Table 3.

Ward round characteristics and observed participation

Behaviour observed	Category	CPS active n (%)	CPS shared n (%)	CPS passive n (%)
Number of WR	(n=113)	34 (30)	26 (23)	53 (46.9)
Site 1	(n=70)	21 (30)	19 (27.1)	30 (42.8)
Site 2	(n=43)	13 (30.2)	7 (16.3)	23 (53.4)
Number of WRs observed per patient	One ward round	4 (25)	5 (38.4)	5 (22.7)
	Two ward rounds	7 (43.8)	3 (23.1)	7 (31.8)
	Three ward rounds	5 (31.25)	5 (38.5)	11 (50)
Number of staff present for WRs	Range	2–12	2–11	2–11
Patient participation
Patient participation observed during WR	Yes	25 (83.3)	19 (82.6)	41 (77.4)
Patient participation observed in all stages of WR	Yes	6 (17.6)	5 (19.2)	27 (50.9)
Teamwork
Patient contributed information during WR.	Yes	20 (59)	17 (65.4)	40 (75.5)
Patient was given specific information by clinicians.	Yes	16 (47.1)	14 (53.8)	34 (64.2)
Plain (non-technical) language used	No	22 (64.7)	12 (46.2)	32 (60.4)
Potentially sensitive information was shared with patient.	Yes	15 (44.1)	13 (50)	19 (35.8)
A decision was made/care planned during WR.	Yes	26 (76.5)	20 (76.9)	41 (77.4)
Patient-centred care
Timing of engagement	Beginning (entry)	16 (47.1)	11 (42.3)	41 (77.4)
	Middle (process)	7 (20.6)	6 (23.1)	4 (7.5)*
	Near end (exit)	3 (8.8)*	1 (3.8)*
Initial patient participation prompted by	Patient (self)	4 (11.8)	5 (19.2)	8 (15.1)
	Clinician	18 (52.9)	13 (50)	30 (56.6)
	Both	3 (8.8)	1 (3.8)	3 (5.7)
Clinician observed to prompt patient contribution	Medical	21 (61.8)	12 (46.2)	28 (52.8)
	Nurse	8 (23.5)	11 (42.3)	22 (41.5)
Patient preference was elicited.	Yes	3 (8.8)		4 (7.5)
Patients asked if they had any questions.	Yes	15 (44.1)	11 (42.3)	19 (35.8)
Patient contributed to decisions during WR.	Yes	7 (20.6)	2 (7.7)	11 (20.8)

*Excludes missing data.

CPS, Control Preference Scale; WR, ward round.