Short answer
Designers should focus on creating user-centred frameworks for open disclosure that are practical, evidence-informed, and address the concerns and experiences of both patients and healthcare providers.
- Field
- User-Centred Design
- Source
- Health Services and Delivery Research (2014)
- Method
- Mixed-methods research, including systematic literature reviews and qualitative stakeholder interviews.
- Sample
- 610 papers for the broad review; 11 papers for the focused review. Specific number of stakeholder interviews not provided.
- Evidence
- Moderate effect
Implementing open disclosure of adverse events in healthcare settings is complex, with a significant disconnect between existing policy guidance and actual practice, often relying on expert consensus rather than robust evidence. This user-centred design research insight is drawn from a 2014 study published in Health Services and Delivery Research. Using Mixed-methods research, including systematic literature reviews and qualitative stakeholder interviews. with 610 papers for the broad review; 11 papers for the focused review. Specific number of stakeholder interviews not provided., researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Designers should focus on creating user-centred frameworks for open disclosure that are practical, evidence-informed, and address the concerns and experiences of both patients and healthcare providers.
Open Disclosure of Adverse Events: Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Practice
Implementing open disclosure of adverse events in healthcare settings is complex, with a significant disconnect between existing policy guidance and actual practice, often relying on expert consensus rather than robust evidence.
Health Services and Delivery Research · 2014
Key Findings
- 01A large body of literature exists on open disclosure, but often from conflicting perspectives.
- 02Current practice is largely based on expert consensus rather than empirical evidence.
- 03There is little evidence for the effectiveness of disclosure alone or interventions to promote it.
- 04A tension exists between pragmatic guidance and deeper critiques of transparency in healthcare.
Application
Design takeaway
Designers should focus on creating user-centred frameworks for open disclosure that are practical, evidence-informed, and address the concerns and experiences of both patients and healthcare providers.
How to apply
When designing communication strategies or support tools for adverse event reporting in any high-stakes environment, prioritize user research to understand current practices, identify barriers, and co-create solutions with all involved parties.
Project actions
- 01When researching a design problem, look for evidence of what works, not just what people say should work.
- 02Consider the practical challenges of implementing your design in a real-world setting.
Method & Evidence
Variables
Strengths & Limitations
Strengths
- +Combines systematic review with primary qualitative data.
- +Focuses on a critical area of healthcare practice.
Limitations
The study focuses on the UK healthcare system, so findings may not directly translate to other contexts without adaptation.
Reliability & validity
The systematic reviews aim for reliability through rigorous search and selection criteria. The qualitative interviews' validity would depend on thorough data analysis and triangulation of findings.
Think critically
How can design interventions bridge the gap between mandated policies for open disclosure and the actual, often hesitant, implementation by healthcare professionals?
Design Principles
"Evidence-informed design for complex socio-technical systems requires a deep understanding of stakeholder perspectives and practical implementation challenges."
Understanding the challenges in implementing open disclosure is crucial for designing effective communication strategies and support systems in healthcare. This research highlights the need for user-centred approaches that consider the perspectives of all stakeholders involved in adverse event reporting and resolution.
What This Means for Your Design
It's hard to get people to openly talk about mistakes in hospitals, even when there are rules for it. We don't have much proof that the ways we try to get them to talk actually work, and a lot of what happens is just based on what experts think is best.
How to use in your project
- 1.Use this study to justify the need for user research in your design project, especially when dealing with sensitive communication or reporting systems.
Add to My Project
Quick Cite
Paragraph starter
This research highlights the significant challenges in implementing open disclosure of adverse events within healthcare systems, noting a substantial gap between policy and actual practice. The study's findings, derived from systematic reviews and qualitative interviews, indicate that current approaches often rely on expert consensus rather than empirical evidence of effectiveness. This underscores the critical need for user-centred design approaches that actively address practical implementation barriers and stakeholder perspectives when developing communication and reporting systems.
Source
Health Services and Delivery Research
An exploration of the implementation of open disclosure of adverse events in the UK: a scoping review and qualitative exploration
journal · 2014
View sourceQuestions About This Research
- What does the research say about open disclosure of adverse events: bridging the gap between policy and practice?
- Designers should focus on creating user-centred frameworks for open disclosure that are practical, evidence-informed, and address the concerns and experiences of both patients and healthcare providers. Evidence: Health Services and Delivery Research (2014).
- Why does "Open Disclosure of Adverse Events: Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Practice" matter for design?
- Understanding the challenges in implementing open disclosure is crucial for designing effective communication strategies and support systems in healthcare. This research highlights the need for user-centred approaches that consider the perspectives of all stakeholders involved in adverse event reporting and resolution.
- How can designers apply this research?
- Designers should focus on creating user-centred frameworks for open disclosure that are practical, evidence-informed, and address the concerns and experiences of both patients and healthcare providers.
- What were the main findings?
- A large body of literature exists on open disclosure, but often from conflicting perspectives.. Current practice is largely based on expert consensus rather than empirical evidence.. There is little evidence for the effectiveness of disclosure alone or interventions to promote it.. A tension exists between pragmatic guidance and deeper critiques of transparency in healthcare.
- What research method was used?
- Mixed-methods research, including systematic literature reviews and qualitative stakeholder interviews. with 610 papers for the broad review; 11 papers for the focused review. Specific number of stakeholder interviews not provided..
- How strong is the evidence?
- Evidence strength is rated Moderate effect, based on a 2014 journal from Health Services and Delivery Research.
- What should I do differently in my next project?
- When designing communication strategies or support tools for adverse event reporting in any high-stakes environment, prioritize user research to understand current practices, identify barriers, and co-create solutions with all involved parties.
- What are the limitations?
- Limited evidence for the effectiveness of disclosure interventions; reliance on expert consensus for current practices.