Patient participation in the emergency department: an evaluation using a specific instrument to measure patient participation (PPED)

Authors

  • Catharina Frank,

    1. Catharina Frank PhD RNT Senior Lecturer School of Health and Caring Science, Linneaus University, Växjö, and School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Bengt Fridlund,

    1. Bengt Fridlund PhD RNT Professor School of Health and Caring Science, Linneaus University, Växjö, and School of Health Sciences, Jönköping University, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Amir Baigi,

    1. Amir Baigi MSc Statistician PhD Associate Professor General Practice and Public Health, Halland County Council, Falkenberg, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Margareta Asp

    1. Margareta Asp PhD RNT Senior Lecturer School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Mälardalen University, Eskilstuna, Sweden
    Search for more papers by this author

C. Frank: e-mail: catharina.frank@mdh.se

Abstract

frank c., fridlund b., baigi a. & asp m. (2011) Patient participation in the emergency department: an evaluation using a specific instrument to measure patient participation (PPED). Journal of Advanced Nursing67(4), 728–735.

Abstract

Aim.  This study aimed at evaluating patient participation from the perspective of patients who received care in emergency departments, with a separate examination of the relationship between participation and age, gender, education and priority level.

Background.  International and national guidelines encourage patient participation. High patient participation is required to ensure a high quality of care. No studies evaluating patient participation at an emergency department have been published.

Methods.  An evaluating study, with the Patient Participation Emergency Department questionnaire, was conducted at emergency departments in Sweden. A consecutive sample of 356 patients participated. Data were collected in 2008: participants were 49% women and with an average age of 56 years. The statistical methods used were Student’s t-test, one-way anova and Spearman correlation.

Results.  The results revealed that patients experienced good requirement for participation such as time and information. Mutual participation demonstrated a reasonable level, but patient participation is low in two dimensions (Fight for participation, Participation in getting basic needs satisfied). Young and well-educated patients fought more to participate in their care and gained less attention for basic needs than older and less well-educated patients.

Conclusions.  Patient participation in a mutual care situation between patients and healthcare professionals requires further improvement to ensure that patients are satisfied and do not have to struggle and fight to participate in their care.

Ancillary