4.3 Article

Preparation for cardiac procedures: a cross-sectional study identifying gaps between outpatients' views and experiences of patient-centred care

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcad042

Keywords

Patient-centred care; Patient preferences; Cardiac catheterization; Cardiovascular surgical procedures; Cardiovascular nursing; Cross-sectional studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examined patients' views and experiences of care in relation to cardiac catheterization and subsequent cardiovascular procedures. Gaps were identified between patients' expectations and actual care, including areas such as preparation, treatment decision-making, prognosis, and post-treatment follow-up.
Background To examine and identify gaps in care perceived as essential by patients; this study examined outpatients': (1) views on what characterizes essential care and (2) experiences of care received, in relation to cardiac catheterization and subsequent cardiovascular procedures. Methods Cross-sectional descriptive study. Surveys were posted to outpatients who had undergone elective cardiac catheterization in the prior 6 months at an Australian hospital. Participants completed a 65-item survey to determine: (a) aspects of care they perceive as essential to patients receiving care for a cardiac condition (Important Care Survey); or (b) their actual care received (Actual Care Survey). Numbers and percentages were used to calculate the most frequently identified essential care items; and the experiences of care received. Items rated as either 'Essential'/'Very important' by at least 80% of participants were determined. A gap in patient-centred care was identified as being any item that was endorsed as essential/very important by 80% or more of participants but reported as received by Results Of 582 eligible patients, 264 (45%) returned a completed survey. A total of 43/65 items were endorsed by >80% of participants as essential. Of those, for 22 items, <80% reported the care as received. Gaps were identified in relation to general practitionerconsultation (1 item), preparation (1 item) subsequent decision making for treatment (1 item), prognosis (6 items), and post-treatment follow-up (1 item). Conclusions Areas were identified where actual care fell short of patients' perceptions of essential care.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available