Frontiers in health services最新文献

Background: Organizational readiness for change, defined as the collective preparedness of organization members to enact changes, remains understudied in implementing sepsis survivor transition-in-care protocols. Effective implementation relies on collaboration between hospital and post-acute care informants, including those who are leaders and staff. Therefore, our cross-sectional study compared organizational readiness for change among hospital and post-acute care informants.

Methods: We invited informants from 16 hospitals and five affiliated HHC agencies involved in implementing a sepsis survivor transition-in-care protocol to complete a pre-implementation survey, where organizational readiness for change was measured via the Organizational Readiness to Implement Change (ORIC) scale (range 12-60). We also collected their demographic and job area information. Mann-Whitney U-tests and linear regressions, adjusting for leadership status, were used to compare organizational readiness of change between hospital and post-acute care informants.

Results: Eighty-four informants, 51 from hospitals and 33 from post-acute care, completed the survey. Hospital and post-acute care informants had a median ORIC score of 52 and 57 respectively. Post-acute care informants had a mean 4.39-unit higher ORIC score compared to hospital informants (p = 0.03).

Conclusions: Post-acute care informants had higher organizational readiness of change than hospital informants, potentially attributed to differences in health policies, expertise, organizational structure, and priorities. These findings and potential inferences may inform sepsis survivor transition-in-care protocol implementation. Future research should confirm, expand, and examine underlying factors related to these findings with a larger and more diverse sample. Additional studies may assess the predictive validity of ORIC towards implementation success.

Background: Opinion leadership, educational outreach visiting, and innovation championing are commonly used strategies to address barriers to implementing innovations and evidence-based practices in healthcare settings. Despite voluminous research, ambiguities persist in how these strategies work and under what conditions they work well, work poorly, or work at all. The current paper develops middle-range theories to address this gap.

Methods: Conceptual articles, systematic reviews, and empirical studies informed the development of causal pathway diagrams (CPDs). CPDs are visualization tools for depicting and theorizing about the causal process through which strategies operate, including the mechanisms they activate, the barriers they address, and the proximal and distal outcomes they produce. CPDs also clarify the contextual conditions (i.e., preconditions and moderators) that influence whether, and to what extent, the strategy's causal process unfolds successfully. Expert panels of implementation scientists and health professionals rated the plausibility of these preliminary CPDs and offered comments and suggestions on them.

Findings: Theoretically, opinion leadership addresses potential adopters' uncertainty about likely consequences of innovation use (determinant) by promoting positive attitude formation about the innovation (mechanism), which results in an adoption decision (proximal outcome), which leads to innovation use (intermediate outcome). As this causal process repeats, penetration, or spread of innovation use, occurs (distal outcome). Educational outreach visiting addresses knowledge barriers, attitudinal barriers, and behavioral barriers (determinants) by promoting critical thinking and reflection about evidence and practice (mechanism), which results in behavioral intention (proximal outcome), behavior change (intermediate outcome), and fidelity, or guideline adherence (distal outcome). Innovation championing addresses organizational inertia, indifference, and resistance (determinants) by promoting buy-in to the vision, fostering a positive implementation climate, and increasing collective efficacy (mechanisms), which leads to participation in implementation activities (proximal outcome), initial use of the innovation with increasing skill (intermediate outcome) and, ultimately, greater penetration and fidelity (distal outcomes). Experts found the preliminary CPDs plausible or highly plausible and suggested additional mechanisms, moderators, and preconditions, which were used to amend the initial CPD.

Discussion: The middle-range theories depicted in the CPDs furnish testable propositions for implementation research and offer guidance for selecting, designing, and evaluating these social influence implementation strategies in both research studies and practice settings.

Introduction: The implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices across systems is a complex, multifaceted endeavor, often requiring the mobilization of multiple organizations from a range of contexts. In order to facilitate this process, policy makers, innovation developers and service deliverers are increasingly calling upon intermediaries to support implementation, yet relatively little is known about precisely how they contribute to implementation. This study examines the role of intermediaries supporting the implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices in the mental health and addictions systems of New Zealand, Ontario, Canada and Sweden.

Methods: Using a comparative case study methodology and taking an integrated knowledge translation approach, we drew from established explanatory frameworks and implementation theory to address three questions: (1) Why were the intermediaries established? (2) How are intermediaries structured and what strategies do they use in systems to support the implementation of policy directions? and (3) What explains the lack of use of particular strategies? Data collection included three site visits, 49 key informant interviews and document analysis.

Results: In each jurisdiction, a unique set of problems (e.g., negative events involving people with mental illness), policies (e.g., feedback on effectiveness of existing policies) and political events (e.g., changes in government) were coupled by a policy entrepreneur to bring intermediaries onto the decision agenda. While intermediaries varied greatly in their structure and characteristics, both the strategies they used and the strategies they didn't use were surprisingly similar. Specifically it was notable that none of the intermediaries used strategies that directly targeted the public, nor used audit and feedback. This emerged as the principle policy puzzle. Our analysis identified five reasons for these strategies not being employed: (1) their need to build/maintain healthy relationships with policy actors; (2) their need to build/maintain healthy relationships with service delivery system actors; (3) role differentiation with other system actors; (4) perceived lack of "fit" with the role of policy intermediaries; and (5) resource limitations that preclude intensive distributed (program-level) work.

Conclusion: Policy makers and implementers must consider capacity to support implementation, and our study identifies how intermediaries can be developed and harnessed to support the implementation process.

Cancer mortality rates have decreased over the last 48 years attributable to standardized cancer screenings. These screenings were developed without deliberate inclusion of transgender and non-binary populations. While specialists are familiar regarding cancer screening in this distinct population, those in primary care might be more limited. As such, we aimed to develop a screening risk tool that combines the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (Gail model) with the updated American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria-Transgender Breast Cancer Screening, into an online questionnaire designed to accommodate primary care physicians performing routine health screenings to advise appropriate imaging and referral for this population. This new tool can be used for transgender chest/breast risk assessment whereas the Gail model alone was developed without transgender populations in mind, with the aim of early detection and cancer prevention in this historically underserved healthcare population.

Introduction: Approximately 240,000 people in Ukraine are living with HIV. Recent changes in medical legislation have significantly strengthened the role of family doctors and primary care pediatricians in the prevention, early detection and follow-up of patients with HIV. Thus, the purpose of the study was to examine the experience of primary care physicians in testing and providing care to patients with HIV.

Methods: Qualitative semi-structured in-depth interviews with typical representatives of the target audience from different regions of Ukraine were conducted. Inductive thematic content analysis was used to analyze the data upon standardized research protocols using the Theoretical Domain System.

Results: The results identify knowledge, skills, motivation, barriers, and opportunities in the context of HIV testing among family doctors in Ukraine. Primary health care providers consider HIV testing of patients to be an important part of their professional activities. In most cases, HIV testing is initiated upon detection of clinical indicators or when a person is identified as a key population. Preventive testing at the request of the patient is less common. Although most family doctors believe that they are sufficiently informed to conduct testing, there is a certain knowledge gap regarding communication with the patient and further treatment in case of a positive HIV result. The main obstacle to regular HIV testing is the reluctance and resistance of patients, as well as in some cases insufficient or non-existent tests in primary health care facilities. In order to improve the situation with HIV testing among the population, family doctors believe that it is necessary to organize regular trainings and courses to improve the skills of doctors on HIV, provide primary health care facilities with sufficient tests and establish high-quality information support.

Conclusions: The obtained results clearly outline the main problems that concern family doctors in Ukraine regarding work with key vulnerable groups and persons living with HIV.

Introduction: Despite significant advances in surgical techniques and patient outcomes, organ transplantation (OT) remains fraught with legal challenges and ethical dilemmas. This study aims to address the notable gap in literature on malpractice claims specifically related to OT, providing insights into litigation trends, outcomes, and implications for medical practice and patient care.

Methods: We retrospectively queried the Verdictsearch database from 1988 to 2023, and captured malpractice claims involving several organs. Data on demographics, organ types, and litigation outcomes were collected to compare compensation across different categories of malpractice and patient outcomes.

Results: Out of 292 malpractice cases identified, 62 met inclusion criteria, distributed across 19 states with kidney being the most implicated organ (46.8%). Defendants prevailed in 53.2% of cases, while settlements were reached in 29.0%, and plaintiffs won in 16.1% of cases. Surgical errors and complications were the most frequent allegations, followed by medication and treatment errors. The median compensation for deceased plaintiffs was significantly higher ($1,300,000) compared to living plaintiffs at litigation initiation ($128,000).

Discussion: Our study sheds light on the challenges and trends in malpractice litigation within the field of OT. By identifying key areas of concern and the influence of patient outcomes on litigation resolution, this study offers valuable insights for healthcare providers, legal practitioners, and policymakers aimed at enhancing patient safety, reducing litigation risks, and fostering a deeper understanding of the ethical and legal complexities in OT.

Introduction: There is limited guidance on strategies for delivering complex global health programs. We synthesized available evidence on implementation strategies and outcomes utilized in the global polio eradication initiative (GPEI) across low and middle-income country (LMIC) settings.

Methods: We nested our scoping review into a literature review conducted as part of a parent study, STRIPE. This review systematically searched PubMed for articles between 1 January 1988 and 25 April 2018 using polio search terms. Strategies from included studies were organized according to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) framework, specified using Proctor's framework, and linked to various outcomes (implementation, services delivery, impact).

Results: 152 unique articles fulfilled our inclusion criteria (from 1,885 articles included in the parent study). Only 43 out of the 152 articles described a suitable quantitative study design for evaluating outcomes. We extracted 66 outcomes from the 43 unique studies. Study publication dates ranged from 1989 to 2018 and represented diverse country settings. The most common implementation strategies were developing mechanisms for feedback, monitoring, and evaluation (n = 69); increasing awareness among the population (n = 58); involving stakeholders, workers, and consumers in the implementation efforts (n = 46); conducting workshops (n = 33); using mass media (n = 31); and building robust record systems to capture outcomes (n = 31). Coverage (n = 13) and morbidity (n = 12) were the most frequently identified outcomes, followed by effectiveness (n = 9) and fidelity (n = 6). Feasibility and sustainability were rarely evaluated.

Conclusions: This review provides a catalogue of implementation strategies and outcomes relevant for advancing global health services delivery in LMICs drawing from the GPEI. Implementation strategies reviewed were poorly described and not adequately linked to outcomes. It calls for additional implementation research to unravel the mechanisms of implementation strategies and their effectiveness, and adaptation of the ERIC framework in LMICs.

In recent years, rapidly changing disease profile patterns, shortage & uneven utilization of healthcare professionals contributed massive burden on the Indian healthcare system, which resulted in varying, fragmented, inconsistent healthcare delivery to the patients and poor patient management. Patients often face and experience many challenges like lack of accessibility, poor patient-healthcare provider relationships, and inadequate quality of care, resulting in unnecessary economic burden in managing their health conditions. Thus Indian healthcare reform is essential in enhancing its capacity to fulfill patients' health needs that can be addressed by focusing on key sustainable strategies and initiatives meant for enhancing coordination of care, expanding services accessibility, redeveloping healthcare infrastructure, implementing workforce innovation and strong governance with the incorporation of core principles such as patient-centeredness, integrated care and collaborative care approaches. The clinical and ambulatory pharmacy practice are fragment of the healthcare delivery which delivers pharmaceutical care and fulfils the needs of patients across healthcare settings. This paper focuses on the present & future perspectives of ambulatory pharmacy practice in India and the factors to be considered for implementing it in patient care.

Introduction: There is a growing body of literature on the activities and competencies of implementation support practitioners (ISPs) and the outcomes of engaging ISPs to support implementation efforts. However, there remains limited knowledge about the experiences of implementation support recipients who engage with ISPs and how these experiences shape the trajectory of implementation and contribute to implementation outcomes. This study aimed to extend the research on ISPs by describing the experiences of professionals who received implementation support and inform our understanding of the mechanisms by which ISPs produce behavior change and contribute to implementation outcomes.

Methods: Thirteen individuals with roles in supporting implementation efforts at a private foundation participated in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using qualitative narrative analysis and episode profile analysis approaches. Iterative diagramming was used to visualize the pathway of experiences of implementation support recipients evidenced by the interview data.

Results: The majority of recipients described how positive experiences and trusting relationships with ISPs increased acceptance of implementation science throughout the foundation and increased the perception of implementation science as both an appropriate and feasible approach for strengthening the impact of foundation strategies. As perceptions of appropriateness and feasibility increased, recipients of implementation support described increasing knowledge and application of implementation science in their funding engagements and internal foundation strategies. Finally, recipients reported that the application of implementation science across the foundation led to sustained implementation capacity and better outcomes.

Discussion: The experiences of implementation support recipients described in this paper provide a source for further understanding the mechanisms of change for delivering effective implementation support leading to better implementation quality. Insights from these experiences can enhance our understanding for building implementation capacity and the rationales for evolving approaches that emphasize the dynamic, emotional, and highly relational nature of supporting others to use evidence in practice.