Consensus conference for patient engagement

Consensus conference for patient engagement

  1. English
  2. English

Activity details

DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMITMENT Despite the fact that older adults are healthier than in the past, the current trend of an ageing population implies an increased risk and severity of chronic diseases. Low-resource healthcare systems face increased organizational healthcare costs, which is likely to result in an allocation of limited health resources. All governments and societies face rising demand for services and higher quality of life expectations, and they need to reconcile these requests with the limited resources availability. Furthermore healthcare organization are facing the people rising demand for more active role in all the steps of the care process: in other words, healthcare organizations are claimed to face a “critical outside” that should be transformed in ally to the successful planning and delivery of healthcare interventions and services. People require to be better involved in the decision making about their care and are willing to deeply entangle all the possible treatment options, their advantages, and their risks. That implies also the involvement of a large network of peers: patients are involved in their communities of reference, and their goal is to remain active members. Peers and caregivers influence patients’ knowledge about health and illness, contribute to shape shared practices of health management, and influence good or bad health conduct. Thus, patients, caregivers, and peers advocate for their right to judge the adequacy of care received. Finally, technological advances may play a crucial role sustaining people’s health management in daily life, but only if well attuned to people’s needs and expectations and if well ecologically designed. In the majority of the Western countries, to sustain “patient’s active roles in their own healthcare” is becoming a key priority It is notable that, in more recent years, both academic and grey literature have increasingly adopted the term “patient engagement” to indicate the active role of individuals in their healthcare. The adoption of the term engagement in the healthcare field indicates a renewed partnership between the different actors and institutions (more often a patient and his/her healthcare provider) implied in the health and care management. The international literature, precisely, has outlined several advantages of the improved engagement of the patient in the care process: 1) Patient engagement allows the improvement of clinical outcomes; 2) Patient engagement improves client satisfaction of the care process; 3) Patient engagement allows cuts in healthcare delivery costs. However, the healthcare system often lacks in delivering effective interventions able to sustain patient engagement and to bridge the gap between health and healthcare. As a consequence, concrete guidelines to align the scientific and professional practices are still poor and fragmentised. Many times, patient engagement risks to be a fashionable claim rather than a real guidance for practice. For these reasons we enacted a participatory process (CONSENSUS CONFERENCE) where all the actors involved in the healthcare system might share empirical evidences and best practices to identify and recommend effective actions to sustain people health engagement. In sum, the consensus process is aimed to: 1. Put into dialogue international scientific literature about patient engagement with the best practices and experiences spread on the Italian territory regarding the promotion of patients active role in care management 2. Generate shared recommendations regarding interventions able to sustain patient engagement, by describing their main features 3. Map the level of evidences reached by each detected intervention regarding their effectiveness in promoting patient engagement
Action Group:
Other organisations participating in the commitment: 
Associazione Medici Diabetologi (AMD); Federazione Nazionale Collegi Infermieri (IPASVI); Ospedale Sacra Famiglia Fatebenefratelli di Erba (CO); Federazione Italiana delle Associazioni di Volontariato in Oncologia (FAVO); Casa di Cura Privata del Policlinico - Istituto Dezza (MI); Azienda per l'Assistenza Sanitaria n. 1 - Triestina; La Nostra Famiglia - IRCCS Eugenio Medea (LC); Parkinson Italia Onlus; Fondazione IRCCS - Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano; I.R.C.C.S Istituto Auxologico Italiano; Ospedale San Paolo (MI); Alomar - Associazione Lombarda Malati Reumatici
Objective:
Lead organisation name: 
UNIVERSITA' CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE
Organisation country:
Contact person: 
GUENDALINA GRAFFIGNA
Contact person email: 
guendalina.graffigna@unicatt.it
Activity type:
Start date: 
14/04/2016
End date: 
14/04/2017
Geographic_coverage:
Last update: 17/06/2016

Current Status

Ongoing
EVIDENCE ABOUT PROGRESS The consensus conference on patient engagement implies the following 3 steps STEP 1) SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF THE SCIENTIFIC LETERATURE [concluded] So far an extensive systematic review of the literature about patient engagement has been performed. The review was based on a systematic search of the scientific literature including the following key words: “patient engagement” and the words used to describe the main interventions to foster it (“intervention”, “plan”, “program”, “protocol”, “actions, “practices”, and their names1) in four different scientific database: PUBMED, SCOPUS, COCHRANE and ISI WEB OF SCIENCE. 2846 recors have been retrieved. 104 have been finally included for the analysis. Each contribution was analysed to examine, summarize and extract information about the types of interventions conducted to foster patient engagement. This allowed the author to proceed with an in-depth qualitative description of the practices promoted in the patient engagement area, with regards to their objectives, the actors included and the tools adopted. The interventions, initiatives and tools were aggregated and examined for similarity and consistency STEP 2) EVIDENCE REVIEW AND GRADING [CONCLUDED] The retrieved interventions were evaluated in their level of recommendation according to a validated evaluation checklist (SIGN guidelines (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) 50: A Guideline Developer’s Handbook. Available from http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/50/index.html) for establishing their level of evidence. Thus, the level of evidence was assigned to each retrieved source and the recommendation were formulated accordingly considering the effectiveness of the patient engagement interventions. Finally, a list of recommendable interventions was created considering the quality and effectiveness of the intervention proposed. STEP 3) RECCOMANDATIONS FROM EXPERTS [ONGOING] A series of face-to-face workshop were organized with the study members and a selection of experts to discuss about the first results of the consensus process. The workshops included representatives of the different “worlds” involved in the promotion of patients engagement and participation such as: academic research, medical and nursing professions, patients advocacy, pharma industries, experts of new technology, designers, small and medium enterprises active in the healthcare area, patients associations. During the first face-to face workshop three break-out sessions were conducted to encourage the active participation and contribution from all the experts. Particularly experts were required to help in organizing and prioritizing best practices to promote patient engagement which are effective in their clinical experience. During the second face-to-face workshop the results achieved by the systematic analysis of the literature in the forms of guidance statements and recommendations, was presented and discussed with the experts. The participants commented the recommendations presented, by offering feedback to improve them and by indicating their level of level of agreement based on a 5-point scale (strong positive, weak positive, uncertain or equivocal, weak negative, strong negative) using a structured questionnaire. The responses were tabulated and projected for the entire conference to discuss and revise in real-time. The conference participants then expressed again their level of agreement with each statement that, after discussion, required more information or clarification. The participants sent additional comments to the study members by email to be considered in the final discussion. The focus was to improve accuracy and specificity in each statement, improve clarity, and re-review controversial areas. In addition, common ground and agreement of experts from different disciplines with different approaches was sought throughout the manuscript writing, review and rewriting process. All working group members reviewed each major version of the document, and all participants who participated in the discussion and reviewed and approved the final document are included as co-authors. Two workshops have been already conducted and involved over 100 experts, belonging to several different healthcare Italian Organizations. Other workshop are in plan

Results

Title Planned Deadline Current Status Category Attachments
EXPERT WORKGROUP 14/04/2016 Achieved Dissemination: Meetings, events, conferences
Patient engagement community - linkedin webpage 14/04/2016 Achieved Dissemination: Platforms/websites/social networks.
Patient Engagement @Engaging_Care - twitter webpage 14/04/2016 Achieved Dissemination: Platforms/websites/social networks.
Patient engagement community - facebook webpage 14/04/2016 Achieved Dissemination: Platforms/websites/social networks.
survey on patient engagement best practices 14/04/2016 Achieved Research: Tools (methodologies, models, questionnaires, analysis, surveys)
survey on patient engagement strategies 14/04/2016 Achieved Research: Tools (methodologies, models, questionnaires, analysis, surveys)
Reccomendation for Patient Engagement in chronic care 14/04/2016 Not achieved Products: Recomendations/ guidelines/ regulations/ standards/ agreements

Outcomes

No results were indicated for this commitment.