BACKGROUND: Direct access of patients to their web-based patient portal, including laboratory test results, has become increasingly common. Numeric laboratory results can be challenging to interpret for patients, which may lead to anxiety, confusion, and unnecessary doctor consultations. Laboratory results can be presented in different formats, but there is limited evidence regarding how these presentation formats impact patients\' processing of the information.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to synthesize the evidence on effective formats for presenting numeric laboratory test results with a focus on outcomes related to patients\' information processing, including affective perception, perceived magnitude, cognitive perception, perception of communication, decision, action, and memory.
METHODS: The search was conducted in 3 databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase) from inception until May 31, 2023. We included quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods articles describing or comparing formats for presenting diagnostic laboratory test results to patients. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesized the characteristics of the articles and presentation formats used. The quality of the included articles was assessed by 2 independent reviewers using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.
RESULTS: A total of 18 studies were included, which were heterogeneous in terms of study design and primary outcomes used. The quality of the articles ranged from poor to excellent. Most studies (n=16, 89%) used mock test results. The most frequently used presentation formats were numerical values with reference ranges (n=12), horizontal line bars with colored blocks (n=12), or a combination of horizontal line bars with numerical values (n=8). All studies examined perception as an outcome, while action and memory were studied in 1 and 3 articles, respectively. In general, participants\' satisfaction and usability were the highest when test results were presented using horizontal line bars with colored blocks. Adding reference ranges or personalized information (eg, goal ranges) further increased participants\' perception. Additionally, horizontal line bars significantly decreased participants\' tendency to search for information or to contact their physician, compared with numerical values with reference ranges.
CONCLUSIONS: In this review, we synthesized available evidence on effective presentation formats for laboratory test results. The use of horizontal line bars with reference ranges or personalized goal ranges increased participants\' cognitive perception and perception of communication while decreasing participants\' tendency to contact their physicians. Action and memory were less frequently studied, so no conclusion could be drawn about a single preferred format regarding these outcomes. Therefore, the use of horizontal line bars with reference ranges or personalized goal ranges is recommended to enhance patients\' information processing of laboratory test results. Further research should focus on real-life settings and diverse presentation formats in combination with outcomes related to patients\' information processing.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal pain is one of the most common complaints when patients are admitted to emergency departments (ED). Unfortunately, many of these patients are readmitted to the ED shortly after initial discharge. The perspectives of these patients have not yet been explored.
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to explore how patients readmitted with acute abdominal pain in the ED experienced their initial admission, the time after discharge, and the cause of readmission.
METHODS: The study had a qualitative explorative design with a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach. Semi-structured individual telephone interviews were conducted with 14 patients readmitted with acute abdominal pain.
RESULTS: The analysis showed four themes: 1) being vulnerable during hospitalisation, 2) the meaning of information during hospitalisation, 3) discharged without being diagnosed, and 4) readmitted in the pursuit of relief. The patients wanted more knowledge and better communication despite their vulnerable condition. Patients were discharged whilst still in pain, and uncertainty of the situation at home contributed to mistrust of the health professionals.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients\' experience of the first ED admission due to acute abdominal pain was loneliness, minimal contact with healthcare professionals, and lack of information and involvement in pain management. Discharge was associated with feelings of insignificance and contributed to a fear of death. Pain was the main reason for readmission. Patients described how multiple readmissions contributed to being taken seriously by healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Patient participation in undergraduate education has been proven to contribute to student skills development complementing their didactic training. An increasing number of educational programs have implemented systematic patient engagement in curriculum to comply with the requirements of professional and regulatory bodies and to ensure greater focus on patient care. This scoping review aims to identify and summarize literature on the integration of patients and associated benefits in undergraduate allied health education programs.
METHODS: This scoping review was conducted using a comprehensive literature search of the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. The study was carried out and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses (PRISMA) guidance for Systematic reviews and Meta Analyses. Inclusion criteria included English language and allied health education. Exclusion criteria were outside the date range of 2011 to 2023, non-allied health programs, and clinical exposure during didactic courses. Literature reviews and commentaries were also excluded.
RESULTS: A total of nineteen studies were included in the scoping review. The majority of these papers examined undergraduate programs that engaged patients in curriculum delivery while a few involved patients in feedback delivery and formal assessment. Other forms of patient involvement were through curriculum co-design. Across institutions, evidence suggested the benefits of patient involvement to students, patients, and educational programs for improved delivery of person-centred care.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient involvement in curriculum delivery and student assessment provided valuable teaching and learning experiences for students and patients. Patient engagement also ensured that person-centered care principles were integrated into education programs. Summary of findings are provided to better prepare patients and facilitators for their role and to enhance the benefits to all participants.

BACKGROUND: Typically, researchers and clinicians determine the agenda in sarcoma research. However, patient involvement can have a meaningful impact on research. Therefore, the Patient-Powered Research Network (PPRN) of the Sarcoma Patient Advocacy Global Network (SPAGN) set up a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP). The primary objective of this partnership is to identify priorities for research and patient advocacy topics.
METHODS: In the first phase of this PSP, including 264 sarcoma patients and carers from all over the world, 23 research topics regarding sarcomas and 15 patient advocacy topics were identified using an online survey. In the second phase, participants were asked to fill in a top five and a top three of research and patient advocacy topics, respectively. Additionally, sociodemographic characteristics and sarcoma characteristics were collected. Social media channels, local national patient advocacy groups and the SPAGN website were used to distribute the survey.
RESULTS: In total, 671 patients (75%) and carers (25%) participated in this survey. The five highest ranked research topics were related to causes of sarcoma (43%), prognosis and risk of recurrence (40%), specific subtypes of sarcoma (33%), the role of immunotherapy, targeted therapy and combined therapy (30%), and hereditary aspects (30%). The three highest ranked patient advocacy topics were improving the diagnostic process of sarcoma (39%), access to tumor DNA analysis (37%) and establishing an international sarcoma registry (37%).
CONCLUSIONS: This sarcoma PSP has identified priorities for research and patient advocacy, offering guidance for researchers, assisting funding agencies with assessing project relevance and empowering patient advocates to represent the needs of patients and carers.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing role for patients, family members and caregivers as consultants, collaborators and partners in health system settings in Canada. However, compensation for this role is not systematized. When offered, it varies in both type (e.g., one-time honorarium, salary) and amount. Further, broad-based views of patient partners on compensation are still unknown. We aimed to describe the types and frequency of compensation patient partners have been offered and their attitudes towards compensation.
METHODS: This study uses data from the Canadian Patient Partner Study (CPPS) survey. The survey gathered the experiences and perspectives of those who self-identified as patient partners working across the Canadian health system. Three questions were about compensation, asking what types of compensation participants had been offered, if they had ever refused compensation, and whether they felt adequately compensated. The latter two questions included open-text comments in addition to menu-based and scaled response options. Basic frequencies were performed for all questions and open-text comments were analyzed through inductive qualitative content analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 603 individuals participated in the CPPS survey. Most respondents were never or rarely offered salary (81%), honorarium (64%), gift cards (80%) or material gifts (93%) while half were offered conference registration and expenses at least sometimes. A total of 129 (26%) of 499 respondents reported refusing compensation. Of 511 respondents, half felt adequately compensated always or often, and half only sometimes, rarely or never. Open-text comments revealed positive, ambivalent and negative attitudes towards compensation. Attitudes were framed by perceptions about their role, sentiments of giving back to the health system, feelings of acknowledgement, practical considerations, values of fairness and equity and accountability relationships.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that compensation is not standardized in Canada. Half of survey respondents routinely feel inadequately compensated. Patient partners have diverse views of what constitutes adequate compensation inclusive of personal considerations such as a preference for volunteering, and broader concerns such as promoting equity in patient partnership. Organizations should attempt to ensure that compensation practices are clear, transparent and attentive to patient partners\' unique contexts.
UNASSIGNED: Two patient partners are members of the CPPS research team and have been fully engaged in all study phases from project conception to knowledge translation. They are co-authors of this manuscript. The survey was co-designed and pilot tested with patient partners and survey participants were patient partners.

BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare (VBHC) focusses on increasing value for patients. Hospitals aim to implement VBHC via value improvement (VI) teams for medical conditions. To determine the patient\'s perspective on value, collective patient participation is important in these teams. We therefore evaluated the current state of patient participation in VI teams and share lessons learned.
METHODS: This mixed-methods study was conducted at seven collaborating hospitals in the Netherlands. A questionnaire (the public and patient engagement evaluation tool) was tailored to the study\'s context, completed by VI team members (n = 147 from 76 different VI teams) and analysed with descriptive statistics. In addition, 30 semistructured interviews were held with VI team members and analysed through thematic analysis. Data were collected between February 2022 and January 2023 and were triangulated by mapping the quantitative results to the interview themes.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight of the 76 included VI teams reported using a form of patient participation. Many respondents (71%) indicated a lack of a clear strategy and goal for patient participation. Multiple VI team members believed that specific knowledge and skills are required for patients to participate in a VI team, but this led to concerns regarding the representativeness of participating patients. Furthermore, while patients indicated that they experienced some level of hierarchy, they also stated that they did not feel restricted hereby. Lastly, patients were satisfied with their participation and felt like equal VI team members (100%), but they did mention a lack of feedback from the VI team on their input.
CONCLUSIONS: The results imply the lack of full implementation of patient participation within VI teams. Guidelines should be developed that provide information on how to include a representative group of patients, which methods to use, how to evaluate the impact of patient participation, and how to give feedback to participating patients.
UNASSIGNED: Two patient advisors were part of the research team and attended the research team meetings. They were involved as research partners in all phases of the study, including drafting the protocol (e.g., drafting interview guides and selecting the measurement instrument), interpreting the results and writing this article.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to demonstrate the compliance, feasibility, and acceptability of telehealth monitoring among surgical patients discharged with wounds or drains.
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional feasibility study. Post-surgical breast, plastic, and hepatobiliary patients with wounds and/or surgical drains were recruited using convenience sampling. The control group received conventional care which consisted of daily telephone follow-up. The intervention group used a mobile wound application to take wound and drain images, report drainage amount and symptoms. Compliance was assessed by measuring the percentage of actual to expected patient entries, feasibility was assessed by comparing detection of abnormalities and unexpected hospital visits, and acceptability was assessed by subjective feedback from nurses and patients from the intervention group.
RESULTS: 59 patients were recruited, with 30 patients in the control group and 29 patients in the intervention group. 9 specialty nurses were involved in the patients\' post-discharge care. The mean compliance rate for the hepatobiliary, breast and plastic patients were 89.9 %, 89.5 % and 75.9 % respectively. 4 patients from the intervention group (13.8 %) and 6 patients from the control group (20.1 %) were flagged as having potential abnormalities. As for unexpected hospital visits, there were 2 (6.9 %) in the intervention group and 1 (3.4 %) in the control group. 25 patients and 9 specialty nurses responded to the feedback survey. 22 patients (88 %) did not face any application issues. 18 patients (72 %) preferred to self-report symptoms via the application rather than to call the nurses and reported feeling safe knowing that they are remotely monitored. Most nurses found the app convenient and timesaving (n = 7, 78 %), with monitoring through pictures as more accurate than phone conversation (n = 8, 89 %).
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that use of a mobile application by surgical patients discharged with wounds or drains is feasible and serves as a viable monitoring tool.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that shared decision-making (SDM) between a practitioner and a patient strengthens the ideal of treatment adherence. This study employed a multi-method approach to SDM in healthcare to reinforce the theoretical and methodological grounds of this argument. As the study design, self-reported survey items and experimental vignettes were combined in one electronic questionnaire. This technique aimed to analyze the effects of previous experiences and the current preferences regarding SDM on the intentions to follow-through with the medical recommendations.
METHODS: Using quantitative data collected from the members of the Finnish Pensioners\' Federation (N = 1610), this study focused on the important and growing population of older adults as healthcare consumers. Illustrated vignettes were used in the evaluation of expected adherence to both vaccination and the treatment of an illness, depending on the decision-making style varying among the repeated scenarios. In a within-subjects study design, each study subject acted as their own control.
RESULTS: The findings demonstrated that SDM correlates with expected adherence to a treatment and vaccination. Both the retrospective experiences and prospective aspirations of SDM in clinical encounters supported the patients\' expected adherence to vaccination and treatment while decreasing the probability of pseudo-compliance. The association between SDM and expected adherence was not affected by the perceived health of the respondents. However, the associations among the expected adherence and decision-making styles were found to differ between the treatment and vaccination scenarios.
CONCLUSIONS: SDM enables expected treatment adherence among older adults. Thus, the multi-method study emphasizes the importance of SDM in various healthcare encounters. The findings further imply that SDM research benefits from questionnaires combining self-report methods and experimental study designs. Further cross-validation studies using various types of written and illustrated scenarios are encouraged.

BACKGROUND: Patient involvement (PI) in systematic reviews (SRs) can help to improve the quality of SRs and enhance the credibility of the research process. At the same time, PI in SRs poses challenges such as the need for extra time. While several organizations and working groups from English-speaking countries provide recommendations for PI in SRs, there is a lack of current insights from stakeholders in Germany, including researchers and patients. Eliciting their perspectives is indicated, as PI in SRs in Germany might differ due to language barriers and organizational dissimilarities. For sharing and discussing stakeholders\' experiences in Germany, a workshop was facilitated. This paper summarizes the results of the workshop to elucidate stakeholders\' perspectives on key aspects of PI in SRs in Germany.
METHODS: A World Café was conducted at the 2023 conference of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine. Participants at all levels of experience could take part without prior registration. The data obtained was summarized narratively in an iterative process, and a framework of the topics discussed was developed.
RESULTS: 22 participants, predominantly researchers, took part. Participants formulated several general conditions for PI in SRs such as time and transparency. The majority of the tasks described referred to the application phase and the initial phase of a SR. The development of training and information materials in plain German language was deemed essential. The application phase of an externally funded SR and patient recruitment were considered as particularly challenging.
CONCLUSIONS: Several of the formulated aspects such as time and transparency are consistent with earlier work. The project start of a SR, however, has so far not been explicitly described in the literature as being of particular importance. This phase might be even more crucial to SR projects in Germany since researchers are expected to develop information materials for patients. Both the application phase and patient recruitment could be considered particularly challenging due to a lower degree of organisation of PI in Germany.
CONCLUSIONS: World Café participants described many aspects referring to the project start of a SR. This underlines that PI in SRs needs to be described as a process. A process model intertwining the phases of a SR with the respective phases of PI, ideally including best practices for each phase, could be of great value. With respect to the specific context in Germany, a greater degree of organization of PI, i.e. coordinated by an institution, could help to manage challenges such as patient recruitment.

The current trend in healthcare is to actively involve patients in their own treatment; however, in practice, healthcare providers may adhere to paternalistic views, which may not align with ideals related to patient involvement. This tension may become visible when providers talk about service encounters that they experienced as being interactionally troubling. In this empirical qualitative study, we utilize Bamberg\'s narrative positioning analysis to explore how healthcare providers construct patients\' roles in narratives about such troubling exchanges. Data consist of 20 audio-recorded interviews with healthcare providers. We found two types of narratives in which healthcare providers\' perceptions of interactionally troubling patient exchanges were consistently related to their implicit evaluations of patients along a continuum of activeness versus passiveness. In the first, an active patient was considered ideal, and the problematic patient was one who is passive. In the second, a patient\'s over-activeness was thought to interfere with the healthcare delivery. While providers\' complaints about patient passiveness were unproblematically presented from the perspective of the patient participation ideal, complaints about patient over-activeness were difficult to account for due to their inherent connotations with paternalism. Thus, we conclude that there is a need for training and interventions aiming to develop healthcare providers\' critical awareness of shifting cultural models, including patient involvement ideals and providers\' capacity to reflect paternalistic tendencies.