• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

患者体验与反思学习(PEARL):英国急性与重症监护医学中提升医护人员洞察力的混合方法研究方案。

Patient experience and reflective learning (PEARL): a mixed methods protocol for staff insight development in acute and intensive care medicine in the UK.

机构信息

Research, Development & Innovation, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.

Warwick Medical School (WMS), The University of Warwick, Warwick, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 24;9(7):e030679. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030679.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030679
PMID:31345985
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6661565/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Patient and staff experiences are strongly influenced by attitudes and behaviours, and provide important insights into care quality. Patient and staff feedback could be used more effectively to enhance behaviours and improve care through systematic integration with techniques for reflective learning. We aim to develop a reflective learning framework and toolkit for healthcare staff to improve patient, family and staff experience.

METHODS & ANALYSIS: Local project teams including staff and patients from the acute medical units (AMUs) and intensive care units (ICUs) of three National Health Service trusts will implement two experience surveys derived from existing instruments: a continuous patient and relative survey and an annual staff survey. Survey data will be supplemented by ethnographic interviews and observations in the workplace to evaluate barriers to and facilitators of reflective learning. Using facilitated iterative co-design, local project teams will supplement survey data with their experiences of healthcare to identify events, actions, activities and interventions which promote personal insight and empathy through reflective learning. Outputs will be collated by the central project team to develop a reflective learning framework and toolkit which will be fed back to the local groups for review, refinement and piloting. The development process will be mapped to a conceptual theory of reflective learning which combines psychological and pedagogical theories of learning, alongside theories of behaviour change based on capability, opportunity and motivation influencing behaviour. The output will be a locally-adaptable workplace-based toolkit providing guidance on using reflective learning to incorporate patient and staff experience in routine clinical activities.

ETHICS & DISSEMINATION: The PEARL project has received ethics approval from the London Brent Research Ethics Committee (REC Ref 16/LO/224). We propose a national cluster randomised step-wedge trial of the toolkit developed for large-scale evaluation of impact on patient outcomes.

摘要

简介

患者和员工的体验深受态度和行为的影响,为了解护理质量提供了重要的见解。患者和员工的反馈可以通过与反思性学习技术的系统整合,更有效地用于增强行为和改善护理。我们旨在为医护人员开发一个反思性学习框架和工具包,以改善患者、家属和员工的体验。

方法与分析

包括来自三个国民保健服务信托基金的急性医学病房(AMU)和重症监护病房(ICU)的员工和患者在内的当地项目团队将实施两项源自现有工具的体验调查:一项是连续的患者和亲属调查,一项是年度员工调查。调查数据将辅以工作场所的民族志访谈和观察,以评估反思性学习的障碍和促进因素。当地项目团队将利用便利的迭代共同设计,用他们的医疗保健经验补充调查数据,以确定通过反思性学习促进个人洞察力和同理心的事件、行动、活动和干预措施。中央项目团队将整理这些产出,以开发一个反思性学习框架和工具包,并将其反馈给当地团队进行审查、改进和试点。该开发过程将映射到一个反思性学习的概念理论,该理论结合了学习的心理和教学理论,以及基于能力、机会和动机影响行为的行为改变理论。该成果将是一个适用于当地环境的基于工作场所的工具包,提供关于如何将患者和员工体验纳入常规临床活动的反思性学习指南。

伦理与传播

PEARL 项目已获得伦敦布伦特伦理委员会的伦理批准(REC 参考号 16/LO/224)。我们提出了一项针对该工具包的全国性群组随机阶梯式试验,该工具包是为大规模评估对患者结果的影响而开发的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/f1dcdf88be31/bmjopen-2019-030679f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/a51e284c8879/bmjopen-2019-030679f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/b444e12794a4/bmjopen-2019-030679f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/f1dcdf88be31/bmjopen-2019-030679f03.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/a51e284c8879/bmjopen-2019-030679f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/b444e12794a4/bmjopen-2019-030679f02.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/db30/6661565/f1dcdf88be31/bmjopen-2019-030679f03.jpg

相似文献

1
Patient experience and reflective learning (PEARL): a mixed methods protocol for staff insight development in acute and intensive care medicine in the UK.患者体验与反思学习(PEARL):英国急性与重症监护医学中提升医护人员洞察力的混合方法研究方案。
BMJ Open. 2019 Jul 24;9(7):e030679. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030679.
2
3
Development and evaluation of a de-escalation training intervention in adult acute and forensic units: the EDITION systematic review and feasibility trial.成人急症和法医病房中降级治疗培训干预措施的制定和评估:EDITION 系统评价和可行性试验。
Health Technol Assess. 2024 Jan;28(3):1-120. doi: 10.3310/FGGW6874.
4
Enhancing medical students' reflectivity in mentoring groups for professional development - a qualitative analysis.促进医学学生在导师小组中的反思能力以促进专业发展 - 一项定性分析。
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Jul 14;17(1):122. doi: 10.1186/s12909-017-0951-y.
5
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.医疗专业人员在急症医院环境中团队合作教育的经验:对定性文献的系统综述
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Apr;14(4):96-137. doi: 10.11124/JBISRIR-2016-1843.
6
Faculty development initiatives designed to promote leadership in medical education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 19.旨在促进医学教育领导力的教师发展计划。BEME 系统评价:BEME 指南第 19 号。
Med Teach. 2012;34(6):483-503. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.680937.
7
Healthcare stakeholders' perceptions and experiences of factors affecting the implementation of critical care telemedicine (CCT): qualitative evidence synthesis.医疗保健利益相关者对影响重症监护远程医疗(CCT)实施因素的看法和经验:定性证据综合分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 18;2(2):CD012876. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012876.pub2.
8
Why do acute healthcare staff behave unprofessionally towards each other and how can these behaviours be reduced? A realist review.医护人员之间为何会出现不专业的行为,又应如何减少此类行为?一项现实主义综述。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Aug;12(25):1-195. doi: 10.3310/PAMV3758.
9
10
Co-designing and testing the learn together guidance to support patient and family involvement in patient safety investigations: a mixed-methods study.共同设计并测试“共同学习指南”以支持患者及家属参与患者安全调查:一项混合方法研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 May;13(18):1-125. doi: 10.3310/KJHT3375.

引用本文的文献

1
How to implement patient experience surveys and use their findings for service improvement: a qualitative expert consultation study in Australian general practice.如何开展患者体验调查并利用调查结果改进服务:澳大利亚全科医疗的定性专家咨询研究
Integr Healthc J. 2020 Nov 1;2(1):e000033. doi: 10.1136/ihj-2019-000033. eCollection 2020.
2
Co-production practice and future research priorities in United Kingdom-funded applied health research: a scoping review.英国资助的应用健康研究中的共同生产实践和未来研究重点:范围综述。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2022 Apr 2;20(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s12961-022-00838-x.
3
Trainee doctors' experiences of learning and well-being while working in intensive care during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study using appreciative inquiry.

本文引用的文献

1
Understanding organisational culture for healthcare quality improvement.理解组织文化以提升医疗质量。
BMJ. 2018 Nov 28;363:k4907. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k4907.
2
What's the problem with patient experience feedback? A macro and micro understanding, based on findings from a three-site UK qualitative study.患者体验反馈存在哪些问题?基于一项英国内三个地点的定性研究结果的宏观和微观理解。
Health Expect. 2019 Feb;22(1):46-53. doi: 10.1111/hex.12829. Epub 2018 Sep 22.
3
Updating Beliefs under Perceived Threat.更新感知威胁下的信念。
新冠疫情期间实习医生在重症监护病房工作时的学习经历与幸福感:一项运用肯定性探究的定性研究
BMJ Open. 2021 May 25;11(5):e049437. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-049437.
4
Reflection in practice: How can patient experience feedback trigger staff reflection in hospital acute care settings?实践反思:患者体验反馈如何在医院急症护理环境中引发医护人员的反思?
Health Expect. 2020 Apr;23(2):396-404. doi: 10.1111/hex.13010. Epub 2019 Dec 19.
J Neurosci. 2018 Sep 5;38(36):7901-7911. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0716-18.2018. Epub 2018 Aug 6.
4
'Collective making' as knowledge mobilisation: the contribution of participatory design in the co-creation of knowledge in healthcare.作为知识动员的“集体创造”:参与式设计在医疗保健知识共同创造中的贡献。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jul 25;18(1):585. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3397-y.
5
Care pathway and organisational features driving patient experience: statistical analysis of large NHS datasets.推动患者体验的护理路径和组织特征:对英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)大型数据集的统计分析
BMJ Open. 2018 Jul 7;8(7):e020411. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020411.
6
Methodological quality of teaching communication skills to undergraduate medical students: a mapping review.本科医学生医学沟通技能教学方法的质量评价:映射综述。
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Jun 27;18(1):151. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1265-4.
7
What can patients tell us about the quality and safety of hospital care? Findings from a UK multicentre survey study.患者能告诉我们关于医院护理质量和安全的什么信息?来自英国多中心调查研究的结果。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Sep;27(9):673-682. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-006974. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
8
Making soft intelligence hard: a multi-site qualitative study of challenges relating to voice about safety concerns.使软智能变硬:一项关于与安全顾虑相关的声音的多地点定性研究。
BMJ Qual Saf. 2018 Sep;27(9):710-717. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007579. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
9
A Randomized Controlled Study on the Effects of a Documentary on Students' Empathy and Attitudes towards Older Adults.关于一部纪录片对学生同理心及对老年人态度影响的随机对照研究。
Psychol Cogn Sci. 2017;3(3):79-88. doi: 10.17140/PCSOJ-3-127. Epub 2017 Jul 20.
10
Intern as Patient: A Patient Experience Simulation to Cultivate Empathy in Emergency Medicine Residents.实习生扮演患者:一种培养急诊住院医师同理心的患者体验模拟。
West J Emerg Med. 2018 Jan;19(1):41-48. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2017.11.35198. Epub 2017 Dec 14.