TY - JOUR T1 - Giving Voice to Patients Through Interviews and Qualitative Analysis- A Pilot Study JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.03.16.20030684 SP - 2020.03.16.20030684 AU - Matthew H Loxton AU - Ebele Okoli Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/04/10/2020.03.16.20030684.abstract N2 - Modern healthcare is drowning in data, and burdened by quality, safety, financial, and operational metrics, but few relate directly to how patients experiences their care. This has a direct bearing on patient safety, and whether the care they receive meets their needs and goals. As such, a key concept in quality management, is to view all processes in terms of whether, and to what degree, these meet patient goals. However, the literature lacks sufficient specificity on how care processes are seen through the eyes of the patient. A thick account of patient experience of their care processes could provide us with a typology of what patients are seeing, how they conceptualize what they experience, and what risks, issues, and opportunities they can express.To fill a gap in awareness of the patient experience of the radiology processes, we used a mixed methods qualitative approach to elicit the patient view of their radiology experiences, and attempt to develop a typology and insights from the patient voice. We developed a typology of patient experiences of the radiology processes that centered on communication gaps, and reflected opacity, fragility, and unpredictability of administrative and care processes in radiology. Although care and administrative processes were described by participants as well-executed in isolation, from a patient perspective, processes frequently failed to interconnect efficiently or effectively, and did not work well as an end-to-end patient journey. Care processes were described by participants as fragile, solitary, and opaque, and required constant vigilance, supervision, and assistance by patients. Participants described a need for improved communication between radiology staff and patients that focuses on the patient journey and helps to identify and mitigate causes of process opacity and fragilityCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSelf-fundedAuthor DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesCleansed interview transcripts asre available on reasonable request ER -