How patients and clinicians experience the utility of a personalized clinical feedback system in routine practice

Objective The objective was to explore how a person‐adaptive clinical feedback system (CFS) effects its users, and how meaning and relevance are negotiated. Methods We conducted a 10‐month case‐study of the implementation and practice of Norse Feedback, a personalized CFS. The data material consisted of 12 patient interviews, 22 clinician interviews, 23 field notes, and 16 archival documents. Results We identified four main categories or themes: (i) patients’ use of clinical feedback for enhanced awareness and insight; (ii) patients work to make clinical feedback a communication mode; (iii) patients and clinicians negotiate clinical feedback as a way to influence treatment; and (iv) clinical feedback requires an interactive sense‐making effort. Conclusion Patients and therapists produced the meaning and relevance of the CFS by interpreting the CFS measures to reflect the unique patient experience of the patient–therapist relationship. Patients regarded CFS as a tool to inform therapy with important issues. Patients became more self‐aware and prepared for therapy.