Background: Patient Reported Experience Measures are promoted to be used as an integrated measurement approach in which outcomes are used to improve individual care (micro level), organisational quality (meso level) and external justification (macro level). However, a deeper understanding of implementation issues of these measures is necessary. The narrative Patient Reported Experience Measure “Dit vind ik ervan!” (English “How I feel about it!”) is used in the Dutch disability care sector, but insight into its’ current use is lacking. We aimed to provide insight into experiences with the implementation and current ways of working with “Dit vind ik ervan!” as an integrated measurement strategy. A descriptive qualitative study was done at a disability care organisation. Data were collected by nine documentations, seven observations, 11 interviews and three focus groups. We applied deductive content analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research as a framework. Results: Our analysis revealed facilitators and barriers for the implementation of “Dit vind ik ervan!”. We found most barriers at the micro level. Professionals and clients appreciated the measure’s narrative approach, but struggled to perform it with communication vulnerable clients. Some clients, professionals and team leaders were unfamiliar with the measure’s aim and benefit. On the meso level, implementation was done top-down, and the management’s vision using the measure as an integrated measurement approach was insufficiently shared throughout the organisation. Conclusions: Our study shows that Patient Reported Experience Measures have the potential to be used as an integrated measurement strategy. Yet, we found barriers at the micro level, which might have influenced using the measurement outcomes at the meso and macro level. Tailored implementation strategies, mostly focusing on designing and preparing the implementation on themicro level, need to be developed in co-creation with all stakeholders.
Background: To prevent deterioration after admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and to improve rehabilitation, the ICU team should use digital technologies to provide comprehensive and practical information alongside personalised support for survivors and their family members. However, a knowledge gap exists on the users’ preferences for such an e-health platform in ICU follow-up services. Objectives: This study aims to explore the opinions and priorities for an e-health platform, including choices in digital elements, according to survivors of critical illness and their family members. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was used among members and other interested individuals of the Dutch volunteer organisation ‘Foundation Family- and Patient-Centred Intensive Care’. An investigator-developed questionnaire was disseminated through the newsletter and social media channels of the Foundation Family- and Patient-Centred Intensive Care. The results of this member consultation were analysed and reported as descriptive statistics on demographic variables and outcome measures in opinions and priorities of the participants. Results: Most of the 227 participants were female (76%), aged 46–55 years (33%), and completed higher education (70%). The participants reported high confidence in advice delivered through an e-health platform (72%). They prioritised the provision of a guide including relevant professionals who may support them during their recovery when using an e-health platform. Conclusions: ICU survivors prioritised the provision of relevant professionals who may support them during their recovery when using an e-health platform; however, selection bias means the population studied is likely to be more digitally connected than the general ICU population. Digital solutions could cater to their information and support needs. For family members, the highest priority reported was receiving help in managing their emotional distress. The development of an e-health platform considering the opinions and priorities of this target group could contribute to a personalised recovery trajectory promoting self-management while including digital elements addressing relevant ICU follow-up services.
MULTIFILE
Background: In Europe, cardiovascular disease is one of the predominant causes of mortality and morbidity among older people over 65 years. The occurrence of cardiovascular disease can have a negative impact on the quality of life of older patients and their families and family health overall. Assuming that illness is a family affair shaped by culture and health care systems, we explored European health care practices and interventions toward families of older patients with cardiovascular disease and heart failure.Aims: This paper aimed to determine the extent, range, and variety of practices and interventions in Europe directed to families of older patients and to identify knowledge gaps.Materials & Methods: A scoping review was conducted including studies published in Medline, CINHAL, or Cochrane library between 2009 and mid-2020.Results: A total of 22 articles from 17 studies were included, showing diverse practices and interventions. The interventions targeted the family as a unit (six studies), dyads (five studies), patients alone, but assessed family members’ reactions (five studies) or the family member primarily, but assessed the reaction of the patient (one study). Target outcomes were family caregiver burden; health-related QoL; and perceived control in patients; and family functioning and changes in health behavior or knowledge in both, family members and patients. Most studies did not include an integral view of the family as the unit of care but rather had a disease-centered approach.Discussion: This scoping review provides insight into a variety of healthcarepractices towards families of older patients with cardiovascular disease in Europe. Clarifying underlying assumptions to involve families is needed. More studies with family-focused approaches as integral models could lead to practices that improve families’ well-being. Exploring integral models for their acceptance in health care and family systems appears pertinent to develop European policy to support and add to family health.
