“They heard our voice!” patient engagement councils in community-based primary care practices: a participatory action research pilot study

Abstract

Background Patient engagement could improve the quality of primary care practices. However, we know little about effective patient engagement strategies. We aimed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of embedding advisory councils of clinicians, managers, patients and caregivers to conduct patient-oriented quality improvement projects in primary care practices. Methods Using a participatory action research approach, we conducted our study in two non-academic primary care practices in Quebec City (Canada). Patient-experts (patients trained in research) were involved in study design, council recruitment and meeting facilitation. Advisory councils were each to include patients and/or caregivers, clinicians and managers. Over six meetings, councils would identify quality improvement priorities and plan projects accordingly. We assessed acceptability and feasibility of the councils using non-participant observations, audio-recordings and self-administered questionnaires. We used descriptive analyses, triangulated qualitative data and performed inductive thematic analysis. Results Between December 2017 and June 2018, two advisory councils were formed, each with 11 patients (36% male, mean age 53.8 years), a nurse and a manager practising as a family physician (25% male, mean age 45 years). The six meetings per practice occurred within the study period with a mean of eight patients per meeting. Councils worked on two projects each: the first council on a new information leaflet about clinic organization and operation, and on communications about local public health programs; the second on methods to further engage patients in the practice, and on improving the appointment scheduling system. Median patient satisfaction was 8/10, and 66.7% perceived councils had an impact on practice operations. They considered involvement of a manager, facilitation by patient-experts, and the fostering of mutual respect as key to this impact. Clinicians and managers liked having patients as facilitators and the respect among members. Limiting factors were difficulty focusing on a single feasible project and time constraints. Managers in both practices were committed to pursuing the councils post-study. Conclusion Our results indicated that embedding advisory councils of clinicians, managers, patients and caregivers to conduct patient-oriented quality improvement projects in primary care practices is both acceptable and feasible. Future research should assess its transferability to other clinical contexts.

Enhancing psychological safety in mental health services

“…Action research groups, allowing clinicians to act as researchers, calibrate approaches and share best practice Staff engagement [ 63 , 64 ]. Action Research Groups [ 64 , 65 ] Patient participatory councils These groups provide an opportunity to bring professionals, managers and clinical and non-clinical staff together to ensure healthcare is patient-oriented and maximise patient involvement and choice Patient engagement and participatory action research group [ 66 ] Skills workshops Workshops and train the trainer workshops offer opportunities to bolster skills and embed this into practice by training champions Train the trainer workshops [ 57 ]. Skills workshop [ 67 , 68 ] Simulation and role play Utilising the role of simulated or unstructured role-play to explore complex scenarios in mental health in safe no-risk environments Simulation [ 51 ].…”

Evaluating patient participation in value‐based healthcare: Current state and lessons learned

“…Previous research has recommended combining the two methods, so having both patient representatives as well as using other methods such as patient questionnaires, to learn more about the perspectives of a large group of patients. 33 Furthermore, in the literature, there are different opinions on the level of professionalism that is required from patients to participate at the collective level. Some studies stipulate the importance of training the patients, 9,[34][35][36][37][38] while others criticize this need of training, since this would lead to 'proto-professionalism' of patients participating in such projects and minimizes the representativeness of patients.…”

Advancing digital patient-centered measurement methods for team-based care

“…[29][30][31] Literature is sparse on how PMHs can help advance PCM methods to support effective use of PCM in teambased care. While there are studies on incorporating patient voices, 32,33 and patient-reported experiences and outcomes [34][35][36] in evaluating PMH performance, we are not aware of studies that examine how PMHs can help advance PCM methods, particularly in resource-limited settings. 37 Thus, there is a need for new PCM methods that take into account the nuances in the PMH model of teambased care, and use of digital tools for team-based care.…”