Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Apr 15:14:175.
doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-175.

'Practical' resources to support patient and family engagement in healthcare decisions: a scoping review

Affiliations

'Practical' resources to support patient and family engagement in healthcare decisions: a scoping review

Katharina Kovacs Burns et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Extensive literature exists on public involvement or engagement, but what actual tools or guides exist that are practical, tested and easy to use specifically for initiating and implementing patient and family engagement, is uncertain. No comprehensive review and synthesis of general international published or grey literature on this specific topic was found. A systematic scoping review of published and grey literature is, therefore, appropriate for searching through the vast general engagement literature to identify 'patient/family engagement' tools and guides applicable in health organization decision-making, such as within Alberta Health Services in Alberta, Canada. This latter organization requested this search and review to inform the contents of a patient engagement resource kit for patients, providers and leaders.

Methods: Search terms related to 'patient engagement', tools, guides, education and infrastructure or resources, were applied to published literature databases and grey literature search engines. Grey literature also included United States, Australia and Europe where most known public engagement practices exist, and Canada as the location for this study. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set, and include: English documents referencing 'patient engagement' with specific criteria, and published between 1995 and 2011. For document analysis and synthesis, document analysis worksheets were used by three reviewers for the selected 224 published and 193 grey literature documents. Inter-rater reliability was ensured for the final reviews and syntheses of 76 published and 193 grey documents.

Results: Seven key themes emerged from the literature synthesis analysis, and were identified for patient, provider and/or leader groups. Articles/items within each theme were clustered under main topic areas of 'tools', 'education' and 'infrastructure'. The synthesis and findings in the literature include 15 different terms and definitions for 'patient engagement', 17 different engagement models, numerous barriers and benefits, and 34 toolkits for various patient engagement and evaluation initiatives.

Conclusions: Patient engagement is very complex. This scoping review for patient/family engagement tools and guides is a good start for a resource inventory and can guide the content development of a patient engagement resource kit to be used by patients/families, healthcare providers and administrators.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowcharts of published and grey literature screening and selection. A. Flowchart of the published literature screening and selection process. Application of search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria as well as review worksheet analysis, resulted in 74 selected articles. B. Flowchart of the grey or unpublished literature/material screening and selection process. Application of specific search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria, as well as review worksheet analysis, resulted in 193 items selected.

References

    1. Luxford K, Safron DG, Delbanco T. |Promoting patient-centered care: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers in healthcare organizations with a reputation for improving the patient experience. Int J Qual Health Care. 2011;14(5):510–515. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr024. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Coyle J, Williams B. Valuing people as individuals: development of an instrument through a survey of person-centredness in secondary care. J Adv Nurs. 2001;14(3):450–459. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01993.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Alberta Health Services. Patient Engagement: A Framework for Engaging Patients with Alberta Health Services. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Health Services; 2010. pp. 1–16.
    1. Arksey H, 0’Malley L. Scoping studies towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;14:19–32. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000119616. - DOI
    1. Mays N, Roberts E, Popay J. In: Studying the Organisation and Delivery of Health Services: Research Methods. Fulop N, Allen P, Clarke A, Black N, editor. London and New York: Routledge – Taylor and Francis Group; 2001. Synthesising research evidence; p. 194.

Publication types