Back

Enhancing system empathy within a UK Emergency Department: A feasibility interprofessional priority setting exercise

Howick, J.; Ward, A.; Grantham, C.; Bennett-Weston, A.

2024-04-16 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2024.04.15.24305826 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSystem-level barriers inhibit empathy in healthcare, and this can harm patients and practitioners. The barriers include burnout-inducing administrative workloads, burdensome protocols, lack of wellbeing spaces, un-empathic leadership, and not emphasising empathy as an institutional value. A workshop aimed at enhancing empathic systems was successfully delivered in Canada but has not been tested in the UK National Health Service (NHS) setting. AimTo test the feasibility of an empathic systems workshop within the UK NHS setting. MethodsWe conducted an interprofessional group of an emergency department (ED). We used a modified nominal group technique to prioritise actions to enhance empathy in the ED system. Satisfaction with the workshop and confidence that the workshop would lead to change were measured on a 10-point Likert scale. ResultsTwenty-eight participants representing the following stakeholder groups attended the workshop: leaders, consultants, nurses, security, and porters. The group agreed to generating a better wellbeing action plan and implementing an effective secondary triage system. Seventy-three percent (73%) rated their satisfaction with the workshop as 8 or higher out of ten, and 63% reported being confident that the workshop would lead to positive change. LimitationsA doctors strike limited the range of stakeholders who were able to attend, and long-term follow up was not conducted. ConclusionsParticipants in a UK setting were satisfied with a previously developed system empathy workshop and reported being confident that it would lead to positive change. Participants were able to prioritise changes that would improve system empathy and were confident that the changes would be effective.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMJ Open Quality
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.4%
2
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
23.4%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.5%
50% of probability mass above
4
Emergency Medicine Journal
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.0%
5
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.8%
6
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
7
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.8%
8
BJPsych Open
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
9
Journal of Clinical Pathology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
10
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
11
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
12
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
13
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.3%
14
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
15
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
16
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
17
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
19
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
20
Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
11 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
21
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
22
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
23
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
24
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
25
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
26
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%
27
CMAJ Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
28
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%