IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i3-4p567-582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patients’ satisfaction and experiences during elective primary fast‐track total hip and knee arthroplasty journey: A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • Miia Marika Jansson
  • Marja Harjumaa
  • Ari‐Pekka Puhto
  • Minna Pikkarainen

Abstract

Aims and objectives To explore how satisfied patients are with the process of treatment and care and to identify the experiences that patients perceive during elective primary fast‐track total hip and knee arthroplasty journey. Background Greater satisfaction with care has predicted better quality of recovery, and patient experience has been positively associated with patient safety and clinical effectiveness. However, a little is still known about how patients experience their treatment and care. Design A qualitative interview study. Methods The study was conducted among 20 patients in a single joint replacement centre during 2018. Patient satisfaction was measured using a numerical rating scale. Patients’ experiences were identified through qualitative semi‐structured interviews which were analysed using an inductive content analysis method. The COREQ checklist was used (Supporting Information). Results The mean numerical rating scale score for overall satisfaction was 9.0 (SD 1.1) on a scale from 0–10. The patients’ experiences were grouped under eight main categories that were derived from the qualitative data in the analysis: (a) patient selection, (b) meeting the Health Care Guarantee, (c) patient flow, (d) postdischarge care, (e) patient counselling, (f) transparency of the journey, (g) communication and (h) feedback. Conclusions The findings suggest that patients are highly satisfied after an elective primary fast‐track total hip and knee arthroplasty. However, closer analysis of the patients’ experiences reveals challenges and suggestions on how they could be solved, often involving digital technologies. Relevance to clinical practice As the number of total joint arthroplasties grows, patients and their families need to take ever greater responsibility, for their own care from advance preparation to rehabilitation. The findings of the study can be used to organise work, improving patient‐clinical communication, fostering engagement and improving patient centredness. In addition, the results pinpoint the issues on how the patient experience could be improved.

Suggested Citation

  • Miia Marika Jansson & Marja Harjumaa & Ari‐Pekka Puhto & Minna Pikkarainen, 2020. "Patients’ satisfaction and experiences during elective primary fast‐track total hip and knee arthroplasty journey: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3-4), pages 567-582, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:3-4:p:567-582
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15121
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15121?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Åsa Johansson Stark & Andreas Charalambous & Natalja Istomina & Sanna Salanterä & Arun K Sigurdardottir & Panayota Sourtzi & Kirsi Valkeapää & Adelaida Zabalegui & Margareta Bachrach‐Lindström, 2016. "The quality of recovery on discharge from hospital, a comparison between patients undergoing hip and knee replacement – a European study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(17-18), pages 2489-2501, September.
    2. Sheard, Laura & Marsh, Claire & O'Hara, Jane & Armitage, Gerry & Wright, John & Lawton, Rebecca, 2017. "The Patient Feedback Response Framework – Understanding why UK hospital staff find it difficult to make improvements based on patient feedback: A qualitative study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 19-27.
    3. Stein Conradsen & Mette Muren Gjerseth & Marit Kvangarsnes, 2016. "Patients’ experiences from an education programme ahead of orthopaedic surgery – a qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(19-20), pages 2798-2806, October.
    4. Johnson, Emma C. & Horwood, Jeremy & Gooberman-Hill, Rachael, 2014. "Conceptualising time before surgery: The experience of patients waiting for hip replacement," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 126-133.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miia Jansson & Jonna Koivisto & Minna Pikkarainen, 2020. "Identified opportunities for gamification in the elective primary fast‐track total hip and knee arthroplasty journey: Secondary analysis of healthcare professionals’ interviews," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2338-2351, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miles Sibley & Ray Earwicker & Jörg W. Huber, 2018. "Making best use of patient experience," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(23-24), pages 4239-4241, December.
    2. Louise H Strickland & Laura Kelly & Thomas W Hamilton & David W Murray & Hemant G Pandit & Crispin Jenkinson, 2018. "Early recovery following lower limb arthroplasty: Qualitative interviews with patients undergoing elective hip and knee replacement surgery. Initial phase in the development of a patient‐reported outc," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(13-14), pages 2598-2608, July.
    3. Joy Davis & Sue Sinni & Stephen Maloney & Lorraine Walker, 2022. "Strategies Australian Hospitals Utilize to Incorporate Patient Feedback in the Delivery and Measurement of Person-Centered Care: A Scoping Review," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 31(5), pages 782-794, June.
    4. Pedersen, Kirstine Zinck & Roelsgaard Obling, Anne, 2020. "‘It's all about time’: Temporal effects of cancer pathway introduction in treatment and care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    5. Kathryn Jack & Catrin Evans & Louise Bramley & Joanne Cooper & Tracy Keane & Marie Cope & Elizabeth Hendron, 2022. "Identifying and Understanding the Non-Clinical Impacts of Delayed or Cancelled Surgery in Order to Inform Prioritisation Processes: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-11, May.
    6. Aavash Raj Pandey & Mahdi Seify & Udoka Okonta & Amin Hosseinian-Far, 2023. "Advanced Sentiment Analysis for Managing and Improving Patient Experience: Application for General Practitioner (GP) Classification in Northamptonshire," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(12), pages 1-11, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:3-4:p:567-582. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.