title: The professional perspective on patient involvement in the development of quality indicators: a qualitative analysis using the example of chronic heart failure in the German health care setting.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  There is an international consensus that quality indicators (QIs) of health care ought to represent patient-relevant aspects. Therefore, patient involvement in the development process is essential. However, there is no methodological gold standard for involving patients in QI development. The aim of this study is to explore experts' views on the representation of patient-relevant aspects in the QI development process using the QIs developed in the context of the German National Disease Management Guideline for Heart Failure as an example.
  
  
  METHODS
  Semi-structured, open telephone interviews were conducted with 15 German experts (patient representatives, physicians, researchers, and methodologists involved in guideline development or quality assessment). Interview themes were the relevance of the exemplary set of QIs for patients, as well as the legitimacy of, competence of, and collaboration with the patient representative who participated in the development process. Interviews were fully transcribed and content analyzed. Deductive categories derived from the research questions were supplemented by inductively formed categories during the review of the interview material.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The qualitative analysis suggests a discrepancy between the guidelines' QIs and those relevant to patients from an expert's point of view, such as physician-patient communication and quality of counseling. Experts reported only minor communication and cooperation problems while working together in the guideline/QI development team. Concerns existed, for example, regarding the recruitment of patient representatives for diseases without self-help organizations, the financing of patient representation, and the training of patient representatives. Only few potential strategies for improving the process of patient involvement were mentioned.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Integrating the patients' perspectives through the recruitment of a patient representative to participate in the development team was well established and broadly accepted. However, experts stated that the finally selected QIs represent only a small part of the patient-relevant aspects of medical care. According to the experts' perceptions, the current processes provide a very limited scope for integrating the patients' perspectives in a more extensive way. Supplementing the set of "conventional" QIs with additional, separately developed, "patient-side" QIs might help to include patient priorities in quality measurement.
authors: Department of Primary Medical Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamberg, Germany.
authors: Nadine Janis
authors: NJ
authors: Pohontsch
authors: Faculty of Health, Nursing, Management, Neubrandenburg University of Applied Sciences, Neubrandenburg, Germany.
authors: Heidrun
authors: H
authors: Herzberg
authors: Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
authors: Stefanie
authors: S
authors: Joos
authors: Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany.
authors: Felix
authors: F
authors: Welti
authors: Department of Primary Medical Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamberg, Germany.
authors: Martin
authors: M
authors: Scherer
authors: Department of Primary Medical Care, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamberg, Germany.
authors: Eva
authors: E
authors: Blozik
keywords: chronic heart failure; national disease management guideline; patient involvement; qualitative expert interviews; quality indicators
references: Qual Saf Health Care. 2004 Dec;13(6):428-34
references: 15576704
references: BMJ. 2003 Apr 12;326(7393):816-9
references: 12689983
references: Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Feb;12 (1):8-12
references: 12571338
references: Patient Prefer Adherence. 2013;7:259-68
references: 23569365
references: Qual Prim Care. 2011;19(3):183-91
references: 21781434
references: BMC Fam Pract. 2011 Aug 10;12 :85
references: 21831317
references: BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr 06;10:88
references: 20370925
references: J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Sep 20;46(6):e1-82
references: 16168273
references: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2009 Jan;52(1):96-103
references: 19189161
references: N Engl J Med. 2009 Jul 23;361(4):368-78
references: 19625717
references: J Health Serv Res Policy. 2006 Jul;11(3):172-9
references: 16824265
references: J Health Serv Res Policy. 2011 Jul;16 Suppl 2:38-47
references: 21737528
references: Nurs Qual Connect. 1994 Sep-Oct;4(2):7
references: 7767279
references: Implement Sci. 2012 Mar 21;7:21
references: 22436067
references: Med Care. 2007 Jun;45(6):489-96
references: 17515775
references: BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Mar 24;10:77
references: 20331904