The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature

Objective To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities. Design Scoping Review. Data sources Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical rehabilitation 2023-02, Vol.37 (2), p.261-276
Hauptverfasser: Jesus, TS, Stern, BZ, Struhar, J, Deutsch, A, Heinemann, AW
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 276
container_issue 2
container_start_page 261
container_title Clinical rehabilitation
container_volume 37
creator Jesus, TS
Stern, BZ
Struhar, J
Deutsch, A
Heinemann, AW
description Objective To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities. Design Scoping Review. Data sources Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest), website searches (e.g. Beryl Institute), snowballing, and key-informant recommendations. Methods Two independent reviewers performed title and abstract screenings and full-text reviews. Eligibility focused on English-language, peer-reviewed (all time) and gray literature (last five years) that used patient experience feedback in rehabilitation improvement activities. The aims, settings, methods, findings, implications, and reported limitations were extracted, followed by content analyses identifying reported enablers and gaps. Results Among the 901 unique references and 52 full texts reviewed, ten were included: four used patient experience surveys for improving patient experiences; six used codesign methodologies to engage patient feedback in service improvement activities. Implementation enablers included securing managerial support, having a structured methodology and facilitator, using efficient processes, engaging staff experiences, and using appreciative inquiry. Reported study gaps included limited follow-up, low sample sizes, analytical limitations, lack of reported limitations, or narrow range of perspectives (e.g. not from people with severe impairments). Conclusion Few examples of the use of patient experience feedback in quality improvement or codesign activities were found in the rehabilitation literature. Patient experience improvement activities relied exclusively on retrospective survey data, which were not combined with often more actionable forms (e.g. qualitative, real time) of patient experience feedback. Further research might consider design of activities that collect and use patient experience feedback for rehabilitation service improvements.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/02692155221126690
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2715441768</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_02692155221126690</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2715441768</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-4831aefbf9c9741fc91de6726e76accc16c8abf41e807620615ecbd402d47be43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9P3DAQxa0KBNuFD8AFWeLCJYvHcWyHG0KlrYTUQ5dz5DiTXcPmz9rJUr5AP3cd7baVqHqakeb33hvpEXIBbAGg1A3jMueQZZwDcClz9oHMQCiVMK3SIzKb7skEnJKPITwzxjQXcEJOUxkFWrMZ-blcIx0D0q6mvRkctgPFHz36uFmkNWJVGvtCXUs9rk3pNm6IWNfS7Wji_kZd0_tuh82kNG1FbVdhcKuWGju4nYuW4ZZ-t13v2lX02Dl8ncKGmBv16M0wejwjx7XZBDw_zDl5evi0vP-SPH77_PX-7jGxqdRDInQKBuuyzm2uBNQ2hwql4hKVNNZakFabshaAminJmYQMbVkJxiuhShTpnFzvfePP2xHDUDQuWNxsTIvdGAquIBMClNQRvXqHPnejb-N3kcokUxADIgV7yvouBI910XvXGP9WACumkop_Soqay4PzWDZY_VH8biUCiz0QzAr_xv7f8Rf7O5ur</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2756071620</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Jesus, TS ; Stern, BZ ; Struhar, J ; Deutsch, A ; Heinemann, AW</creator><creatorcontrib>Jesus, TS ; Stern, BZ ; Struhar, J ; Deutsch, A ; Heinemann, AW</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities. Design Scoping Review. Data sources Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest), website searches (e.g. Beryl Institute), snowballing, and key-informant recommendations. Methods Two independent reviewers performed title and abstract screenings and full-text reviews. Eligibility focused on English-language, peer-reviewed (all time) and gray literature (last five years) that used patient experience feedback in rehabilitation improvement activities. The aims, settings, methods, findings, implications, and reported limitations were extracted, followed by content analyses identifying reported enablers and gaps. Results Among the 901 unique references and 52 full texts reviewed, ten were included: four used patient experience surveys for improving patient experiences; six used codesign methodologies to engage patient feedback in service improvement activities. Implementation enablers included securing managerial support, having a structured methodology and facilitator, using efficient processes, engaging staff experiences, and using appreciative inquiry. Reported study gaps included limited follow-up, low sample sizes, analytical limitations, lack of reported limitations, or narrow range of perspectives (e.g. not from people with severe impairments). Conclusion Few examples of the use of patient experience feedback in quality improvement or codesign activities were found in the rehabilitation literature. Patient experience improvement activities relied exclusively on retrospective survey data, which were not combined with often more actionable forms (e.g. qualitative, real time) of patient experience feedback. Further research might consider design of activities that collect and use patient experience feedback for rehabilitation service improvements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0269-2155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-0873</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/02692155221126690</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36112880</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Appreciative inquiry ; Content analysis ; Feedback ; Humans ; Limitations ; Literature reviews ; Medical screening ; Patient Outcome Assessment ; Patient satisfaction ; Patient-centered care ; Polls &amp; surveys ; Quality Improvement ; Quality management ; Quality of care ; Rehabilitation ; Retrospective Studies ; Time use</subject><ispartof>Clinical rehabilitation, 2023-02, Vol.37 (2), p.261-276</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-4831aefbf9c9741fc91de6726e76accc16c8abf41e807620615ecbd402d47be43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-4831aefbf9c9741fc91de6726e76accc16c8abf41e807620615ecbd402d47be43</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1300-6308 ; 0000-0003-2290-7757 ; 0000-0001-6604-7096</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/02692155221126690$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/02692155221126690$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21799,27903,27904,30978,43600,43601</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36112880$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jesus, TS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stern, BZ</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struhar, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deutsch, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinemann, AW</creatorcontrib><title>The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature</title><title>Clinical rehabilitation</title><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><description>Objective To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities. Design Scoping Review. Data sources Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest), website searches (e.g. Beryl Institute), snowballing, and key-informant recommendations. Methods Two independent reviewers performed title and abstract screenings and full-text reviews. Eligibility focused on English-language, peer-reviewed (all time) and gray literature (last five years) that used patient experience feedback in rehabilitation improvement activities. The aims, settings, methods, findings, implications, and reported limitations were extracted, followed by content analyses identifying reported enablers and gaps. Results Among the 901 unique references and 52 full texts reviewed, ten were included: four used patient experience surveys for improving patient experiences; six used codesign methodologies to engage patient feedback in service improvement activities. Implementation enablers included securing managerial support, having a structured methodology and facilitator, using efficient processes, engaging staff experiences, and using appreciative inquiry. Reported study gaps included limited follow-up, low sample sizes, analytical limitations, lack of reported limitations, or narrow range of perspectives (e.g. not from people with severe impairments). Conclusion Few examples of the use of patient experience feedback in quality improvement or codesign activities were found in the rehabilitation literature. Patient experience improvement activities relied exclusively on retrospective survey data, which were not combined with often more actionable forms (e.g. qualitative, real time) of patient experience feedback. Further research might consider design of activities that collect and use patient experience feedback for rehabilitation service improvements.</description><subject>Appreciative inquiry</subject><subject>Content analysis</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Limitations</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medical screening</subject><subject>Patient Outcome Assessment</subject><subject>Patient satisfaction</subject><subject>Patient-centered care</subject><subject>Polls &amp; surveys</subject><subject>Quality Improvement</subject><subject>Quality management</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Time use</subject><issn>0269-2155</issn><issn>1477-0873</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9P3DAQxa0KBNuFD8AFWeLCJYvHcWyHG0KlrYTUQ5dz5DiTXcPmz9rJUr5AP3cd7baVqHqakeb33hvpEXIBbAGg1A3jMueQZZwDcClz9oHMQCiVMK3SIzKb7skEnJKPITwzxjQXcEJOUxkFWrMZ-blcIx0D0q6mvRkctgPFHz36uFmkNWJVGvtCXUs9rk3pNm6IWNfS7Wji_kZd0_tuh82kNG1FbVdhcKuWGju4nYuW4ZZ-t13v2lX02Dl8ncKGmBv16M0wejwjx7XZBDw_zDl5evi0vP-SPH77_PX-7jGxqdRDInQKBuuyzm2uBNQ2hwql4hKVNNZakFabshaAminJmYQMbVkJxiuhShTpnFzvfePP2xHDUDQuWNxsTIvdGAquIBMClNQRvXqHPnejb-N3kcokUxADIgV7yvouBI910XvXGP9WACumkop_Soqay4PzWDZY_VH8biUCiz0QzAr_xv7f8Rf7O5ur</recordid><startdate>202302</startdate><enddate>202302</enddate><creator>Jesus, TS</creator><creator>Stern, BZ</creator><creator>Struhar, J</creator><creator>Deutsch, A</creator><creator>Heinemann, AW</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1300-6308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2290-7757</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6604-7096</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202302</creationdate><title>The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature</title><author>Jesus, TS ; Stern, BZ ; Struhar, J ; Deutsch, A ; Heinemann, AW</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c368t-4831aefbf9c9741fc91de6726e76accc16c8abf41e807620615ecbd402d47be43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Appreciative inquiry</topic><topic>Content analysis</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Limitations</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medical screening</topic><topic>Patient Outcome Assessment</topic><topic>Patient satisfaction</topic><topic>Patient-centered care</topic><topic>Polls &amp; surveys</topic><topic>Quality Improvement</topic><topic>Quality management</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Time use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jesus, TS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stern, BZ</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Struhar, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deutsch, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinemann, AW</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jesus, TS</au><au>Stern, BZ</au><au>Struhar, J</au><au>Deutsch, A</au><au>Heinemann, AW</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature</atitle><jtitle>Clinical rehabilitation</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Rehabil</addtitle><date>2023-02</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>261</spage><epage>276</epage><pages>261-276</pages><issn>0269-2155</issn><eissn>1477-0873</eissn><abstract>Objective To characterize the literature, reported enablers, and gaps on the use of patient experience feedback for person-centered rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities. Design Scoping Review. Data sources Scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Rehabdata, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest), website searches (e.g. Beryl Institute), snowballing, and key-informant recommendations. Methods Two independent reviewers performed title and abstract screenings and full-text reviews. Eligibility focused on English-language, peer-reviewed (all time) and gray literature (last five years) that used patient experience feedback in rehabilitation improvement activities. The aims, settings, methods, findings, implications, and reported limitations were extracted, followed by content analyses identifying reported enablers and gaps. Results Among the 901 unique references and 52 full texts reviewed, ten were included: four used patient experience surveys for improving patient experiences; six used codesign methodologies to engage patient feedback in service improvement activities. Implementation enablers included securing managerial support, having a structured methodology and facilitator, using efficient processes, engaging staff experiences, and using appreciative inquiry. Reported study gaps included limited follow-up, low sample sizes, analytical limitations, lack of reported limitations, or narrow range of perspectives (e.g. not from people with severe impairments). Conclusion Few examples of the use of patient experience feedback in quality improvement or codesign activities were found in the rehabilitation literature. Patient experience improvement activities relied exclusively on retrospective survey data, which were not combined with often more actionable forms (e.g. qualitative, real time) of patient experience feedback. Further research might consider design of activities that collect and use patient experience feedback for rehabilitation service improvements.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>36112880</pmid><doi>10.1177/02692155221126690</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1300-6308</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2290-7757</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6604-7096</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0269-2155
ispartof Clinical rehabilitation, 2023-02, Vol.37 (2), p.261-276
issn 0269-2155
1477-0873
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2715441768
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
subjects Appreciative inquiry
Content analysis
Feedback
Humans
Limitations
Literature reviews
Medical screening
Patient Outcome Assessment
Patient satisfaction
Patient-centered care
Polls & surveys
Quality Improvement
Quality management
Quality of care
Rehabilitation
Retrospective Studies
Time use
title The use of patient experience feedback in rehabilitation quality improvement and codesign activities: Scoping review of the literature
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T14%3A07%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20use%20of%20patient%20experience%20feedback%20in%20rehabilitation%20quality%20improvement%20and%20codesign%20activities:%20Scoping%20review%20of%20the%20literature&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20rehabilitation&rft.au=Jesus,%20TS&rft.date=2023-02&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=261&rft.epage=276&rft.pages=261-276&rft.issn=0269-2155&rft.eissn=1477-0873&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/02692155221126690&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2715441768%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2756071620&rft_id=info:pmid/36112880&rft_sage_id=10.1177_02692155221126690&rfr_iscdi=true