Development of an inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) Patient‐Reported Experience Measure (PREM): A patient‐led consensus work and 'think aloud' study for a quality improvement programme. (6th November 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sheldon, Elena M.; Lillington, George; Simpson, Kati; Gibson, Kirsty; Chambers, Lucy; D'Afflitto, Manfredi; Greig, Nancy; Stearn, Theresa; Hind, Daniel; Ainley, Rachel; Winsor, Gemma; Ridsdale, Katie; Totton, Nikki; Lobo, Alan
• Is Part Of: Health expectations. Volume 26:Number 1(2023)
• Page Start: 213
• Page End: 225
• Publication Date: 2022-11-06
• Subjects: inflammatory bowel disease -- patient experience -- quality improvement; Medical policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; Health planning -- Periodicals; 362.105
• DOI: 10.1111/hex.13647
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1369-6513

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Patient‐Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) are key in improving healthcare quality, but no PREM exists for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). This study aimed to co‐produce a PREM with IBD service users for IBD service evaluation and quality improvement programme. Methods: A pool of 75 items was drawn from published survey instruments covering interactions with services and aspects of living with IBD. In Stage 1, during two workshops, eight expert service users reduced candidate items through a ranked‐choice voting exercise and suggested further items. During Stage 2, 18 previously uninvolved people with IBD assessed the face and content validity of the candidate items in 'Think Aloud' interviews. During two final workshops (Stage 3), the expert service users removed, modified and added items based on the interview findings to produce a final version of the PREM. Results: Stage 1 generated a draft working PREM mapped to the following four domains: Patient‐Centred Care; Quality; Accessibility; Communication and Involvement. The PREM included a set of nine items created by the expert group which shifted the emphasis from 'self‐management' to 'living with IBD'. Stage 2 interviews showed that comprehension of the PREM was very good, although there were concerns about the wording, IBD‐relevance and ambiguity of some items. During the final two workshops in Stage 3, the expert service users removed 7 items, modified 15 items and added seven new ones based on the interview findings, resulting in a 38‐item PREM. Conclusions: This study demonstrates how extensive service user involvement can inform PREM development. Patient or Public Contribution: Patients were involved as active members of the research team and as research participants to co‐produce and validate a PREM for IBD services. In Stage 1, eight expert service users ('the expert group') reduced candidate items for the PREM through a voting exercise and suggested new items. During Stage 2, 18 previously uninvolved people with IBD (the 'think aloud' participants ) assessed the validity of the candidate items in 'Think Aloud' interviews as research participants. In Stage 3, the expert group removed, changed and added items based on the interview findings to produce a final version of the 38‐item PREM. This study shows how service user involvement can meaningfully inform PREM development.