Search

Background: Emergency ambulance staff have a strong desire to receive feedback but the frequency and effects of prehospital feedback have not yet been explored quantitatively in the UK. Surveys on prehospital feedback prevalence have been conducted in the US, but are limited by retrospective data collection and a potential disconnect in recipients recognising that they were being provided with feedback (Cash et al., 2017; McGuire et al., 2021). Our study seeks to overcome these limitations by collecting data in real-time using a diary study design and providing a clear definition of prehospital feedback: ‘the provision of information to emergency ambulance staff regarding their performance within prehospital practice and/or patient outcomes’. The study aim will be to explore the extent, characteristics, mechanisms and effects of prehospital feedback in the UK from the recipients’ point of view and to describe individual differences in the desire for enhanced feedback. Methods: This will be an observational mixed-methods study involving a baseline survey, diary entries and a follow-up survey. The emphasis of data collection is quantitative survey data, which is supported by qualitative open-ended survey items that will be integrated using triangulation. Data analysis will involve logistic regression (baseline survey), multilevel modelling (diary entries) and content analysis (qualitative data). The baseline survey includes questions on demographics, feedback frequency and the Feedback Environment Scale (Steelman et al., 2004). Participants will be asked to complete 10 diary entries for an event where feedback is received and 5 diary entries where feedback is desired but not received. Eligible participants will be NHS ambulance staff delivering face-to-face patient care. Power calculations suggest a sample size of n=325 participants. Results & Conclusion: The findings from this study will demonstrate how feedback characteristics, person and environment variables influence reported feedback effects in the prehospital setting, and highlight missed opportunities for feedback.

Additional file 1: Example search strategy for MEDLINE (adapted for other databases).

Additional file 2: Conceptualization and implementation of co-production in the included papers.

Background Healthcare professionals are experiencing unprecedented levels of occupational stress and burnout. Higher stress and burnout in health professionals is linked with the delivery of poorer quality, less safe patient care across healthcare settings. In order to understand how we can better support healthcare professionals in the workplace, this study evaluated a tailored resilience coaching intervention comprising a workshop and one-to-one coaching session addressing the intrinsic challenges of healthcare work in health professionals and students. Methods The evaluation used an uncontrolled before-and-after design with four data-collection time points: baseline (T1); after the workshop (T2); after the coaching session (T3) and four-to-six weeks post-baseline (T4). Quantitative outcome measures were Confidence in Coping with Adverse Events (‘Confidence’), a Knowledge assessment (‘Knowledge’) and Resilience. At T4, qualitative interviews were also conducted with a subset of participants exploring participant experiences and perceptions of the intervention. Results We recruited 66 participants, retaining 62 (93.9%) at T2, 47 (71.2%) at T3, and 33 (50%) at T4. Compared with baseline, Confidence was significantly higher post-intervention: T2 (unadj. β = 2.43, 95% CI 2.08–2.79, d = 1.55, p

Additional file 1.