背景:患者的作用越来越大,家庭成员和照顾者作为顾问,加拿大卫生系统设置的合作者和合作伙伴。然而,对这一角色的补偿不是系统化的。当提供时,它在两种类型中都不同(例如,一次性酬金,工资)和金额。Further,患者伴侣对赔偿的广泛看法仍然未知。我们旨在描述提供补偿的患者合作伙伴的类型和频率以及他们对补偿的态度。
方法:本研究使用来自加拿大患者伴侣研究(CPPS)调查的数据。该调查收集了那些自我认定为在加拿大卫生系统工作的患者合作伙伴的经验和观点。三个问题是关于赔偿的,询问提供了哪些类型的补偿参与者,如果他们拒绝赔偿,以及他们是否感到得到了充分的补偿。后两个问题除了基于菜单和缩放响应选项外,还包括开放文本注释。对所有问题执行基本频率,并通过归纳定性内容分析对开放文本评论进行分析。
结果:共有603人参加了CPPS调查。大多数受访者从未或很少提供薪水(81%),酬金(64%),礼品卡(80%)或物质礼物(93%),而至少有时会提供一半的会议注册和费用。499名受访者中,共有129名(26%)表示拒绝赔偿。在511名受访者中,一半感到总是或经常得到充分的补偿,只有一半有时,很少或从不。开放式文本评论显示出积极的一面,对赔偿的矛盾和消极态度。态度是由对他们角色的看法构成的,回馈卫生系统的情绪,承认的感觉,实际考虑,公平、公平和问责关系的价值观。
结论:我们的研究结果证实,在加拿大,补偿没有标准化。一半的受访者经常感到补偿不足。患者伴侣对什么是适当的补偿有不同的看法,包括个人考虑,例如对志愿服务的偏好,以及更广泛的关注,如促进患者伙伴关系的公平。组织应努力确保薪酬做法是明确的,透明和关注患者合作伙伴的独特环境。
■两名患者合作伙伴是CPPS研究团队的成员,他们充分参与了从项目构思到知识翻译的所有研究阶段。他们是这份手稿的共同作者。该调查是与患者合作伙伴共同设计和试点测试的,调查参与者是患者合作伙伴。
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.