Development of the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool for maternity care (CHAT-maternity-care): participatory action research.

BACKGROUND: Limited health literacy in (expectant) parents is associated with adverse health outcomes. Maternity care providers often experience difficulties assessing (expectant) parents' level of health literacy. The aim was to develop, evaluate, and iteratively adapt a conversational tool that supports maternity care providers in estimating (expectant) parents' health literacy. METHODS: In this participatory action research study, we developed a conversational tool for estimating the health literacy of (expectant) parents based on the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool for general care, which in turn was based on the Health Literacy Questionnaire. We used a thorough iterative process including different maternity care providers, (expectant) parents, and a panel of experts. This expert panel comprised representatives from knowledge institutions, professional associations, and care providers with whom midwives and maternity care assistants work closely. Testing, evaluation and adjustment took place in consecutive rounds and was conducted in the Netherlands between 2019 and 2022. RESULTS: The conversational tool 'CHAT-maternity-care' covers four key domains: (1) supportive relationship with care providers; (2) supportive relationship within parents' personal network; (3) health information access and comprehension; (4) current health behaviour and health promotion. Each domain contains multiple example questions and example observations. Participants contributed to make the example questions and example observations accessible and usable for daily practice. The CHAT-maternity-care supports maternity care providers in estimating (expectant) parents' health literacy during routine conversations with them, increased maternity care providers' awareness of health literacy and helped them to identify where attention is necessary regarding (expectant) parents' health literacy. CONCLUSIONS: The CHAT-maternity-care is a promising conversational tool to estimate (expectant) parents' health literacy. It covers the relevant constructs of health literacy from both the Conversational Health Literacy Assessment Tool and Health Literacy Questionnaire, applied to maternity care. A preliminary evaluation of the use revealed positive feedback. Further testing and evaluation of the CHAT-maternity-care is required with a larger and more diverse population, including more (expectant) parents, to determine the effectiveness, perceived barriers, and perceived facilitators for implementation.

Patient experiences and needs in cancer care- results from a nationwide cross-sectional study in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centredness has become a central quality indicator for oncology care. Elements include shared decision-making, patient navigation and integration of psychosocial care, which impact patient-reported and clinical outcomes. Despite efforts to promote patient-centred care in Germany in recent decades, implementation remains fragmented. Further, research on patient experiences with cancer care and its determinants is limited. Therefore, this study examines which patient- and facility-specific factors are associated with patient-centred quality care delivery. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1,121 cancer patients in acute treatment, rehabilitation, and aftercare for different cancer entities across Germany. A participatory developed questionnaire was used. Outcome measures were the quality of physician-patient interaction and provision of psychosocial care during acute care. Predictors comprised patient-specific characteristics and treatment facility-specific factors. Multiple linear regression and multivariate binary logistic regression analyses were performed. In addition, a content analysis of open-ended comments on the patients' overall cancer care needs was applied. RESULTS: Multiple linear regression analysis showed recent diagnosis (ß=-0.12, p = < 0.001), being male (ß=-0.11, p = 0.003), and having a preference for passive decision-making (ß=-0.10, p = 0.001) to be significantly associated with higher interaction quality, but not age, education and health insurance type. An overall low impact of patient characteristics on interaction quality was revealed (adj. R2 = 0.03). Binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated the availability of central contact persons (OR = 3.10, p < 0.001) followed by recent diagnosis (p < 0.001), having breast cancer (p < 0.001) and being female (OR = 1.68, p < 0.05) to significantly predict offering psycho-oncological counselling to patients in acute care facilities. The availability of peer support visiting services (OR = 7.17, p < 0.001) and central contact persons (OR = 1.87, p < 0.001) in the care facility, breast cancer diagnosis (p < 0.001) and a higher level of education (p < 0.05) significantly increased the odds of patients receiving information about peer support in the treatment facility. Despite relatively satisfactory quality of physician-patient interactions in cancer care (M = 3.5 (± 1.1)), many patients expressed that better patient-centred communication and coordinated, comprehensive cancer care are needed. CONCLUSION: The findings reflect effective developments and improvements in cancer care and suggest that patients' social characteristics are less decisive for delivering patient-centred quality care than systemic factors surrounding the care facilities. They can serve to inform oncology care in Germany.

Let the records speak: an exploration of rehabilitation services offered in primary healthcare, Johannesburg metropolitan district.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare in South Africa aims to transform the national health system by emphasising community-based care and preventive strategies. However, rehabilitation services, particularly for individuals with disabilities and chronic non-communicable diseases, are often overlooked in primary healthcare. This study aimed to investigate the provision of primary healthcare rehabilitation services in the Johannesburg Metropolitan District by exploring client sociodemographics and variations in services provided by rehabilitation professionals. METHODS: A retrospective review of clinic rehabilitation records from 2011 to 2020 was conducted at nine provincially funded community health centres (CHCs) offering rehabilitation services. Stratified sampling facilitated record selection based on rehabilitation service type and year. A specifically designed data extraction tool captured demographics, disabilities, rehabilitation received, and referral sources. Descriptive analysis used means, standard deviations, and frequencies. RESULTS: The findings show a diverse client population with a wide age range, with a significant proportion falling into the < 5 years and 30-49 years age groups. Neuromusculoskeletal and movement-related disabilities were most prevalent, affecting approximately two-thirds of clients. Referral sources were often undocumented, and inconsistent discharge information with no record of patient follow up, highlighted the need for improved documentation practices. Clinic visits were the primary service delivery mode, followed by limited home visits and outreach services. Occupational therapy and physiotherapy were the most used services. Speech and language therapy services were underused, and some CHCs lacked audiology services. There were variations in the number of individual and group sessions provided by the different rehabilitation services, and there were age- and disability-specific differences in service use. CONCLUSION: This study offers insights into rehabilitation service provision in the Johannesburg Metropolitan District and enhances our understanding of rehabilitation services in primary healthcare settings. It underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary rehabilitation team to address diverse rehabilitation needs, improving documentation and discharge practices, expanding service delivery models, and reducing disparities in service use. The findings inform strategies for optimising service delivery, workforce, resource allocation, and intersectoral collaboration to ultimately enhance the quality and accessibility of integrated rehabilitation services.

A scoping review exploring how adults self-describe and communicate about the listening difficulties they experience.

Objective: It is unknown how adults communicate about their experienced listening difficulties with their audiologist. This scoping review aims to explore how adults self-describe the listening difficulties that they experience, and how they communicate about them. Design: A scoping review was conducted between December 2020 and September 2022 to identify published journal articles in which adults described and communicated about their listening difficulties. Study sample: Database searches yielded 10,224 articles initially. After abstract screening and full text review, 55 articles were included for analysis. Results: The listening difficulties that adults described were varied, highlighting the fact that each person has individual experiences. Adults discussed reasons for their listening difficulties, impacts of their listening difficulties, and behavioural responses they adopted to cope with their listening difficulties. Conclusions: This review shows the broad impacts of listening difficulties, and the varied ways in which adults discuss their listening difficulties. There is no available literature reporting how adults communicate about their listening difficulties in a clinical context.

Adults' recollections of discussions with their audiologist: a qualitative study of what was and was not successfully communicated about listening difficulties.

OBJECTIVES: Some adults experience challenges in successfully communicating their listening difficulties to their audiologist, and report feeling that they are not always listened to or understood. This project examined adults' recollections of discussions with their audiologist to explore (1) how adults report describing their listening difficulties and (2) information that adults report they do not communicate, or do not communicate successfully, to their audiologist. DESIGN: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted. Interview transcripts were analysed using a template analysis approach. STUDY SAMPLE: Fifteen adults who self-report listening difficulties, and who had previously consulted an audiologist. RESULTS: Four themes were identified from adults' recollections of how they describe their listening difficulties: (1) situation or context of listening difficulties, (2) behavioural responses, (3) impacts of listening difficulties and (4) contributing factors. Adults report not always successfully communicating (1) emotional concerns and impacts, (2) descriptions of sound quality and (3) descriptions of changed listening experiences. CONCLUSION: Results provide insights about the times when adults feel that communication with their audiologist is successful, or unsuccessful. The results are useful for informing interventions to help adults and audiologists communicate more effectively together. To further inform interventions, factors affecting adults' communication should be explored.

Development and testing of a patient-reported experience measure for cancer: A cross-sectional survey.

AIM: To develop and psychometrically test the Patient-reported Experience Measure-Cancer (PREM-C), reflecting patients' perceptions of cancer care experiences according to the Institute of Medicine domains. DESIGN: A three-phase cross-sectional survey was conducted. METHODS: Development, reliability and validity testing of the PREM-C measure was undertaken. Data collection included three phases: firstly (development) between October and November, 2015; secondly (psychometric testing), May 2016-June, 2017, and finally, (revision and psychometric testing) May 2019-March 2020. RESULTS: The final PREM-C structure, created using the Institute of Medicine domains, was psychometrically sound with five factors identified in the Exploratory Factor Analysis, demonstrating internal reliability ranging from 0.8 to 0.9. Confirmatory Factor Analysis indicated the hypothesized model fitted well (Root mean square error of approximation = 0.076). External convergent and divergent validity was established with the PREM-C found to be moderately correlated with the Picker Patient Experience Questionnaire but weakly correlated with the WHOQoL-BREF. CONCLUSION: The development and testing of the PREM-C demonstrated good fit as a clinically relevant measure of ambulatory cancer patients' experiences of care. To make meaningful changes to nursing practice and health services, patient experience measures such as the PREM-C might support staff to identify areas for service improvement. IMPACT: Few reliable measures and less validated measures collect patients' perceptions of the quality of their healthcare provision. Rigorous psychometric testing of the newly developed PREM-C demonstrated good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and external convergent and divergent validity. The PREM-C is a potentially relevant measure of cancer patients' experiences of care. It might be used to assess patient-centred care and guide safety and quality improvements in clinical settings. PREM-C use might inform service providers of experiences of care in their institution and inform policy and practice development. This measure is sufficiently generic, allowing potential use in other chronic disease populations. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This conduct of this study was supported by the participating patients of the hospital Cancer Outpatients Service.

A parental communication assessment initiative in the paediatric cardiovascular ICU.

OBJECTIVE: Challenges to communication between families and care providers of paediatric patients in intensive care units (ICU) include variability of communication preferences, mismatched goals of care, and difficulties carrying forward family preferences from provider to provider. Our objectives were to develop and test an assessment tool that queries parents of children requiring cardiac intensive care about their communication preferences and to determine if this tool facilitates patient-centred care and improves families' ICU experience. DESIGN: In this quality improvement initiative, a novel tool was developed, the Parental Communication Assessment (PCA), which asked parents with children hospitalised in the cardiac ICU about their communication preferences. Participants were prospectively randomised to the intervention group, which received the PCA, or to standard care. All participants completed a follow-up survey evaluating satisfaction with communication. MAIN RESULTS: One hundred thirteen participants enrolled and 56 were randomised to the intervention group. Participants who received the PCA preferred detail-oriented communication over big picture. Most parents understood the daily discussions on rounds (64%) and felt comfortable expressing concerns (68%). Eighty-six percent reported the PCA was worthwhile. Parents were generally satisfied with communication. However, an important proportion felt unprepared for difficult decisions or setbacks, inadequately included or supported in decision-making, and that they lacked control over their child's care. There were no significant differences between the intervention and control groups in their communication satisfaction results. CONCLUSIONS: Parents with children hospitalised in the paediatric ICU demonstrated diverse communication preferences. Most participants felt overall satisfied with communication, but individualising communication with patients' families according to their preferences may improve their experience.