RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Patient and family partners are being increasingly engaged worldwide in processes aimed at the quality improvement (QI) of healthcare services. There is also growing interest in documenting these engagement processes within organizations to share and improve them. To support the provincial implementation of this approach, the Quebec's ministry of health and social services published, in 2018, the "Framework for the partnership approach between patients, their families and health and social service stakeholders". However, while this framework provides guidelines by describing each partner's role and the ways in which patient and family partners should be engaged in QI processes, it remains unclear how these recommendations were actually used and implemented by different healthcare organizations. The aim of this paper is to present the protocol of a multiple case study that is being conducted to document how this approach was implemented in different large healthcare organizations in Quebec. This study is being conducted in partnership with a patient partner/co-researcher. METHODS: This qualitative multiple case study will be conducted in four large healthcare organizations in Quebec. Twelve to 15 key respondents will be recruited for each case. Data will be collected from multiple sources: 1) semi-structured individual interviews with the key respondents, 2) non-participant observations of the meetings of the QI committee engaging PFPs and 3) analysis of documents describing the implementation context, vision, structures and/or processes. The framework method will be used to conduct intracase and intercase qualitative data analysis. DISCUSSION: The multiple cases included will allow for comparisons between different ways of engaging PFPs in QI processes within an organization, the factors influencing these practices, their advantages and disadvantages, and their implementation outcomes. The conclusions drawn from this study will allow us to make recommendations regarding PFP engagement in the QI of care and services and to propose implementation examples for other organizations wishing to design and implement PFP engagement initiatives in their context in Quebec or elsewhere.
Asunto(s)
Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Humanos , Quebec , Participación del Paciente , Atención a la Salud/normasRESUMEN
Cette étude a sondé 46 médecins de famille québécois quant à leurs pratiques pour l'évaluation et le dépistage des conducteurs à risque afin 1) de mieux comprendre leur niveau de compétence perçu; 2) de recenser les difficultés rencontrées dans le processus de prise de décision et 3) de documenter leurs besoins et attitudes quant à une collaboration plus étroite avec les ergothérapeutes. Les participants (femmes : 84,8 %; moyenne d'expérience : 15,7 (±12,1) ans) ont répondu à un sondage en ligne de 30 questions. Les résultats de cette étude démontrent que malgré un certain confort à effectuer l'évaluation et le dépistage des conducteurs à risque, les médecins ne se considèrent pas comme les professionnels les mieux qualifiés pour ce faire. Ils reconnaissent également le rôle que jouent les ergothérapeutes dans le dépistage de cette clientèle et l'intervention auprès d'elle. Ils voient ainsi la pertinence d'avoir accès aux services de ces professionnels en soins de première ligne.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Countries around the world have committed in policy to transforming their mental health services towards a recovery orientation. How has mental health recovery been implemented into services for adults, and what factors influence the implementation of recovery-oriented services? METHODS: This systematic mixed studies review followed a convergent qualitative synthesis design and used the best-fit framework synthesis method. Librarians ran searches in Ovid- MEDLINE, Ovid-EMBASE, Ovid-PsycInfo, EBSCO-CINAHL Plus with Full Text, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion or exclusion using DistillerSR. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods peer-reviewed studies published since 1998 were included if they reported a new effort to transform adult mental health services towards a recovery orientation, and reported findings related to implementation experience, process, or factors. Data was extracted in NVivo12 to the 38 constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). The synthesis included a within-case and a cross-case thematic analysis of data coded to each CFIR construct. Cases were types of recovery-oriented innovations. RESULTS: Seventy studies met our inclusion criteria. These were grouped into seven types of recovery-oriented innovations (cases) for within-case and cross-case synthesis. Themes illustrating common implementation factors across innovations are presented by CFIR domain: Intervention Characteristics (flexibility, relationship building, lived experience); Inner Setting (traditional biomedical vs. recovery-oriented approach, the importance of organizational and policy commitment to recovery-transformation, staff turnover, lack of resources to support personal recovery goals, information gaps about new roles and procedures, interpersonal relationships), Characteristics of Individuals (variability in knowledge about recovery, characteristics of recovery-oriented service providers); Process (the importance of planning, early and continuous engagement with stakeholders). Very little data from included studies was extracted to the outer setting domain, and therefore, we present only some initial observations and note that further research on outer setting implementation factors is needed. CONCLUSION: The CFIR required some adaptation for use as an implementation framework in this review. The common implementation factors presented are an important starting point for stakeholders to consider when implementing recovery-oriented services.
