Table 2 Step 1: Results from data collected from the study conducted in Quebec and France. Data collected from the study conducted in Quebec and France [38]:
From: Developing the first pan-Canadian survey on patient engagement in patient safety
Quebec | France | |
|---|---|---|
Positive comments | Relevance of the tool and questions and understanding of the questions: - All respondents mentioned that the tool helped guide actions and could be used as a self-assessment tool for healthcare institutions. The tool is best used by a team of health care professionals (an advisor in PE, RM and or PS and a patient advisor): ° “The tool helps us really frame our strategies and could be used as a self-assessment tool for healthcare institutions […] It will be used for sure.” Clarity of instructions: - The tool’s instructions were said to be clear and well understood by the team of PE professionals and patients, or PS professionals and patients, or both. ° “You’re asking very pertinent questions, and that helps me.” The choice of having a team answer the questionnaire is very important: ° “It has to be a group that answers the questions. No individual has a comprehensive view of what is going on in the institution.” | |
Limitations | Limitations related to the questions: - There are many questions about policies and procedures. The absence of policies and procedures does not reflect dedication. Pay attention to the presence of procedures and policies and how they are experienced. - At times it is difficult to answer the questions on the FMG, especially since we do not directly work with them. Limitations related to the structure of the questionnaire: - It is difficult to answer some questions, particularly those related to selecting the percentage of engagement. These sections will need to be worded better instead of using rates (%) of engagement. - Many questions are repeated. - It is easier to complete the questionnaire with the research agent on the other end of the phone. | Bias: Limitations related to the respondents’ points of view: - One of the limitations concerns the points of view expressed. Respondents may have overestimated the actual level of user involvement in their institution or may be unaware of all the initiatives and practices in the many services and branches of the university healthcare centres. Bias: Limitations related to patient groups: - Another limitation of the questionnaire is that it is difficult to differentiate, in the responses, between the involvement of user representatives and that of other patients. |
Deleted questions due to repetition | In total, 9 questions were deleted: - Questions 67–73 were repetitions so they were deleted (N = 7 repeated questions deleted) - 2 questions pertaining to FMGs (family medicine groups) and were also deleted. | |