How patients and clinicians experience the utility of a personalized clinical feedback system in routine practice

Abstract

Objective: The objective was to explore how a person-adaptive clinical feedback system (CFS) effects its users, and how meaning and relevance are negotiated. Methods: We conducted a 10-month case-study of the implementation and practice of Norse Feedback, a personalized CFS. The data material consisted of 12 patient interviews, 22 clinician interviews, 23 field notes, and 16 archival documents. Results: We identified four main categories or themes: (i) patients’ use of clinical feedback for enhanced awareness and insight; (ii) patients work to make clinical feedback a communication mode; (iii) patients and clinicians negotiate clinical feedback as a way to influence treatment; and (iv) clinical feedback requires an interactive sense-making effort. Conclusion: Patients and therapists produced the meaning and relevance of the CFS by interpreting the CFS measures to reflect the unique patient experience of the patient–therapist relationship. Patients regarded CFS as a tool to inform therapy with important issues. Patients became more self-aware and prepared for therapy.