The silent threat: investigating sleep disturbances in hospitalized patients.

Sleep disruptions in the hospital setting can have adverse effects on patient safety and well-being, leading to complications like delirium and prolonged recovery. This study aimed to comprehensively assess the factors influencing sleep disturbances in hospital wards, with a comparison of the sleep quality of patients staying in single rooms to those in shared rooms. A mixed-methods approach was used to examine patient-reported sleep quality and sleep disruption factors, in conjunction with objective noise measurements, across seven inpatient wards at an acute tertiary public hospital in Sydney, Australia. The most disruptive factor to sleep in the hospital was noise, ranked as 'very disruptive' by 20% of patients, followed by acute health conditions (11%) and nursing interventions (10%). Patients in shared rooms experienced the most disturbed sleep, with 51% reporting 'poor' or 'very poor' sleep quality. In contrast, only 17% of the patients in single rooms reported the same. Notably, sound levels in shared rooms surpassed 100 dB, highlighting the potential for significant sleep disturbances in shared patient accommodation settings. The results of this study provide a comprehensive overview of the sleep-related challenges faced by patients in hospital, particularly those staying in shared rooms. The insights from this study offer guidance for targeted healthcare improvements to minimize disruptions and enhance the quality of sleep for hospitalized patients.

As loud as a construction site: Noise levels in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The Emergency Department (ED), while being an integral part of healthcare systems, frequently experiences noise levels surpassing the World Health Organization's recommended thresholds. These excessive noise levels could considerably compromise the safety and wellbeing of both patients and staff. METHODS: To evaluate noise levels throughout the ED environment, this study utilized dosimeters to measure noise levels over a 24-hour period in six distinct locations, including the ED Waiting Room and Treatment areas. RESULTS: The study found that noise exceeded the WHO recommendations in all six areas of the ED for the entire 24-hour period. Peak noise levels were recorded up to 102.8 dB, which is as loud as noise levels at a construction site. The ED Waiting Room exhibited high peak and average noise levels, indicating the urgent need for quality improvement efforts. These findings align with the results of previous research, thereby suggesting that noise levels in the ED have remained problematic for more than a decade. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study underscore the importance of addressing excessive noise levels in the ED to create a safe and therapeutic hospital environment for both patients and staff. Healthcare organizations must implement proactive measures to address excessive noise levels in the ED.

From Detractors to Promoters: A comparative analysis of patient experience drivers across Net Promoter Score subcategories.

BACKGROUND: The utilization of patient experience surveying by health care institutions has become increasingly prevalent, yet its effectiveness in promoting quality improvement remains uncertain. To enhance the utility of patient feedback, the examination of free-text comments may provide valuable insights to guide patient experience strategy. AIMS: This study aims to explore the utility of free-text comments and identify key differences for patient experience drivers between Net Promoter Score (NPS) subcategories of Detractors, Passives, and Promoters. METHODS: Evaluation and classification of comments was conducted using the eight Picker Principles of Person Centred Care, with descriptive analysis of patient comments performed on the NPS data. RESULTS: Analysis of patient NPS comments can be classified into three key drivers: "feeling well-treated" (for Detractors), "feeling comfortable" (for Passives), and "feeling valued" (for Promoters). Specifically, Detractor comments provided the most comprehensive and detailed feedback to guide patient experience improvement activities. CONCLUSION: This study highlights differences between NPS subcategories, particularly regarding aspects of safety, comfort, and feeling valued. Comments from Detractor respondents may be especially useful for guiding quality improvements due to increased specificity and insights. These results also emphasize the essential nature of empathy and compassionate interactions between patients and clinicians to achieve the highest level of patient satisfaction and experience.

Differences in Patient Experiences Among People From Ethnic Minority Backgrounds: A Comparative Analysis of HCAHPS Results.

Patients from ethnic minority backgrounds often experience disparities in healthcare quality and outcomes. This study aimed to compare the patient-reported experiences of patients with limited English proficiency (LEP) to general patients in the Australian healthcare setting. The Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey was used to evaluate patient experiences from patients in a metropolitan public healthcare network, spanning three hospitals. Level of English proficiency was based on primary language spoken at home. To identify disparities in experience ratings between patients with LEP and the general cohort, independent t-tests were employed. Data was analysed from 2,291 patients, collected over a five-year period (2017-2022), with 490 patients identified as LEP (i.e. speaking a language other than English at home). Statistically significant differences were identified between the cohorts, with LEP patients rating their experiences higher in three areas: doctors listening carefully, doctors explaining in a way they could understand, and quietness at night. Conversely, patients with LEP scored lower in areas regarding nursing respect and responsiveness to call bells. Although patients with LEP had a more positive overall experience, this difference was not statistically significant. The findings indicate potential misalignment between the often poorer health outcomes among people from ethnic minority backgrounds and their experiences in hospital. Additional research is crucial to delve into the unique experiences of ethnic minority patients, including those with LEP, to understand the differences influencing perceptions of care and contributing to disparities in health outcomes.

The HUSH Project: Using codesign to reduce sleep disruptions for patients in hospital.

BACKGROUND: Poor quality sleep in hospitals may be problematic for patients, negatively impacting their recovery and wellbeing. This project aimed to investigate the effectiveness of codesign in addressing key issues affecting sleep disruption in the healthcare setting. METHODS: Codesign with patients, staff and consumer representatives was conducted in an acute metropolitan tertiary public hospital in Sydney, Australia. Through a four-stage process, a multimodal intervention to address and reduce the impact of sleep disruptions among hospital inpatients was created. Pre- and post-intervention evaluation was used to determine changes in patient-reported sleep disruption. RESULTS: 'The HUSH Project' (Help Us Support Healing) intervention resulted from the codesign process, which included the provision of HUSH Sleep Packs (with earplugs, eye masks and herbal tea), patient information resources, and ward-based Sleep Champions. Survey data from 210 patients revealed a statistically significant decrease in patient-reported noise disturbances for patients in shared rooms following the 4-week intervention period of the HUSH program. CONCLUSION: The HUSH Project demonstrated that a novel multimodal intervention may be valuable in reducing sleep disruption in hospitals. These findings also indicate the benefits of using codesign methodology to support improvement projects that seek to enhance patient experiences of care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This project utilised codesign methodology, which involved significant contributions from patients and consumer representatives, from research conceptualisation into intervention design, implementation and project evaluation.

The ultimate question? Evaluating the use of Net Promoter Score in healthcare: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience is a complex phenomenon that presents challenges for appropriate and effective measurement. With the lack of a standardized measurement approach, efforts have been made to simplify the evaluation and reporting of patient experience by using single-item measures, such as the Net Promoter Score (NPS). Although NPS is widely used in many countries, there has been little research to validate its effectiveness and value in the healthcare setting. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the evidence that is available about the application of NPS in healthcare settings. METHODS: Studies were identified using words and synonyms that relate to NPS, which was applied to five electronic databases: Medline, CINAHL, Proquest, Business Journal Premium, and Scopus. Titles and abstracts between January 2005 and September 2020 were screened for relevance, with the inclusion of quantitative and qualitative studies in the healthcare setting that evaluated the use of NPS to measure patient experience. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Four studies identified benefits associated with using NPS, such as ease of use, high completion rates and being well-understood by a range of patients. Three studies questioned the usefulness of the NPS recommendation question in healthcare settings, particularly when respondents are unable to select their service provider. The free-text comments section, which provides additional detail and contextual cues, was viewed positively by patients and staff in 4 of 12 studies. According to these studies, NPS can be influenced by a wide range of variables, such as age, condition/disease, intervention and cultural variation; therefore, caution should be taken when using NPS for comparisons. Four studies concluded that NPS adds minimal value to healthcare improvement. CONCLUSION: The literature suggests that many of the proposed benefits of using NPS are not supported by research. NPS may not be sufficient as a stand-alone metric and may be better used in conjunction with a larger survey. NPS may be more suited for use in certain healthcare settings, for example, where patients have a choice of provider. Staff attitudes towards the use of NPS for patient surveying are mixed. More research is needed to validate the use of NPS as a primary metric of patient experience. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Consumer representatives were provided with the research findings and their feedback was sought about the study. Consumers commented that they found the results to be useful and felt that this study highlighted important considerations when NPS data is used to evaluate patient experience.

Update on the inaugural Sydney Diabetic Foot Conference 2013.

The first International Diabetic Foot Conference in Australia was hosted at Liverpool Hospital in Sydney during May 30-31, 2013. In response to the growing diabetes epidemic globally and more locally to Australia, the conference provided the perfect bridge for interaction between the multidisciplinary team members involved in diabetes care and the opportunity to assimilate the most up-to-date evidence-based medicine from some of the most respected researchers in the field.

Developing a hospital travel plan: process and baseline findings from a western Sydney hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of a hospital travel plan and report baseline findings. METHODS: The development of a travel plan involved an assessment of organisational barriers and enablers to travel planning, auditing of the transport to and physical environment of the hospital, a staff survey, analysis of distances staff travel to work and interviews with hospital managers. RESULTS: There were no significant organisational impediments to, and consistent managerial support for a travel plan. The staff survey response rate was similar to response rates in workplace surveys delivered mostly online via all staff emails (n = 804, 25%). The majority (83%) of respondents drove to work on most days during the week of the survey, and the majority of drivers (58%) said they were not trying to reduce their car use and not thinking of doing so. Half (47%) of all hospital staff (n = 3222) lived within 10 km and 25% lived within 5 km. People living 5-10 km from the hospital were more likely to be active travellers than were those living less than 5 km from the hospital (AOR 2.7, 95% (CI): 1.6-4.5), as were male than female staff (AOR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.1-2.9). CONCLUSIONS: The process and baseline findings described in this paper are a useful reference for Australian hospitals developing travel plans.

"Others had similar problems and you were not alone": evaluation of an open-group mutual aid model in cardiac rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Dealing with psychological and social issues is an important aspect of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs. STUDY AIM: This study aims to evaluate the use of an open-group mutual aid model facilitated by a social worker and occupational therapist in a secondary prevention CR program. METHOD: A mixed-method study, using questionnaires, focus group data, and reflective interviews of group facilitators, was used to evaluate the program. STUDY FINDINGS: Key themes emerging from this study were (1) the need for provision of hope; (2) a desire for structure and support; (3) appreciation of support of fellow group participants; and (4) the need for individuals to review, process, and interpret their illness trajectory. CONCLUSIONS: In this single site study, an open-group model using a mutual aid model was acceptable and helpful as a method to facilitate adjustment after an acute cardiac event. Further evaluation of this approach using experimental methods is warranted.