A framework and toolkit of interventions to enhance reflective learning among health-care professionals: the PEARL mixed-methods study

Author:

Bion Julian1ORCID,Brookes Olivia2ORCID,Brown Celia3ORCID,Tarrant Carolyn4ORCID,Archer Julian5ORCID,Buckley Duncan6ORCID,Buckley Lisa-Marie6ORCID,Clement Ian7ORCID,Evison Felicity8ORCID,Smith Fang Gao9ORCID,Gibbins Chris10ORCID,Hayton Emma-Jo11ORCID,Jones Jennifer4ORCID,Lilford Richard12ORCID,Mullhi Randeep13ORCID,Packer Greg13ORCID,Perkins Gavin D14ORCID,Shelton Jonathan7ORCID,Snelson Catherine1113ORCID,Sullivan Paul15ORCID,Vlaev Ivo16ORCID,Wolstenholme Daniel17ORCID,Wright Stephen7ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

2. University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

3. Population Evidence and Technologies, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

4. Social Science Applied to Healthcare Improvement Research (SAPPHIRE) Group, Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

5. Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

6. Patient and Public Involvement Representative, Birmingham, UK

7. Critical Care, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

8. Informatics Department, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

9. Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

10. Acute Medicine, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

11. Acute Medicine, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

12. Warwick Centre for Applied Health Research and Delivery, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

13. Critical Care, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK

14. Critical Care Medicine, Warwick Medical School, Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

15. Acute Medicine, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

16. Behavioural Science Group, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

17. National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Yorkshire and Humber, Sheffield, UK

Abstract

Background Although most health care is high quality, many patients and members of staff can recall episodes of a lack of empathy, respect or effective communication from health-care staff. In extreme form, this contributes to high-profile organisational failures. Reflective learning is a universally promoted technique for stimulating insight, constructive self-appraisal and empathy; however, its efficacy tends to be assumed rather than proven. The Patient Experience And Reflective Learning (PEARL) project has used patient and staff experience to co-design a novel reflective learning framework that is based on theories of behaviour and learning. Objective To create a toolkit to help health-care staff obtain meaningful feedback to stimulate effective reflective learning that will promote optimal patient-, family- and colleague-focused behaviours. Design A 3-year developmental mixed-methods study with four interlinked workstreams and 12 facilitated co-design meetings. The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour framework was used to describe factors influencing the behaviour of reflection. Setting This took place at five acute medical units and three intensive care units in three urban acute hospital trusts in England. Participants Patients and relatives, medical and nursing staff, managers and researchers took part. Data sources Two anonymous surveys, one for patients and one for staff, were developed from existing UK-validated instruments, administered locally and analysed centrally. Ethnographers undertook interviews and observed clinical care and reflective learning activities in the workplace, as well as in the co-design meetings, and fed back their observations in plenary workshops. Main outcome measures Preliminary instruments were rated by participants for effectiveness and feasibility to derive a final set of tools. These are presented in an attractively designed toolbox with multiple sections, including the theoretical background of reflection, mini guides for obtaining meaningful feedback and for reflecting effectively, guides for reflecting ‘in-action’ during daily activities, and a set of resources. Results Local project teams (physicians, nurses, patients, relatives and managers) chaired by a non-executive director found the quarterly reports of feedback from the patient and staff surveys insightful and impactful. Patient satisfaction with care was higher for intensive care units than for acute medical units, which reflects contextual differences, but in both settings quality of communication was the main driver of satisfaction. Ethnographers identified many additional forms of experiential feedback. Those that generated an emotional response were particularly effective as a stimulus for reflection. These sources of data were used to supplement individual participant experiences in the nine local co-design meetings and four workshops to identify barriers to and facilitators of effective reflection, focusing on capability, opportunity and motivation. A logic model was developed combining the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour framework for reflection and theories of learning to link patient and staff experience to changes in downstream behaviours. Participants proposed practical tools and activities to enhance reflection ‘in-action’ and ‘on-action’. These tools were developed iteratively by the local and central project teams. Limitations Paper-based surveys were burdensome to administer and analyse. Conclusions Patients and health-care staff collaborated to produce a novel reflective learning toolkit. Future work The toolkit requires evaluating in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 32. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) Programme

Publisher

National Institute for Health Research

Subject

General Economics, Econometrics and Finance

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3