↓ Skip to main content

The patient reporting and action for a safe environment (PRASE) intervention: a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
75 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The patient reporting and action for a safe environment (PRASE) intervention: a feasibility study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1919-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane K. O’Hara, Rebecca J. Lawton, Gerry Armitage, Laura Sheard, Claire Marsh, Kim Cocks, Rosie R. C. McEachan, Caroline Reynolds, Ian Watt, John Wright

Abstract

There is growing interest in the role of patients in improving patient safety. One such role is providing feedback on the safety of their care. Here we describe the development and feasibility testing of an intervention that collects patient feedback on patient safety, brings together staff to consider this feedback and to plan improvement strategies. We address two research questions: i) to explore the feasibility of the process of systematically collecting feedback from patients about the safety of care as part of the PRASE intervention; and, ii) to explore the feasibility and acceptability of the PRASE intervention for staff, and to understand more about how staff use the patient feedback for service improvement. We conducted a feasibility study using a wait-list controlled design across six wards within an acute teaching hospital. Intervention wards were asked to participate in two cycles of the PRASE (Patient Reporting & Action for a Safe Environment) intervention across a six-month period. Participants were patients on participating wards. To explore the acceptability of the intervention for staff, observations of action planning meetings, interviews with a lead person for the intervention on each ward and recorded researcher reflections were analysed thematically and synthesised. Recruitment of patients using computer tablets at their bedside was straightforward, with the majority of patients willing and able to provide feedback. Randomisation of the intervention was acceptable to staff, with no evidence of differential response rates between intervention and control groups. In general, ward staff were positive about the use of patient feedback for service improvement and were able to use the feedback as a basis for action planning, although engagement with the process was variable. Gathering a multidisciplinary team together for action planning was found to be challenging, and implementing action plans was sometimes hindered by the need to co-ordinate action across multiple services. The PRASE intervention was found to be acceptable to staff and patients. However, before proceeding to a full cluster randomised controlled trial, the intervention requires adaptation to account for the difficulties in implementing action plans within three months, the need for a facilitator to support the action planning meetings, and the provision of training and senior management support for participating ward teams. The PRASE intervention represents a promising method for the systematic collection of patient feedback about the safety of hospital care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 75 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 79 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 19 24%
Unknown 23 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Psychology 8 10%
Chemistry 3 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 27 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#935,819
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#229
of 8,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,657
of 419,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#3
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,753 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 419,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.