Evaluating the implementation and use of patient-reported outcome measures in a mental health hospital in Denmark: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Reporting of barriers and successes associated with the implementation and use of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is limited as a means to ensure enhanced patient involvement, shared decision-making and improved treatment and care. We set out to evaluate the implementation and use of the PRO-Psychiatry initiative on patient-reported outcome measures in Danish mental health care. We aimed to described four specific areas: the quality of the clinical consultations before and after the implementation of PRO-Psychiatry as perceived by the patients (objective A), the motivation for participating in PRO-Psychiatry as perceived by patients and clinicians (objective B), the implementation process as perceived by patients, clinicians and managers (objective C) and suggestions for improvement (objective D). METHODS: The PRO-Psychiatry initiative was evaluated through a participatory approach, including patients, clinicians and managers. A repeated cross-sectional interview-based survey explored the quality of the clinical consultation before and after the implementation of PRO-Psychiatry. A three-step semi-structured group interview, inspired by the modified mini-Delphi method, was used to establish consensus on the evaluation of the implementation and use of the initiative. RESULTS: The evaluation pointed at PRO-Psychiatry as a meaningful initiative, which motivated patients and supported clinicians. The patients emphasised the importance of PROs, but they also found that PROs were not used enough. Clinically relevant improvements were detected after the implementation of the initiative; more patients felt heard and experienced that clinicians took a greater interest in their problems. The clinicians valued the easily accessible real-time graphical display of the PRO responses in the electronic health record (EHR). Clinicians and managers agreed that clinical PRO practices, patient compliance and use of PROs in treatment and care should be supported during implementation. CONCLUSION: The evaluation was overall positive. Patients and clinicians were willing to participate, found the online reporting easy and valued the direct access to PRO responses in the EHR. An essential feature was the integration of well-defined and functional PRO practices into the existing clinical workflow. Using PROs in the clinical sessions in a way that was palpable to the patient was found to be a significant improvement need. At the individual level, PRO-Psychiatry can use patient outcome information to support dialogue, encourage shared decision-making and promote self-management during recovery. At the aggregated patient level, the PROs can be used for monitoring the patient-perceived quality of care and for research.

Using patient-reported outcome measures in psychiatric hospital care: an observational study describing an iterative implementation process in Denmark.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly recognized as valuable sources of information to enhance our understanding of the quality of healthcare from the patient's perspective. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the implementation process of the Danish nationwide PRO-Psychiatry project, including iterative tests of previously developed PRO measurement concept and an online data collection tool. Additional aims were to identify the 'best practice' for the routine use of PROs in hospital-based psychiatry and design information material about the project. METHODS: We conducted an action-oriented observational study to explore the pilot implementation of the PRO-Psychiatry project, which was initiated in February 2018. The study was based on an iterative plan-do-learn approach. An inpatient unit and an outpatient unit from the same psychiatric department in the North Denmark Region were selected for the pilot implementation. The implementation was anchored in multidisciplinary implementation teams at unit level. These teams managed the implementation process according to four tasks defined by the department management. RESULTS: The teams designed, tested, evaluated and adjusted the localized work practices relating to the use of PRO-Psychiatry. The comprehensibility of the predesigned PROs, the usability of the Information Technology(IT) system and the routine use of PROs during clinical consultations were repeatedly tested and adjusted until the functionality was satisfactory. Furthermore, the teams designed information material for patients (emails, posters, handouts and webpages) and clinicians (online clinical guidelines). The team members informed their colleagues about the progress of PRO-Psychiatry at staff meetings and rolled out the initiative through one-to-one teaching. CONCLUSIONS: The pilot implementation was deemed successful. PRO-Psychiatry was rolled out to other units in the region, and a national decision was made to pilot implement the initiative in the other four Danish regions.

Analysis of Suicides Reported as Adverse Events in Psychiatry Resulted in Nine Quality Improvement Initiatives.

Background: The majority of persons who die by suicide have a mental disorder. Preventive strategies should include addressing social and psychological factors and the treatment of the mental disorder. Aim: We aimed to identify breaches in clinical care and identify areas for quality improvement initiatives. Method: An aggregate analysis of suicides reported as adverse events during 2012-2016 to Psychiatry, North Denmark Region was carried out. We developed an audit chart and identified items through (a) medical chart review and (b) consensus meetings in an expert panel. Results: A total of 35 cases were analyzed. Suicide risk assessments were adequately documented in the medial chart in six of 35 cases. Risk assessments emphasized suicidal ideation rather than well-known risk factors such as previous suicide attempts, substance abuse, physical illness, or job loss. Relatives were involved in four of 35 of the risk assessments. The panel suggested nine areas for quality improvement. Limitations: Most people who die by suicide are not seen in mental health facilities prior to suicide, and hence conclusions can only be generalized to these patients. Information on the gap between "Work-as-Done" and "Work-As-Imagined" was not recognized. Conclusion: Most of the risk assessments among suicides reported as adverse events to our mental health facilities were insufficient. Quality improvement initiatives focusing on training, documentation, involving relatives, communication, and data sharing must be planned to improve clinical care.

Quality in practice: applying the patient inventory method at a Danish psychiatric hospital.

QUALITY PROBLEM: Patient care pathways should be organized according to the needs of the patients. This requires methods to assess whether the specific pathways ensure the right care for the right person at the right time and in the right setting. INITIAL ASSESSMENT: Previous investigations indicate that ~25% of the patients in Danish hospitals experience inappropriate elements in their care pathways. CHOICE OF SOLUTION: This study applied the Patient Inventory method to identify inappropriate elements in care pathways in 15 psychiatric in-patient wards in Denmark. IMPLEMENTATION: The pathway for 201 patients was systematically evaluated by the clinical staff to identify whether the admission of the patient was avoidable, the hospitalization was unnecessarily prolonged or if the patient could receive more relevant treatment elsewhere. A subsequent meeting between the clinical staff and management qualified the assessment and identified possible solutions to problems. EVALUATION: A total of 54 (26.9%) of the included patients were assessed to have inappropriate elements in their care pathways, some with more than one type, resulting in a total of 65 episodes.Eight of these episodes (13.1%) were admissions considered to be avoidable, 26 (42.2%) were unnecessary prolongation of admissions, and 31 (58.1%) were patients assessed to be able to receive more relevant care elsewhere. LESSONS LEARNED: One out of four assessed patients admitted to a psychiatric ward was exposed to an inappropriate element in their care pathway. The Patient Inventory tool can assist in a structured dialogue between clinical staff and management to identify focus areas for improvement efforts.

Patient Inventory: a quality improvement method.

Providing high quality care requires that patient care pathways are organized according to the needs of the patient. The organization of high-quality integrated patient care requires methods to assess 'appropriateness' of the care pathways to identify challenges in delivering the right procedure, for the right person at the right time and setting and with the most appropriate use of resources. There is a need for methods to assess appropriateness that can easily be implemented in daily clinical practice. The Patient Inventory method is such a method. Patient Inventory is a special type of audit that provides a 'snapshot' of the patient population in an entire hospital, a ward or another clinical unit. It maps the bed occupancy situation, as well as coordination, continuity and communication associated with the individual patient pathway. The aim is to identify inappropriate or wasteful events and to facilitate reflections on the underlying causes. These reflections are used to identify focus areas for quality improvement efforts. The method answers the question: 'Is it the right patient in the right place at the right time, and is the correct pathway for the patient organized with the most appropriate use of resources?' The aim of this method paper is to describe the background, definitions and methodologies for Patient Inventory, to offer a practical guidance for application of the method and to describe the current experiences with the method.