Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Realist Evaluation of the Use of Patient Experience Data to Improve the Quality of Inpatient Mental Health Care (EURIPIDES) in England: study protocol
  1. Scott Weich1,
  2. Sarah-Jane Hannah Fenton2,
  3. Kamaldeep Bhui3,
  4. Sophie Staniszewska4,
  5. Jason Madan4,
  6. Michael Larkin5,
  7. Elizabeth Newton6,
  8. David Crepaz-Keay7,
  9. Alastair Canaway4,
  10. Charlotte Croft8,
  11. Frances Griffiths4
  1. 1 School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  2. 2 Institute for Mental Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  3. 3 Barts & the London Medical School, Queen Mary University, London, UK
  4. 4 Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
  5. 5 School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
  6. 6 School of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
  7. 7 Empowerment and Social Inclusion, Mental Health Foundation, London, UK
  8. 8 Entrepreneurship & Innovation, Organising Healthcare Research Network, Warwick Business School, Coventry, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Scott Weich; s.weich{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Abstract

Introduction Inpatient mental healthcare continues to be an area of high risk and where patients report negative experiences. To ensure the patient voice is heard, National Health Service (NHS) Trusts are required to collect feedback from patients routinely. We do not know what kinds of feedback are most important or what management processes are needed to translate this into effective action plans. Further, we do not know if this makes any difference to the patients themselves. This study seeks to explore which of the many different approaches to collecting and using patient experience data are the most useful for supporting improvements in inpatient mental healthcare. The overarching aim of the study is to arrive at recommendations for best practice in the collection and use of patient experience data in NHS England adult inpatient mental health settings. We present the protocol for Realist Evaluation of the Use of Patient Experience Data to Improve the Quality of Inpatient Mental Health Care study (EURIPIDES).

Methods and analysis The study is composed of five work packages (WPs), including a systematic review of patient experiences (WP1); a telephone survey to assist the selection of case sites (WP2); six indepth case studies involving interviews with service users, carers and staff to enable a realist evaluation of the use of patient experience to improve quality in adult inpatient mental health services (WP3); an economic evaluation of patient experience feedback activity (WP5); and a consensus conference (WP4). We discuss the methodological rationale for the five WPs.

Ethics and dissemination This study has received approval from West Midlands/South Birmingham NHS Research Ethics Committee. The outcome of the consensus conference meeting (WP4) will form the basis of the outputs to be disseminated to NHS providers. Dissemination will also take place through publications and presentations at relevant conferences.

  • patient experience
  • inpatient
  • acute care
  • mental health services
  • quality improvement
  • realist evaluation

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors This project is a collaboration between the University of Warwick, The University of Sheffield, The University of Birmingham, Aston University, Queen Mary University London and the Mental Health Foundation. SW is the chief investigator and work package (WP) lead for WP2 and line manages the Research Fellow (RF) and a Research Associate (RA). SS is the WP lead for WP1. FG is the WP lead for WPs 3 and 4. JM is the WP lead for WP5. KB is a coapplicant, a member of the Project Oversight Group (POG) and line manages an RA. CC, ML and EN are coapplicants and members of the Project Oversight Group. DC-K is a coapplicant and co-ordinates the project Patient and Public Involvement (PPI). S-JHF and AC are the RFs who work on WP2-4 and WP5, respectively.

  • Funding The EURIPIDES study is funded by the National Institute of Health Research’s Health Services and Delivery Research Programme.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval HRA, West Midlands - South Birmingham Research Ethics Committee.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.