“We Should Talk”—Moving knowledge into action by learning to engage patients, families, and healthcare staff to communicate for patient safety

Abstract

Innovation in patient engagement and empowerment has been identified as a priority area in the Canadian healthcare system. This article describes the development and implementation of the We Should Talk campaign at an academic pediatric hospital. Through the use of a guiding theoretical framework and a multidisciplinary project team, a multimedia campaign was designed to inspire staff, patients and families to effectively communicate to improve patient safety. The We Should Talk campaign provides a case study for how an organization can foster frontline improvement through the engagement of patient, families, and healthcare providers.

Employee-Driven Innovation in Health Organizations: Insights From a Scoping Review

“…At the Montreal Children’s Hospital, for instance, three physicians observed that the lack of communication between patients and carers could be improved with a patient safety campaign. To move ahead, they sought the “green light by the executive of the hospital.” 68 One study was driven by a researcher employed at the health organization. 82 …”

“…Several methods to operationalize the EDI process were used and more than half the studies mentioned learning, team and digital components (see Supplementary file 3 , Table S6, Table S7, and Table S8). 3 , 15 , 20 , 24 , 25 , 35 , 43 , 50 , 51 , 55 , 59 , 61 , 63 - 65 , 68 - 73 , 75 , 77 , 78 - 83 , 85 , 86 , 88 - 97…”

Do patient engagement interventions work for all patients? A systematic review and realist synthesis of interventions to enhance patient safety

“… 15 , 16 , 22 , 61 , 62 The importance of agency sponsorship of a collaborative culture for engagement has long been emphasized in the change management and person‐centred care literature. 63 Staff identified that agency support is required to address the potential impact of engagement on the patient/provider relationship and workload. 34 These concerns are reflective of Park et al's 8 systematic review, which found that staff were aware of the importance of engaging in safety, but were not always confident to do so.…”

What does safety in mental healthcare transitions mean for service users and other stakeholder groups: An open‐ended questionnaire study

“…This research adds to the growing body of literature in this field advocating for shared decision-making to be translated from policy to practice. [25][26][27] The safety implications of 'readiness for discharge' are described considerably, with differing definitions, service users described not Whilst an existing body of evidence highlights the differences in perceptions between service users and mental healthcare professionals, [30][31][32] the novelty of this study is that it provides a better understanding of how safety is conceptualized specifically in transitions of mental health care, a key research and policy priority for the WHO. 5 This work also highlights the importance of ensuring the patient voice is heard in future mental transition quality and safety research, as perceptions of safety vary considerably between groups and current transitions research, policy and practice frameworks are based predominantly on the biomedical and technical perspective of healthcare professionals and researchers.…”