Patient Journey Action Research: A collaborative and evidence-based approach to quality improvement in healthcare

Conference: Wessex Quality and Improvement Conference

Dates: 15 June 2016

Journal: Wessex AHSN and Health Education England websites

Place of Publication: Wessex AHSN and Health Education England websites

Abstract:

Measures and Outcomes Measures included • Monitoring via a PJAR Steering Group comprising NHS Trust Management; NHS Executive Committee/Trust Board, Ethical and Research & Development Governance Committees and Bournemouth University. • PJAR meeting notes and ‘Issues and Solutions’ change document - audit trail of improvement. Outcomes: • Poignant catalysts for evidence-based change were quickly identified and effectively implemented where resources supported this. • By also inviting feedback from participants about what worked well, a more balanced approach to service review was achieved. This was reported to enhance team morale and motivation for initiating change and sustaining continuous quality improvement. Learning outcomes and conclusions Strengths; • The ARPJ achieves results as a collaborative, evidence-based and balanced approach to improvement that involves people with first-hand knowledge and experience. • Real involvement - patient and care partner participants valued the opportunity to be actively involved and able to ‘make a difference’ through their contributions. Limitations: • Requires significant buy-in from NHS Trust management and ARPJ team participants.

Time • Dependent on the qualities, attributes, knowledge and people skills of the ARPJ facilitator.

Conclusions: • The ARPJ offers as a generic model for healthcare and services review and evidence-based improvement.

The outcomes may have wider reaching impact. For example the potential to “shift thinking” about how clinical care pathways are reviewed and what services are “like from the patient perspective”; and to trigger “cultural shift across the whole hospital”.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/33687/

Source: Manual

Patient Journey Action Research: A collaborative and evidence-based approach to quality improvement in healthcare

Authors: Baron, S.

Conference: Wessex Quality and Improvement Conference

Abstract:

Project aim and objectives To implement, test and evaluate a structured, evidence-based, collaborative approach to continuous quality improvement in healthcare and explore its wider potential as a model for improvement. Actions taken (including methods used) Patient Journey Action Research (PJAR) improvement project implemented and evaluated in an acute NHS Hospital Trust. The action researcher/project facilitator was external to the Trust but worked in close collaboration with NHS management; a core PJAR project team of 25 interdisciplinary NHS staff; 11 patients with peripheral vascular disease and 6 care partners. Supplementary methods included qualitative interviews with patients and care partners; mapping of Vascular Patient Journey; matrix sampling; PJAR project team meetings. Evaluation through qualitative interviews and/or questionnaire. Measures and Outcomes Measures included • Monitoring via a PJAR Steering Group comprising NHS Trust Management; NHS Executive Committee/Trust Board, Ethical and Research & Development Governance Committees and Bournemouth University. • PJAR meeting notes and ‘Issues and Solutions’ change document - audit trail of improvement. Outcomes: • Poignant catalysts for evidence-based change were quickly identified and effectively implemented where resources supported this. • By also inviting feedback from participants about what worked well, a more balanced approach to service review was achieved. This was reported to enhance team morale and motivation for initiating change and sustaining continuous quality improvement. Learning outcomes and conclusions Strengths; • The ARPJ achieves results as a collaborative, evidence-based and balanced approach to improvement that involves people with first-hand knowledge and experience. • Real involvement - patient and care partner participants valued the opportunity to be actively involved and able to ‘make a difference’ through their contributions. Limitations: • Requires significant buy-in from NHS Trust management and ARPJ team participants. • Time • Dependent on the qualities, attributes, knowledge and people skills of the ARPJ facilitator. Conclusions: • The ARPJ offers as a generic model for healthcare and services review and evidence-based improvement. • The outcomes may have wider reaching impact. For example the potential to “shift thinking” about how clinical care pathways are reviewed and what services are “like from the patient perspective”; and to trigger “cultural shift across the whole hospital”.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/33687/

Source: BURO EPrints