Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Participants’ ratings of the proposed items

From: Measuring organisational readiness for patient engagement (MORE): an international online Delphi consensus study

DOMAIN 1: Stakeholders
Type of stakeholders
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought these stakeholders should preferably or definitely be involved in completing the scale Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought these stakeholders should preferably or definitely be involved in completing the scale
a. Senior Managers 127 (97%) reworded: Executives/Board of Directors 70 (97%)
b. Junior Managers 124 (95%) reworded: Managers 71 (99%)
c. Medical Clinicians 129 (99%) unchanged 72 (100%)
d. Nurse Clinicians 130 (99%) unchanged 72 (100%)
e. Other Health professionals* 126 (96%) unchanged 72 (100%)
f. Receptionists 99 (76%) unchanged 62 (86%)
g. Other staff in administration 87 (66%) unchanged 57 (79%)
h. Other 76 (58%) unchanged 47 (65%)
Stakeholders’ characteristics
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought the item was important or very important Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought the item was important or very important
a. Gender 50 (38%) unchanged 34 (47%)
b. Age 66 (50%) unchanged 38 (53%)
c. Length of employment 80 (61%) unchanged 43 (60%)
d. - - new: Role in the organisation 61 (85%)
e. - - new: Discipline (e.g. cardiology) 49 (68%)
f. - - new: Ethnicity 26 (36%)
DOMAIN 2: The organisation’s willingness to implement patient engagement
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought the item was important or very important Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought the item was important or very important
a. Informing patients about their condition or potential health issues 126 (96%) reworded: Engaging patients in discussing their condition or potential health issues 72 (100%)
b. Informing patients about all available options, and the potential benefits and risks of each option 128 (98%) reworded: Discussing all relevant health care options with patients (including doing nothing), and the potential benefits and risks of each option 71 (99%)
c. Actively checking patients’ understanding 128 (98%) unchanged 72 (100%)
d. Encouraging patients to ask questions and voice concerns 130 (99%) unchanged 72 (100%)
e. Engaging patients in collaborative decision-making 129 (99%) reworded: Encouraging patients to make health care decisions in partnership with the health care team 71 (99%)
f. Engaging patients in positive health behaviours 110 (84%) unchanged 61 (85%)
g. Eliciting patients’ preferences 128 (98%) combined with item h. and reworded: Asking patients about their health-related preferences and acting upon them 71 (99%)
h. Taking patient preferences into account 128 (98%) combined with item g. -
i. Providing patients with written information 109 (83%) combined with item j. and reworded: Supporting patients with additional health information resources (e.g. access to patient groups and decision support resources) 67 (93%)
j. Providing patients with decision support tools 111 (85%) combined with item i. -
k. Ensuring effective oral and written communication with diverse patients 123 (94%) reworded: Communicating with patients in a format that all patients can understand 71 (99%)
l. Giving patients access to their medical information 115 (88%) reworded: Supporting patients to access their medical information in a format they can understand 71 (99%)
m. Asking patients for feedback about their care experiences 124 (95%) reworded: Asking patients for feedback about their care experiences and acting upon it 70 (97%)
n. Engaging patients as advisors in the organisation 114 (87%) reworded: Engaging patients as partners in the organisation in all areas of health care services (e.g. design, delivery, and evaluation) 61 (85%)
o. - - new: Treating patients as partners, with respect and consideration for their individual needs, throughout their care journey, from entering the building to receiving reatments etc. 71 (99%)
p. - - new: Developing care plans as a partnership between health professionals and patients with long term conditions (e.g. defining mutually agreed goals, actions, and timeframes) 71 (99%)
DOMAIN 3: The organisation’s ability to implement patient engagement
Tasks
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought the item was important or very important Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought the item was important or very important
a. Developing a shared organisational vision for patient engagement 126 (96%) reworded: Developing a shared organisational vision for patient engagement among employees and patients 70 (97%)
b. Getting ownership of a shared organisational vision for patient engagement 107 (82%) reworded: Sharing the organisational vision for patient engagement with all employees 69 (96%)
c. Sharing the organisational vision for patient engagement with all patients 114 (87%) reworded: Sharing the organisational vision for patient engagement with all patients and the public (e.g. information in waiting areas) 66 (92%)
d. Including patient engagement in policies, processes, position descriptions and training programs 119 (91%) reworded: Including patient engagement in all areas of health care services (e.g. policies, processes, position descriptions and training programs) 68 (94%)
e. Tailoring communication to individual patients’ needs 126 (96%) removed because this item is covered in domain 2 -
f. Tailoring consultations to individual patients’ needs 123 (94%) removed because this item is covered in domain 2 -
g. Supporting all employees in their efforts to promote patient engagement 128 (98%) reworded: Supporting employees in their efforts to promote patient engagement (e.g. asking what they need and addressing these needs, reminders) 71 (99%)
h. Monitoring patient engagement in the organisation 124 (95%) reworded: Monitoring patient engagement in the organisation and giving feedback to employees 72 (100%)
i. Solving problems that arise during the implementation of patient engagement 128 (98%) unchanged 72 (100%)
Resources
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought the item was important or very important Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought the item was important or very important
a. Expertise in patient engagement 118 (90%) reworded: Access to expertise in patient engagement 71 (99%)
b. Time for initial implementation of patient engagement 123 (94%) reworded: Time for initial implementation of patient engagement (e.g. time to inform employees about patient engagement processes) 70 (97%)
c. Time for monitoring implementation of patient engagement 125 (95%) reworded: Time for monitoring implementation of patient engagement (e.g. time for employees to provide feedback) 69 (96%)
d. Time to make patient engagement happen 125 (95%) reworded: Time to make patient engagement happen (e.g. revising targets and objectives, longer consultations) 72 (100%)
e. Communication skills training 121 (92%) combined with item f. and reworded: Training health professionals in patient engagement (e.g. communication and shared decision-making skills) 72 (100%)
f. Training in patient engagement and shared decision-making skills 128 (98%) combined with item e. -
g. Patient education materials in a language the patient can understand 123 (94%) combined with item h. and i. and reworded: Resources to provide health-related information and support to patients (e.g. access to interpreters, answering questions, helping patients to make decisions) 72 (100%)
h. Decision support resources 113 (86%) combined with item g. and i. -
i. Trained medical interpreters and care coordinators 105 (80%) combined with item g. and h. -
j. Systems and processes that can identify and adapt to diverse patients’ needs 116 (89%) reworded: Systems and processes that can adapt to diverse patients’ needs (e.g. scheduling of appointments) 68 (94%)
k. - - new: Access to patient representatives 57 (79%)
l. - - new: Resources to support patients in becoming partners (e.g. recruitment of representatives, training, coaching, money to pay patients for participation) 59 (82%)
m. - - new: Tools to evaluate the implementation of patient engagement 68 (94%)
Situational factors
  Round 1 Round 2
Item Initial wording of the item % of participants who thought the item was important or very important Changes made in round 2 % of participants who thought the item was important or very important
a. Alignment of patient engagement with organisational priorities 123 (94%) unchanged 68 (94%)
b. Timing of the implementation of patient engagement 105 (80%) removed because this is already covered by item a. -
c. Employee attitudes, beliefs, and experiences regarding patient engagement 126 (96%) unchanged 70 (97%)
d. Positive and consistent communication about patient engagement 126 (96%) reworded: Frequent and consistent communication about patient engagement 69 (96%)
e. Employee involvement in planning the implementation of patient engagement 127 (97%) reworded: Employee involvement in planning, implementation, and monitoring of patient engagement 71 (99%)
f. Patient involvement in planning the implementation of patient engagement 117 (89%) reworded: Patient involvement in planning, implementation, and monitoring of patient engagement 70 (97%)
g. Performance measures include patient engagement 120 (92%) unchanged 66 (92%)
  1. *(e.g. Clinical Psychologists or Allied Health professionals).