Six ways to get a grip on patient and family centered care during the undergraduate medical years.

Patient and family-centered care and patient engagement practices have strong evidence-based links with quality and safety for both patients and health care providers. Expectations for patient and family-centered care have advanced beyond hearing the patient perspective and taking patient wishes into account. A participatory approach including patients as partners in their care journey is expected, but attitudes toward patient and family-centered care remain barriers in practice. As health service organizations shift from a system-centered approach to a patient and family-centered care delivery model, black ice occurs. In this Black Ice article, we present some practical tips for medical educators to improve opportunities for medical students to develop knowledge, attitudes, and skills that support patient and family-centered care.

Le lien entre les soins axés sur le patient et la famille et l'engagement des patients d'un côté et la qualité et la sécurité des soins, tant pour les patients que pour les prestataires de services, de l'autre, a été solidement démontré. Les attentes en matière de soins axés sur le patient et la famille ont évolué et elles ne se limitent plus à recueillir le point de vue du patient et à prendre en considération ses souhaits. On préconise désormais une approche participative faisant intervenir les patients en tant que partenaires dans leur cheminement clinique. Toutefois, certaines attitudes à l'égard des soins axés sur le patient et la famille freinent la mise en pratique d'une telle démarche. Dans les organismes de services de santé, le passage d'une approche centrée sur le système à un modèle de prestation de soins axé sur le patient et la famille constitue un terrain glissant. Nous proposons ici quelques stratégies pratiques pour aider les enseignants en médecine à faciliter l'acquisition par les étudiants des connaissances, des attitudes et des habiletés qui favorisent les soins centrés sur le patient et la famille.

A rapid realist review of patient engagement in patient-oriented research and health care system impacts: part one.

BACKGROUND: Patient-oriented research affords individuals with opportunities to genuinely contribute to health care research as members of research teams. While checklists and frameworks can support academic researchers' awareness of patient engagement methods, less guidance appears available to support their understanding of how to develop and maintain collaborative relationships with their patient partners. This knowledge is essential as patient partners report that the social atmospheres of research teams significantly impacts the quality of their experiences. This study sought to develop theory regarding how academic researchers support and sustain patient engagement in patient-oriented research. METHODS: A six-step, rapid realist review was conducted: (1) research question development, (2) preliminary theory development, (3) search strategy development; (4) study selection and appraisal, (4) data extraction, analysis and synthesis (5) identification of relevant formal theories, and (6) theory refinement with stakeholders. Findings were additionally distilled by collective competence theory. RESULTS: A program theory was developed from 62 international studies which illuminated mechanisms supporting academic researchers to engage patient partners, contexts supporting these mechanisms, and resources that enabled mechanism activation. Interaction between seven contexts (patient-oriented research belief, prior interaction with a healthcare system, prior interaction with a particular academic researcher, educational background of patient partner, prior experience with patient-oriented research, study type, and time lived in a rural-urban setting) and seven mechanisms (deciding to become involved in patient-oriented research, recognizing valuable experiential knowledge, cultural competence, reducing power differentials, respectful team environment, supporting patient partners to feel valued, and readiness to research) resulted in an intermediate outcome (sense of trust). Trust then acted as an eighth mechanism which triggered the final-level outcome (empowered patient-centred lens). CONCLUSIONS: Our theory posits that if patient partners trust they are a member of a supportive team working alongside academic researchers who authentically want to incorporate their input, then they are empowered to draw upon their experiential knowledge of health care systems and contribute as researchers in patient-oriented research. Our theory extends conceptual thinking regarding the importance of trust on patient-oriented research teams, how patient partners' trust is shaped by team interactions, and the role that academic researchers have within those interactions.

Patient-oriented research gives patients, families, and caregivers opportunities to become members of health care research teams. Although academic researchers may be aware of what patient engagement is, they may not understand how to develop effective relationships with their patient partners. Academic researchers need this guidance because earlier research has shown that patient partners want to be supported to feel like they are important members of research teams. This support empowers them to feel confident to share their lived experiences and make suggestions and decisions about a research study. If patient partners believe their experiences and knowledge were not used or valued by academic researchers, then they may feel that their involvement was tokenistic. Tokenistic experiences discourage patient partners from participating in another research study.We conducted a rapid realist review of 62 international studies to explore what works (and does not work) in patient-oriented research. This methodology supported us to examine existing research and better understand what contexts, how and why patient-oriented research led to outcomes on a health care system. The goal of this type of research study is to develop and refine a program theory that identifies how actions and activities lead to outcomes.Our program theory emphasizes that patient partners need to trust the academic researchers they are working with. Several categories of actions (academic researcher's behavior) helped researchers to gain the trust of their patient partners. Academic researchers were more (or less) likely to act in these ways depending on several contextual factors. Once patient partners trusted academic researchers on the team, they were empowered to draw upon their lived knowledge of health care systems and actively contribute as researchers. These findings are part of our complete theory about patient-oriented research impacts. They highlight why it is important to gain patient partners' trust and how a complex set of actions are required by academic researchers to gain that trust.

Development of a Patient-Oriented Intervention to Support Patient-Provider Conversations about Unnecessary Lower Back Pain Imaging.

BACKGROUND: despite the efforts of multiple stakeholders to promote appropriate care throughout the healthcare system, studies show that two out of three lower back pain (LBP) patients expect to receive imaging. We used the Choosing Wisely Canada patient-oriented framework, prioritizing patient engagement, to develop an intervention that addresses lower back pain imaging overuse. METHODS: to develop this intervention, we collaborated with a multidisciplinary advisory team, including two patient partners with lower back pain, researchers, clinicians, healthcare administrators, and the Choosing Wisely Canada lead for Saskatchewan. For this qualitative study, data were collected through two advisory team meetings, two individual interviews with lower back pain patient partners, and three focus groups with lower back pain patient participants. A lower back pain prescription pad was developed as an outcome of these consultations. RESULTS: participants reported a lack of interactive and informative communication was a significant barrier to receiving appropriate care. The most cited content information for inclusion in this intervention was treatments known to work, including physical activity, useful equipment, and reliable sources of educational material. Participants also suggested it was important that benefits and risks of imaging were explained on the pad. Three key themes derived from the data were also used to guide development of the intervention: (a) the role of imaging in LBP diagnosis; (b) the impact of the patient-physician relationship on LBP diagnosis and treatment; and (c) the lack of patient awareness of Choosing Wisely Canada and their recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: the lower back pain patient-developed prescription pad may help patients and clinicians engage in informed conversations and shared decision making that could support reduce unnecessary lower back pain imaging.

Developing a program theory of patient engagement in patient-oriented research and the impacts on the health care system: protocol for a rapid realist review.

BACKGROUND: The patient-oriented research (POR) discourse has been criticized as being fragmented, lacking consistent terminology and having few evaluative studies. Our research team will use rapid realist review methodology to generate broad, process-based program theory regarding how partnering patients with researchers in POR generates an impact within a health care system. METHODS: This protocol for a rapid realist review will involve multiple steps, including research question development; preliminary program theory and search strategy development; study selection and appraisal; data extraction, analysis and synthesis; and program theory refinement. We will be guided by the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) publication standards for realist synthesis. Unlike traditional reviews, a realist review aims to discover and understand causal processes that exist within a complex environment, asking questions regarding what works for whom, under what circumstances, how and why. Our multidisciplinary team consists of patient partners, health care professionals, a health sciences librarian and health services researchers. Patient partners are full research partners, supporting development of our guiding research question and identifying community partners and stakeholder groups to disseminate our findings. Patient partners will be asked to recommend literature sources, to review and vet our set of search terms, and to review, evaluate and reflect on our initial program theory in light of their personal, lived expertise. INTERPRETATION: We will share the results of our rapid realist review with community partners and stakeholder groups. We will also disseminate our program theory by means of publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation at scientific conferences.

The Interdisciplinary Patient Partner Program: Building Better Health Care Professionals through Mentorship with Patients and Families.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Introduction: Patient- and Family Centered Care (PFCC) aims to promote collaborative empowering relationships among patients, families, and health care professionals. Best practice for teaching patient- and family-centred care is unknown. Methods, Results: Patient and Family Advisors were matched with an interdisciplinary group of 2-3 students from medicine, pharmacy, and nursing over a five month period to teach PFCC. Advisors provided their journey in the health care system as a basis for further exploration of the 4 pillars of Patient and Family Centered Care. 28 students and 14 Patient and Family Advisors completed the program. Overall, students and advisors were satisfied with the program. Attitudes toward family centeredness were evaluated on a scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). Paired samples t-tests were conducted to gauge perceived increases over the program. All items increased significantly with large effect sizes. Discussion: Patient and Family Advisors highlighted the importance of sharing stories and exploring them through dialogue with students as a key factor in the success of the program. The Interdisciplinary Patient Partner Program also reinforced the power of relationship as a learning tool for students. The interdisciplinary nature of this program resulted in additional learning opportunities such as learning about the interdependencies between health care professionals and the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to health care Conclusion: Matching medicine, pharmacy and nursing students with Patient and Family Advisors is an effective way to improve students' understanding of Patient and Family Centered Care.

The association of albumin/creatinine ratio with postoperative AKI in children undergoing cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This study determined if preoperative and postoperative urine albumin/creatinine ratios (ACRs) predict postoperative AKI in children undergoing cardiac surgery (CS). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This was a three-center, prospective study (2007-2009) of 294 children undergoing CS (n=145 aged <2 years). Urine ACR was measured preoperatively and 0-6 hours after intensive care unit arrival. AKI outcomes were based on the Acute Kidney Injury Network serum creatinine (SCr) criteria (stage 1 AKI, ≥50% or 0.3 mg/dl SCr rise from baseline; and stage 2 or worse AKI, ≥SCr doubling or dialysis). AKI was predicted using preoperative and postoperative ACRs and postoperative ACR performance was compared with other AKI biomarkers. RESULTS: Preoperative ACR did not predict AKI in younger or older children. In children aged <2 years, first postoperative ACR ≥908 mg/g (103 mg/mmol) predicted stage 2 AKI development (adjusted relative risk, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-9.4). In children aged ≥2 years, postoperative ACR ≥169 mg/g (19.1 mg/mmol) predicted stage 1 AKI (adjusted relative risk, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.1). In children aged ≥2 years, first postoperative ACR improved AKI prediction from other biomarker and clinical prediction models, estimated by net reclassification improvement (P≤0.03), but only when serum cystatin C was also included in the model. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative ACR is a readily available early diagnostic test for AKI after pediatric CS that performs similarly to other AKI biomarkers; however, its use is enhanced in children aged ≥2 years and in combination with serum cystatin C.