Are Surveys on Quality Improvement of Healthcare Chaplaincy Emotionally Distressing for Patients? A Pilot Study

Winter-Pfändler, Urs; Morgenthaler, Christoph

doi:10.1080/08854726.2010.480829

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Social and religious data were collected through a 7-item-questionnaire. It has been demonstrated that assessing spirituality in this way doesn't distress the patients (Winter-Pfandler & Morgenthaler, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do You Want Some Spiritual Support? Different Rates of Positive Response to Chaplains' versus Nurses' Offer

Martinuz¹,

Dürst²,

Faouzi

et al. 2013

J Pastoral Care Counsel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Correspondence may be sent to: Marco Martinuz, email: Marco.Martinuz@chuv.ch Access to spiritual support appears to be important in the hospital setting. The offer of spiritual support can be done by different providers such as doctors, nurses or chaplains. Who should initiate or coordinate this spiritual care. This study addresses the following questions: 1) How many patients accept spiritual proposition? 2) What is the better mode of proposition? The study's objectives are the assessment and comparison of the rates of acceptance to an offer of spiritual support made by nurses and chaplains. Two hundred twenty-three consecutive hospitalized patients hospitalized received a proposal of spiritual support and were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. Results revealed that 85.8 % of patients accepted the offer in the chaplains' group and 38.5 % in the nurses' group. Acceptance of the offer of spiritual support was positively associated with the proposal being made by the chaplains by the frequency of meditation and age, and negatively related to physical well-being.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do You Want Some Spiritual Support? Different Rates of Positive Response to Chaplains' versus Nurses' Offer

Martinuz¹,

Dürst²,

Faouzi

et al. 2013

J Pastoral Care Counsel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are sufficient studies to show that each survey has limitations. [176][177][178][179][180][181][182][183][184][185][186][187][188][189][190][191] Potential users are often aware of these limitations already. A study by Macmillan Cancer Support 13 showed that commissioners valued CPES free-text data, especially as a means of capturing broad information from patients and opening up conversations about patient experience between commissioners and providers.…”

Section: Appendix 6 Concept-mapping Workhop Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated analysis of free-text comments and dashboard representations in patient experience surveys: a multimethod co-design study

Rivas

Tkacz

Antao

et al. 2019

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patient experience surveys (PESs) often include informative free-text comments, but with no way of systematically, efficiently and usefully analysing and reporting these. The National Cancer Patient Experience Survey (CPES), used to model the approach reported here, generates > 70,000 free-text comments annually. Main aim To improve the use and usefulness of PES free-text comments in driving health service changes that improve the patient experience. Secondary aims (1) To structure CPES free-text comments using rule-based information retrieval (IR) (‘text engineering’), drawing on health-care domain-specific gazetteers of terms, with in-built transferability to other surveys and conditions; (2) to display the results usefully for health-care professionals, in a digital toolkit dashboard display that drills down to the original free text; (3) to explore the usefulness of interdisciplinary mixed stakeholder co-design and consensus-forming approaches in technology development, ensuring that outputs have meaning for all; and (4) to explore the usefulness of Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) in structuring outputs for implementation and sustainability. Design A scoping review, rapid review and surveys with stakeholders in health care (patients, carers, health-care providers, commissioners, policy-makers and charities) explored clinical dashboard design/patient experience themes. The findings informed the rules for the draft rule-based IR [developed using half of the 2013 Wales CPES (WCPES) data set] and prototype toolkit dashboards summarising PES data. These were refined following mixed stakeholder, concept-mapping workshops and interviews, which were structured to enable consensus-forming ‘co-design’ work. IR validation used the second half of the WCPES, with comparison against its manual analysis; transferability was tested using further health-care data sets. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) explored which toolkit features were preferred by health-care professionals, with a simple cost–benefit analysis. Structured walk-throughs with NHS managers in Wessex, London and Leeds explored usability and general implementation into practice. Key outcomes A taxonomy of ranked PES themes, a checklist of key features recommended for digital clinical toolkits, rule-based IR validation and transferability scores, usability, and goal-oriented, cost–benefit and marketability results. The secondary outputs were a survey, scoping and rapid review findings, and concordance and discordance between stakeholders and methods. Results (1) The surveys, rapid review and workshops showed that stakeholders differed in their understandings of the patient experience and priorities for change, but that they reached consensus on a shortlist of 19 themes; six were considered to be core; (2) the scoping review and one survey explored the clinical toolkit design, emphasising that such toolkits should be quick and easy to use, and embedded in workflows; the workshop discussions, the DCE and the walk-throughs confirmed this and foregrounded other features to form the toolkit design checklist; and (3) the rule-based IR, developed using noun and verb phrases and lookup gazetteers, was 86% accurate on the WCPES, but needs modification to improve this and to be accurate with other data sets. The DCE and the walk-through suggest that the toolkit would be well accepted, with a favourable cost–benefit ratio, if implemented into practice with appropriate infrastructure support. Limitations Small participant numbers and sampling bias across component studies. The scoping review studies mostly used top-down approaches and focused on professional dashboards. The rapid review of themes had limited scope, with no second reviewer. The IR needs further refinement, especially for transferability. New governance restrictions further limit immediate use. Conclusions Using a multidisciplinary, mixed stakeholder, use of co-design, proof of concept was shown for an automated display of patient experience free-text comments in a way that could drive health-care improvements in real time. The approach is easily modified for transferable application. Future work Further exploration is needed of implementation into practice, transferable uses and technology development co-design approaches. Funding The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

show abstract

Operational Definitions in Research on Religion and Health

Flannelly

Jankowski

Flannelly

2014

Journal of Health Care Chaplaincy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article summarizes the historical development of operational definitions and discusses their application to research on religion and health, and their importance for research, in general. The diversity of religious concepts that have been operationalized is described, as well as the development of multi-dimensional self-report measures of religion specifically designed for use in health research. The operational definitions of a variety of health concepts are also described, including the development of multi-dimensional self-report measures of health. Some of the most consistently observed salutary relationships between religion and health are mentioned. The rising interest in spirituality in health research is discussed, along with problems with the current operational definitions of spirituality in healthcare research. The levels of measurement used in various, operationally defined religious and healthcare concepts are highlighted.

show abstract

Are Surveys on Quality Improvement of Healthcare Chaplaincy Emotionally Distressing for Patients? A Pilot Study

Cited by 5 publications

References 22 publications

Do You Want Some Spiritual Support? Different Rates of Positive Response to Chaplains' versus Nurses' Offer

Do You Want Some Spiritual Support? Different Rates of Positive Response to Chaplains' versus Nurses' Offer

Automated analysis of free-text comments and dashboard representations in patient experience surveys: a multimethod co-design study

Operational Definitions in Research on Religion and Health

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About