A comparison of healthcare priorities amongst ED stakeholders
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A comparison of healthcare priorities amongst the patients who visit the Emergency Department, their family members and the healthcare staff that take care of them during the visit.
IRAS ID
240333
Contact name
Kirsty Challen
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Centre for Health Research and Innovation
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 3 months, 0 days
Research summary
Background: The theory behind triage is that in order to maximise the efficacy and efficiency of limited resources, they must be allocated according to ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’. So far, the ‘greatest good’ has been defined based on imminent clinical need. However, it is actually unknown how ‘good’ is defined and how this definition differs amongst separate ‘stakeholders’ in healthcare. Specifically, it is unknown how contrasting the priorities are between the patient, their relative or caregiver and the attending clinician for each visit to the Emergency Department (ED). If this contrast is significant enough, it could mean that the current approach to triage is in fact ineffective and that stretched resources are being misused.
Aims: This study aims to explore the beliefs and expectations of different stakeholders in the ED visit about healthcare priorities. It is possible that themes uncovered in this study could lead to new guidance for the triage process.
Methodology: This study will opportunistically sample adult participants in the ED over a four week period. Participants will be excluded if they are under 18, critically ill, lacking capacity or from vulnerable groups e.g. Dementia. Participants will be stakeholders (a patient, their relative/caregiver or the attending clinician) in visits across the ED, during day and night shifts. The researcher will obtain the clinician’s written consent prior to the clerking process will approach the selected patient with the medical team to observe, conducting the clinician interview immediately afterwards. The researcher will brief the patient and relative/caregiver on the study, informing them that the interviews will be recorded but no identifiable data will be stored. Written consent will then be sought, if declined, it will be recorded and participants will be excluded from the study.
REC name
North West - Greater Manchester East Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
18/NW/0256
Date of REC Opinion
14 May 2018
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion