Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/legislação & jurisprudência , Fidelidade a Diretrizes/estatística & dados numéricos , Intoxicação por Chumbo/diagnóstico , Testes Obrigatórios/organização & administração , Encaminhamento e Consulta/organização & administração , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/economia , Humanos , Lactente , Intoxicação por Chumbo/sangue , Testes Obrigatórios/economia , New York , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Estudos Prospectivos , Saúde Pública/economia , Saúde Pública/legislação & jurisprudência , Governo Estadual , Estados UnidosRESUMO
AIM: The aim of this study was to understand how people evaluate and make sense of their experience of hospital care. METHOD: Narrative interviews were conducted with 18 patients between 4-6 weeks after an episode of inpatient care or day surgery. Participants were deliberately sampled from a population who participated in a hospital-wide audit which took place during 1 week in June 1995. Sampling criteria ensured a mix of age, gender, type of, and reason for, admission. The interviews were audiotaped, transcribed and analysed using grounded theory. FINDINGS: Three categories: 'feeling informed', 'valued as an individual', and 'at home' contributed to a core category: 'building confidence, faith and trust'. Notably, confidence and trust were determined as much by observations of the care given to other people, as the care the participants themselves had received. CONCLUSIONS: More attention needs to be given to understanding the complex social and reflective process which underpin patient judgements about quality of care.