Leveraging Patients' Creative Ideas for Innovation in Health Care.

Policy Points Patients' creative ideas may inform learning and innovation that improve patient-centered care. Routinely collected patient experience surveys provide an opportunity to invite patients to share their creative ideas for improvement. We develop and assess a methodological strategy that validates question wording designed to elicit creative ideas from patients. Health care organizations should consider how to report and use these data in health care delivery and quality improvement, and policymakers should consider promoting the use of narrative feedback to better understand and respond to patients' experiences. CONTEXT: Learning health systems (LHSs) have been promoted for a decade to achieve high-quality, patient-centered health care. Innovation driven by knowledge generated through day-to-day health care delivery, including patient insights, is critical to LHSs. However, the pace of translating patient insights into innovation is slow and effectiveness inadequate. This study aims to evaluate a method for systematically eliciting patients' creative ideas, examine the value of such ideas as a source of insight, and examine patients' creative ideas regarding how their experiences could be improved within the context of their own health systems. METHODS: The first stage of the study developed a survey and tested strategies for elicitation of patients' creative ideas with 600 patients from New York State. The second stage deployed the survey with the most generative open-ended question sequence within a health care system and involved analysis of 1,892 patients' responses, including 2,948 creative ideas. FINDINGS: Actionable, creative feedback was fostered by incorporating a request for transformative feedback into a sequence of narrative elicitation questions. Patients generate more actionable and creative ideas when explicitly invited to share such ideas, especially patients with negative health care experiences, those from minority racial/ethnic backgrounds, and those with chronic illness. The most frequently elicited creative ideas focused on solving challenges, proposing interventions, amplifying exceptional practices, and conveying hopes for the future. CONCLUSIONS: A valid and reliable method for eliciting creative ideas from patients can be deployed as part of routine patient experience surveys that include closed-ended survey items and open-ended narrative items in which patients share their experiences in their own words. The elicited creative ideas are promising for patient engagement and innovation efforts. This study highlights the benefits of engaging patients for quality improvement, offers a rigorously tested method for cultivating innovation using patient-generated knowledge, and outlines how creative ideas can enable organizational learning and innovation.

Learning from patients: The impact of using patients' narratives on patient experience scores.

BACKGROUND: Enthusiasm has grown about using patients' narratives-stories about care experiences in patients' own words-to advance organizations' learning about the care that they deliver and how to improve it, but studies confirming association have not been published. PURPOSE: We assessed whether primary care clinics that frequently share patients' narratives with their staff have higher patient experience survey scores. APPROACH: We conducted a 1-year study of 5,545 adult patients and 276 staff affiliated with nine clinics in one health system. We used multilevel models to analyze survey data from patients about their experiences and from staff about exposure to useful narratives. We examined staff confidence in own knowledge as a moderator because confidence can influence use of new information sources. RESULTS: Frequency of sharing useful narratives with staff was associated with patient experience scores for all measures, conditional on staff confidence in own knowledge ( p < .01). For operational measures (e.g., care coordination), increased sharing correlated with subsequently higher performance for more confident staff and lower performance or no difference for less confident staff, depending on measure. For relational measures (e.g., patient-provider communication), increased sharing correlated with higher scores for less confident staff and lower scores for more confident staff. CONCLUSION: Sharing narratives with staff frequently is associated with better patient experience survey scores, conditional on confidence in knowledge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Frequently sharing useful patient narratives should be encouraged as an organizational improvement strategy. However, organizations need to address how narrative feedback interacts with their staff's confidence to realize higher experience scores across domains.

Patient-provider therapeutic connections to improve health care: Conceptual development and systematic review of patient measures.

BACKGROUND: The Triple Aim (improved population health, improved patient experiences, and lower costs) has influenced U.S. health care since it was introduced in 2008. With it, value-based purchasing has brought unprecedented focus on patient experience measurement. Despite having devoted extensive resources toward improving patient experiences, inconsistent improvements suggest there are some dimensions not yet being widely measured or addressed. Furthermore, a renewed focus on health disparities calls for stronger patient-provider connections in order to reduce health care inequities. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to articulate the concept of therapeutic connections (TCs) in health care and examine existing survey measures, from the patient perspective, to learn whether they capture the TC construct. METHOD: We interviewed subject matter experts ( n = 24) and patients ( n = 22) about measuring TCs and then conducted a systematic review of quantitative measures from three databases using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) criteria. RESULTS: Of 31 unique measures, none captured all of the theorized TC dimensions. Most were measures of collaboration and shared decision-making or caring. DISCUSSION: Focusing on the nature of patient-provider connections is vital because they are the backbone of most delivery models seeking to achieve the Triple Aim . Further development of the TC concept and measures is warranted to facilitate organizational and financing policies that meaningfully support widespread improvement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: A focus on barriers and facilitators of TCs is needed. Without advancing our understanding of the role TCs play in care, policymakers and practitioners will be limited in their ability to make impactful changes.

Effects of Leader Tactics on the Creativity, Implementation, and Evolution of Ideas to Improve Healthcare Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Slow progress in quality improvement (QI) has prompted calls to identify new QI ideas. Leaders guiding these efforts are advised to use evidence-based tactics, or specific approaches to address a goal, to promote clinician and staff engagement in the generation and implementation of QI ideas, but little evidence about effective tactics exists. OBJECTIVE: Examine the association between leader tactics and the creativity, implementation outcome, and evolution of QI ideas from clinicians and staff. DESIGN: Prospective panel analysis of 220 ideas generated by 12 leaders and teams (N = 72 members) from federally qualified community health practices in one center over 18 months. Measures were extracted from meeting minutes (note-taking by a member during meetings) and expert panel review. Multi-level models were used. MEASURES: Leader tactics, idea creativity, implementation outcome, evolution pathways, center, and idea-submitter characteristics. RESULTS: Leaders used one of four approaches: no tactic, meeting ground rules, team brainstorming, or reflection on team process. Implemented ideas evolved in three pathways: Plug and Play, Slow Burn, and Iterate and Generate. Compared with no leader tactic, meeting ground rules resulted in ideas not significantly different in creativity, implementation outcome, or evolution pathway. Brainstorming was associated with greater idea creativity, idea implementation, and ideas following a Plug and Play path (low member engagement and implementation over 2 months or less). Reflection on team process was associated with idea implementation (versus not), and ideas following an Iterate and Generate path (high member engagement and implementation over 3 months or more). CONCLUSIONS: Two tactics, brainstorming and reflection, are helpful depending on goals. Brainstorming may aide leaders seeking disruptive change via more creative, rapidly implemented ideas. Reflection on team process may aide leaders seeking high-engagement ideas that may be implemented slowly. Both tactics may help leaders cultivate dynamics that increase implementation of ideas that improve healthcare.

The How Matters: How Primary Care Provider Communication With Team Relates to Patients' Disease Management.

BACKGROUND: Investigating primary care provider (PCP)-team communication can provide insight into how colleagues work together to become high-functioning teams more able to address an increasingly complex set of tasks associated with chronic disease management. OBJECTIVE: To assess how PCP communication with their care team relates to patients' health. RESEARCH DESIGN: Longitudinal study of how 3 aspects of PCP-care team communication-participation, time spent listening, and uninterrupted speaking length-relate to disease management of patients with hypertension or diabetes, and the effect of these team communication behaviors on PCP-patient communication as a pathway by which this relationship might exist. We used multilevel regression models. SUBJECTS: Twenty-seven PCPs and 98 team members, and 18,067 patients with hypertension and 8354 patients with diabetes affiliated with a federally qualified health center with 12 practice sites. MEASURES: Primary data on communication collected using sociometric sensors worn by PCPs and team members, patient-PCP communication data collected with surveys, and patient health, PCP and patient characteristics extracted from electronic records. RESULTS: PCPs participated in 75% of care team conversations, spent 56% of conversation time listening, and had an average uninterrupted speaking length of 2.42 seconds. PCP participation, listening, and length of uninterrupted speaking time were associated with significantly higher odds that their patients had controlled hypertension and diabetes and improvements in disease control over time. PCP-patient communication mediates this relationship. CONCLUSIONS: PCP-team communication is associated with patient health management. How team members speak with one another may be as important as the content of their communication.

A quasi-experiment assessing the six-months effects of a nurse care coordination program on patient care experiences and clinician teamwork in community health centers.

BACKGROUND: Recognition that coordination among healthcare providers is associated with better quality of care and lower costs has increased interest in interventions designed to improve care coordination. One intervention is to add care coordination to nurses' role in a formal way. Little is known about effects of this approach, which tends to be pursued by small organizations and those in lower-resource settings. We assessed effects of this approach on care experiences of high-risk patients (those most in need of care coordination) and clinician teamwork during the first 6 months of use. METHODS: We conducted a quasi-experimental study using a clustered, controlled pre-post design. Changes in staff and patient experiences at six community health center practice locations that introduced the added-role approach for high-risk patients were compared to changes in six locations without the program in the same health system. In the pre-period (6 months before intervention training) and post-period (about 6 months after intervention launch, following 3 months of training), we surveyed clinical staff (N = 171) and program-qualifying patients (3007 pre-period; 2101 post-period, including 113 who were enrolled during the program's first 6 months). Difference-in-differences models examined study outcomes: patient reports about care experiences and clinician-reported teamwork. We assessed frequency of patient office visits to validate access and implementation, and contextual factors (training, resources, and compatibility with other work) that might explain results. RESULTS: Patient care experiences across all high-risk patients did not improve significantly (p > 0.05). They improved somewhat for program enrollees, 5% above baseline reports (p = 0.07). Staff-perceived teamwork did not change significantly (p = 0.12). Office visits increased significantly for enrolled patients (p < 0.001), affirming program implementation (greater accessing of care). Contextual factors were not reported as problematic, except that 41% of nurses reported incompatibility between care coordination and other job demands. Over 75% of nurses reported adequate training and resources. CONCLUSIONS: There were some positive effects of adding care coordination to nurses' role within 6 months of implementation, suggesting value in this improvement strategy. Addressing compatibility between coordination and other job demands is important when implementing this approach to coordination.

Differences in work environment for staff as an explanation for variation in central line bundle compliance in intensive care units.

BACKGROUND: Central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) are a common and costly quality problem, and their prevention is a national priority. A decade ago, researchers identified an evidence-based bundle of practices that reduce CLABSIs. Compliance with this bundle remains low in many hospitals. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess whether differences in core aspects of work environments-workload, quality of relationships, and prioritization of quality-are associated with variation in maximal CLABSI bundle compliance, that is, compliance 95%-100% of the time in intensive care units (ICUs). METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A cross-sectional study of hospital medical-surgical ICUs in the United States was done. Data on work environment and bundle compliance were obtained from the Prevention of Nosocomial Infections and Cost-Effectiveness Refined Survey completed in 2011 by infection prevention directors, and data on ICU and hospital characteristics were obtained from the National Healthcare Safety Network. Factor and multilevel regression analyses were conducted. FINDINGS: Reasonable workload and prioritization of quality were positively associated with maximal CLABSI bundle compliance. High-quality relationships, although a significant predictor when evaluated apart from workload and prioritization of quality, had no significant effect after accounting for these two factors. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Aspects of the staff work environment are associated with maximal CLABSI bundle compliance in ICUs. Our results suggest that hospitals can foster improvement in ensuring maximal CLABSI bundle compliance-a crucial precursor to reducing CLABSI infection rates-by establishing reasonable workloads and prioritizing quality.

What matters to you? An observational field study of patient and care provider expectations for health care relationships.

Therapeutic connections (TC) between patients and providers are foundational to patient-centered care, which is co-produced between patients and care providers. This necessitates that we understand what patients expect from TCs, the extent to which providers know what patients expect, and what providers expect. The purpose of this study was to examine nine TC dimensions and determine which are most important to patients, which dimensions providers believe are most important to patients, and which are most important to providers. An online survey of patients (n = 388) and care providers (n = 433) was conducted in the USA in March 2021. Respondents rated the extent to which the nine TC dimensions were important to them, followed by open-ended questions to expand upon what matters. The quantitative responses were rank-ordered and rankings were compared across groups. All groups ranked "having the patient's best interest in mind no matter what" as the top expectation. Patients also ranked "caring commitment" and being "on the same page" as highly important. Providers were relatively accurate in ranking what they believed was most important to patients. Respondents affirmed the TC dimensions in the qualitative results, adding nuance and context, such as patients feeling "heard" and noting providers that go "above and beyond." Providers ranked dimensions differently for themselves, prioritizing "full presence" and "emotional support" of patients. This study is among the first to examine expectations for TC. TC could play an explanatory role in understanding variation in patient experience ratings and other outcomes.

"Nothing Is More Powerful than Words:" How Patient Experience Narratives Enable Improvement.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Patient experience narratives (narratives) are an increasingly important element of both measurement approaches and improvement efforts in healthcare. Prior studies show that narratives are considered by both clinicians and staff to be an appealing, meaningful, and credible form of evidence on performance. They also suggest that making concrete use of narratives within organizational settings to improve care can be complex and challenging. Our qualitative study was designed to explore how middle managers working in a health system's outpatient clinics value and use written narratives in their day-to-day work. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with 20 middle managers working in 8 outpatient clinics. Interviews were fully transcribed, loaded into MAX-QDA software, and coded using thematic analysis techniques. Code reports were extracted and reanalyzed for subthemes related to the objectives of this paper. RESULTS: Middle managers across sites described valuing narratives as a tool to: enable better patient experience assessment by augmenting data from patient experience scores; deepen understanding of and relationships with patients; provide insight about operational issues; identify areas for needed improvement and potential solutions; and facilitate strategic work. They reported using narratives for a range of activities related to their roles as supervisors, such as focusing attention on positive practices and needed improvements, promoting deeper group learning, motivating change, reinforcing sense of purpose for staff, recognizing staff strengths and training needs, and inspiring transformational thinking. Finally, interviewees reported numerous specific quality improvement projects (both short- and longer-term) that were informed by narratives-for example, by identifying an issue to be addressed or by suggesting a workable solution. Together, these interviews suggest a collective "narrative about narratives" woven by these organizational actors-a story which illustrates how narratives are highly relevant for how middle managers derive meaning from their work, put organizational values such as responsive service provision into practice, and enact their roles as supervisors. CONCLUSIONS: Our results add to the nascent literature a detailed description of how narratives can be used both as a tool for middle managers in their leadership and supervisory roles, and as a blueprint for improvement work within outpatient settings. They also illuminate why patient experience scores may improve when narrative data are collected and used. Finally, our results suggest that for middle managers, perhaps "nothing is more powerful than words" because narratives function as both an insight provider and a compelling tool that adds direction and meaning to workplace endeavors.

Better outcomes through patient - Provider therapeutic connections? An exploratory study of proposed mediating variables.

BACKGROUND: Patient-provider therapeutic connections (TCs) have been theorized to enhance patient outcomes as well as care provider job satisfaction and to reduce burnout. High-quality TCs may result in better matching of health care to patient needs, and thus, better care quality and patient outcomes. For care providers, work environments that enable high-quality TCs may make the work more motivating and facilitate resilience. METHOD: We surveyed patients (n = 346) and care providers (n = 341) about their experiences of TCs, and how TCs related to outcomes. We tested parallel mediation models to examine relations. RESULTS: TCs predicted better patient health status, mental health status, and satisfaction, and predicted greater care provider job satisfaction and lower burnout. TCs were theorized to operate through two sets of mechanisms (health self-efficacy and activation for patients; meaningfulness of work and psychological safety for providers). Results revealed significant indirect associations between TCs and outcomes for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: TCs are associated with patient and provider outcomes; however, these relations appear to be explained by several mediating variables. It appears that TCs are associated with better outcomes for patients through health self-efficacy and activation, and TCs are associated with better outcomes for care providers through meaningfulness of work and psychological safety.

Creativity in problem solving to improve complex health outcomes: Insights from hospitals seeking to improve cardiovascular care.

Introduction: Improving performance often requires health care teams to employ creativity in problem solving, a key attribute of learning health systems. Despite increasing interest in the role of creativity in health care, empirical evidence documenting how this concept manifests in real-world contexts remains limited. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study to understand how creativity was fostered during problem solving in 10 hospitals that took part in a 2-year collaborative to improve cardiovascular care outcomes. We analyzed interviews with 197 hospital team members involved in the collaborative, focusing on work processes or outcomes that participants self-identified as creative or promoting creativity. We sought to identify recurrent patterns across instances of creativity in problem solving. Results: Participants reported examples of creativity at both stages typically identified in problem solving research and practice: uncovering non-obvious problems and finding novel solutions. Creativity generally involved the assembly of an "ecological view" of the care process, which reflected a more complete understanding of relationships between individual care providers, organizational sub-units, and their environment. Teams used three prominent behaviors to construct the ecological view: (a) collecting new and diverse information, (b) accepting (rather than dismissing) disruptive information, and (c) employing empathy to understand and share feelings of others. Conclusions: We anticipate that findings will be useful to researchers and practitioners who wish to understand how creativity can be fostered in problem solving to improve clinical outcomes and foster learning health systems.