Preparation for cardiac procedures: identifying gaps between outpatients' views and experiences of patient-centred care
Fakes, K.; Williams, T.; Collins, N.; Boyle, A.; Sverdlov, A. L.; Boyes, A.; Sanson-Fisher, R. W.
Show abstract
BackgroundTo examine the delivery of patient-centred care and identify any gaps in care perceived as essential by patients; this study examined outpatients: 1) views on what characterises essential care and 2) experiences of care received, in relation to cardiac catheterisation and subsequent cardiovascular procedures. MethodsA cross-sectional descriptive study was undertaken. Surveys were posted to outpatients who had undergone elective cardiac catheterisation in the prior six months at an Australian tertiary public hospital. Participants completed a 65-item survey to determine: a) aspects of care they perceive as essential for a healthcare team to provide to patients receiving care for a cardiac condition (Important Care Survey); or b) their actual care received (Actual Care Survey). Numbers and percentages were used to calculate the most frequently identified essential care items by patients; and the experiences of care received. Items rated as either Essential or Very important by at least 80% of participants were determined, reflecting patient endorsement of the importance of the component of care. A gap in patient-centred care was identified as being any item that was endorsed as essential/very important by 80% or more of participants but reported as received by less than 80% of participants. ResultsOf 582 eligible patients, 264 (45%) returned a completed survey. 43/65 items were endorsed by over 80% of participants as essential/very important. Of those, for 22 items, less than 80% of respondents reported the care as received. Gaps were identified in relation to GP consultation (3 items), preparation (4 items), having the procedure (2 items), follow-up care (1 item), subsequent decision making for treatment (4 items), prognosis (6 items) and post-treatment follow-up (1 item). ConclusionsAreas were identified where actual care fell short of patients perceptions of essential care, particularly general practitioner involvement, the referral process and information on patient prognosis.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- What matters to patients?: a timely question for Value Based Care 96%
- Mapping rehabilitation pathways after cardiac surgery: Identifying key points for patient involvement and gaps in care 95%
- Multimodal Prehabilitation in People Awaiting Acute Inpatient Cardiac Surgery: Study Protocol for a Pilot Feasibility Trial (PreP-ACe) 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The impact of the first wave of COVID-19 on those with lifelong conditions: a case study of congenital heart disease 95%
- Face-to-face interventions to encourage enrolment in cardiac rehabilitation; a scoping review protocol 94%
- Pre-Post Analysis of the Impact of British Columbia Nurse Practitioner Primary Care Clinics on Patient Health and Care Experience 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- The Impact for implementing Balanced Scorecard in Health Care Organizations: A Systematic Review 92%
- Integrating Community-Based Health Information System with a Patient-Centered Medical Home to Improve Care of Patients with Hypertension: A Longitudinal Observational Study Protocol 92%
- A Systematic Review: The Dimensions and Indicators utilized in the Performance Evaluation of Health Care Organizations- An Implication during COVID-19 Pandemic 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- “We tend to get pad happy” : a qualitative study of health practitioners’ perspectives on continence care for older people in hospital 92%
- National statutory reporting: not even ticking the boxes? The quality of ‘Learning from Deaths’ reporting in Quality Accounts within the NHS in England 2017-2020 92%
- Improving the impact of pharmacy interventions in hospitals 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and psychometric testing of EPAT-16: A short and valid measure for patient-centeredness from the patient’s perspective 93%
- Patients’ and carers’ experiences of, and engagement with remote home monitoring services for COVID-19 patients: a rapid mixed-methods study 93%
- “I don’t know what to do or where to go”. Experiences of accessing healthcare support from the perspectives of people living with Long Covid and healthcare professionals: A qualitative study in Bradford, UK 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.