Engaging the public in healthcare decision-making: results from a citizens' jury on emergency care services

Scuffham, P. A., Moretto, N., Krinks, R., Burton, P., Whitty, J. A., Wilson, A., Fitzgerald, G., Littlejohns, P. and Kendall, E. (2016) Engaging the public in healthcare decision-making: results from a citizens' jury on emergency care services. Emergency Medicine Journal, 33 11: 782-788. doi:10.1136/emermed-2015-205663


Author Scuffham, P. A.
Moretto, N.
Krinks, R.
Burton, P.
Whitty, J. A.
Wilson, A.
Fitzgerald, G.
Littlejohns, P.
Kendall, E.
Title Engaging the public in healthcare decision-making: results from a citizens' jury on emergency care services
Journal name Emergency Medicine Journal   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1472-0213
1472-0205
Publication date 2016-11-01
Year available 2007
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1136/emermed-2015-205663
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 33
Issue 11
Start page 782
End page 788
Total pages 7
Place of publication London, United Kingdom
Publisher B M J Group
Language eng
Abstract Background Policies addressing ED crowding have failed to incorporate the public's perspectives; engaging the public in such policies is needed.
Formatted abstract
Background: Policies addressing ED crowding have failed to incorporate the public's perspectives; engaging the public in such policies is needed.

Objective: This study aimed at determining the public's recommendations related to alternative models of care intended to reduce crowding, optimising access to and provision of emergency care.

Methods: A Citizens' Jury was convened in Queensland, Australia, to consider priority setting and resource allocation to address ED crowding. Twenty-two jurors were recruited from the electoral roll, who were interested and available to attend the jury from 15 to 17 June 2012. Juror feedback was collected via a survey immediately following the end of the jury.

Results: The jury considered that all patients attending the ED should be assessed with a minority of cases diverted for assistance elsewhere. Jurors strongly supported enabling ambulance staff to treat patients in their homes without transporting them to the ED, and allowing non-medical staff to treat some patients without seeing a doctor. Jurors supported (in principle) patient choice over aspects of their treatment (when, where and type of health professional) with some support for patients paying towards treatment but unanimous opposition for patients paying to be prioritised. Most of the jurors were satisfied with their experience of the Citizens' Jury process, but some jurors perceived the time allocated for deliberations as insufficient.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that the general public may be open to flexible models of emergency care. The jury provided clear recommendations for direct public input to guide health policy to tackle ED crowding.
Keyword Communication
Communication
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Grant ID LP100200446
PHD-000432
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: HERDC Pre-Audit
School of Pharmacy Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 1 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 11 Oct 2016, 12:39:28 EST by System User on behalf of Learning and Research Services (UQ Library)