Patient and family engagement interventions for enhancing patient safety in the perioperative journey: a scoping review

Abstract

Background: Surgical procedures present intricate challenges within healthcare delivery, often associated with higher risks of adverse events compared with non-surgical contexts. Patient and family engagement (PFE) throughout the perioperative journey is a possibility to enhance care quality, safety and patient-centredness. However, literature addressing PFE across the entirety of the perioperative journey remains sparse.

Objective: The current scoping review aims to comprehensively map the existing interventions with PFE approach focused on improving patient safety across various types of surgical procedures throughout the perioperative journey. In addition, the review aims to understand the level and type of PFE approach adopted in this context.

Eligibility criteria: Articles published in indexed peer-reviewed journals from 2003 to 2023, written in English, Portuguese or Spanish, that report on interventions with PFE approach targeting adult surgical patients, their families, caregivers, patient advocates and patient champions. The review includes articles reporting on both inpatient and ambulatory surgical patients.

Methods: Following Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews framework, this review systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for relevant articles. Eligible interventions were categorised using PFE framework regarding the level of engagement and mapped according to the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan 2021-2030.

Results: Out of 765 records initially identified, 32 met the eligibility criteria for data extraction and analysis, of which 40% originated from the USA, followed by the UK (18%) and Canada (12%). 47% of the interventions targeted 'multiple/all types' of procedures, 19% focused on cardiothoracic surgeries and 9% on gynaecological procedures or organ transplant. The majority of the interventions (88%) focused on PFE at the direct care level, predominantly adopting a consultation-based approach. Furthermore, 81% of eligible interventions emphasised patient information and education, 16% addressed codevelopment of policy and 3% of interventions focused on patient advocacy.

Conclusion: The findings show a predominant focus on PFE interventions targeting patient safety at the direct care level, particularly in the provision of patient information and education. However, interventions at organisational and policy-making levels are notably scarce. Further investment is required to promote interventions engaging patients and families at broader organisational and policy-making levels.

Keywords: Health policy; Patient safety; Patient-centred care; Shared decision making.

Figure 1. Framework for data analysis of eligible studies. Free adaptation of the ‘multidimensional framework for patient and family engagement in health and healthcare’ by Carman et al and free adaptation of the of the WHO Global Patient Safety Action Plan for 2021–2030, Framework for Action the 7×5 Matrix, Strategic Objective 4 ‘Patient and family engagement’.

Figure 2. Flow diagram of selection of sources of evidence. Population, concept, article type: reasons for exclusion as defined in the methods section of the current scoping review. Source: Flow diagram constructed using Shiny app from: Haddaway et al. PFE, patient and family engagement. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses.