Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 11 de 11
Filtrar
1.
Int J Surg ; 110(2): 733-739, 2024 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38051926

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Strengthening health systems through planned safety and quality improvement initiatives is an imperative to achieve more equitable, resilient, and effective care. And yet, years of organizational behavior research demonstrate that change initiatives often fall short because managers fail to account for organizational readiness for change. This finding remains true especially among surgical safety and quality improvement initiatives in low-income countries and middle-income countries. In this study, our aim was to psychometrically assess the construct validity and internal consistency of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool (SSORT), a short survey tool designed to provide change leaders with insight into facility infrastructure that supports learning and readiness to undertake change. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To demonstrate generalizability and achieve a large sample size ( n =1706) to conduct exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), a collaboration between seven surgical and anesthesia safety and quality improvement initiatives was formed. Collected survey data from health care workers were divided into pilot, exploration, and confirmation samples. The pilot sample was used to assess feasibility. The exploration sample was used to conduct EFA, while the confirmation sample was used to conduct CFA. Factor internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. RESULTS: Results of the EFA retained 9 of the 16 proposed factors associated with readiness to change. CFA results of the identified 9 factor model, measured by 28 survey items, demonstrated excellent fit to data. These factors (appropriateness, resistance to change, team efficacy, team learning orientation, team valence, communication about change, learning environment, vision for sustainability, and facility capacity) were also found to be internally consistent. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that communication, team learning, and supportive environment are components of change readiness that can be reliably measured prior to implementation of projects that promote surgical safety and quality improvement in low-income countries and middle-income countries. Future research can link performance on identified factors to outcomes that matter most to patients.


Assuntos
Gestão de Mudança , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Psicometria , Estudos Transversais , Inquéritos e Questionários , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
2.
Health Care Manage Rev ; 49(1): 14-22, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38019460

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Whereas organizational literature has provided much insight into the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of organizational leadership and management during emergencies, measures to operationalize related effective practices during crises remain sparse. PURPOSE: To address this need, we developed the Healthcare Emergency Response Optimization survey, which set out to examine the leadership and management practices in health care organizations that support resilience and performance during crisis. METHODOLOGY: We administered an online survey in April to May 2022 to health care administrators and frontline staff intimately involved in their hospital's emergency response during the COVID-19 pandemic, which included a sample of 379 respondents across nine rural and urban hospitals (response rate: 44.4%). We used confirmatory factor analysis and quantile regressions to examine the results. RESULTS: Applying confirmatory factor analysis, we retained 36 items in our survey that comprised eight measures for formal and informal practices to assess crisis leadership and management. To test effectiveness of the specified practices, we regressed self-reported resilience and performance measures on the formality and informality scores. Findings show that informal practices mattered most for resilience, whereas formal practices mattered most for performance. We also identified specific practices (anticipation, transactional and relational interactions, and ad hoc collaborations) for resilience and performance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: These validated measures of organizational practices assess emergency response during crisis, with an emphasis on the actions and decisions of leadership as well as the management of organizational structures and processes. Organizations using these measures may subsequently modify preparedness and planning approaches to better manage future crises.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Prática de Grupo , Humanos , Liderança , Pandemias , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde
3.
Health Care Manage Rev ; 48(4): 292-300, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37615939

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Communication is an essential organizational process for responding to adversity. Managers are often advised to communicate frequently and redundantly during crises. Nonetheless, systematic investigation of how information receivers perceive organizational communication amid crises has remained lacking. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to characterize features of effective internal crisis communication by examining how information-sharing processes unfolded during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: Between June and August 2020, we conducted 55 semistructured interviews with emergency department workers practicing in a variety of roles. We analyzed interview transcripts following constructivist constant comparative methods. RESULTS: Our findings revealed that at the onset of COVID-19 pandemic response, emergency department workers struggled with immense fear and anxiety amid high uncertainty and equivocality. Frequent and redundant communication, however, resulted in information delivery and uptake problems, worsening anxiety, and interpersonal tension. These problems were ameliorated by the emergence of contextual experts who centralized and democratized communication. Centralization standardized information received across roles, work schedules, and settings while decoupling internal communication from turbulence in the environment. Democratization made information accessible in a way that all could understand. It also ensured information senders' receptiveness to feedback from information receivers. Centralization and democratization together worked to reduce sensed uncertainty and equivocality, which reduced anxiety and interpersonal tension. CONCLUSION: Establishing frequent and redundant communication strategies does not necessarily address the anxiety and interpersonal tension produced by uncertainty and equivocality in crises. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Centralization and democratization of crisis communication can reduce anxiety, improve coordination, and promote a safer workplace and patient care environment.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Humanos , Comunicação , Atenção à Saúde , Disseminação de Informação
6.
BMC Med Educ ; 22(1): 653, 2022 Aug 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36045356

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: A well-qualified workforce is critical to effective functioning of health systems and populations; however, skill gaps present a challenge in low-resource settings. While an emerging body of evidence suggests that mentorship can improve quality, access, and systems in African health settings by building the capacity of health providers, less is known about its implementation in surgery. We studied a novel surgical mentorship intervention as part of a safe surgery intervention (Safe Surgery 2020) in five rural Ethiopian facilities to understand factors affecting implementation of surgical mentorship in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: We designed a convergent mixed-methods study to understand the experiences of mentees, mentors, hospital leaders, and external stakeholders with the mentorship intervention. Quantitative data was collected through a survey (n = 25) and qualitative data through in-depth interviews (n = 26) in 2018 to gather information on (1) intervention characteristics including areas of mentorship, mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics, (2) organizational context including facilitators and barriers to implementation, (3) perceived impact, and (4) respondent characteristics. We analyzed the quantitative and qualitative data using frequency analysis and the constant comparison method, respectively; we integrated findings to identify themes. RESULTS: All mentees (100%) experienced the intervention as positive. Participants perceived impact as: safer and more frequent surgical procedures, collegial bonds between mentees and mentors, empowerment among mentees, and a culture of continuous learning. Over 70% of all mentees reported their confidence and job satisfaction increased. Supportive intervention characteristics included a systems focus, psychologically safe mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics including generosity with time and knowledge, understanding of local context, and interpersonal skills. Supportive organizational context included a receptive implementation climate. Intervention challenges included insufficient clinical training, inadequate mentor support, and inadequate dose. Organizational context challenges included resource constraints and a lack of common understanding of the intervention. CONCLUSION: We offer lessons for intervention designers, policy makers, and practitioners about optimizing surgical mentorship interventions in resource-constrained settings. We attribute the intervention's success to its holistic approach, a receptive climate, and effective mentee-mentor relationships. These qualities, along with policy support and adapting the intervention through user feedback are important for successful implementation.


Assuntos
Tutoria , Mentores , Pessoal Administrativo , Humanos , Satisfação no Emprego , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Inquéritos e Questionários
7.
Health Care Manage Rev ; 47(4): 308-316, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35135989

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Psychological safety-the belief that it is safe to speak up-is vital amid uncertainty, but its relationship to feeling heard is not well understood. PURPOSE: The aims of this study were (a) to measure feeling heard and (b) to assess how psychological safety and feeling heard relate to one another as well as to burnout, worsening burnout, and adaptation during uncertainty. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of emergency department staff and clinicians (response rate = 52%; analytic N = 241) in July 2020. The survey measured psychological safety, feeling heard, overall burnout, worsening burnout, and perceived process adaptation during the COVID-19 crisis. We assessed descriptive statistics and construct measurement properties, and we assessed relationships among the variables using generalized structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Psychological safety and feeling heard demonstrated acceptable measurement properties and were correlated at r = .54. Levels of feeling heard were lower on average than psychological safety. Psychological safety and feeling heard were both statistically significantly associated with lower burnout and greater process adaptation. Only psychological safety exhibited a statistically significant relationship with less worsening burnout during crisis. We found evidence that feeling heard mediates psychological safety's relationship to burnout and process adaptation. CONCLUSION: Psychological safety is important but not sufficient for feeling heard. Feeling heard may help mitigate burnout and enable adaptation during uncertainty. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: For health care leaders, expanding beyond psychological safety to also establish a feeling of being heard may further reduce burnout and improve care processes.


Assuntos
Esgotamento Profissional , COVID-19 , Esgotamento Profissional/psicologia , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Incerteza
8.
OTO Open ; 5(2): 2473974X211018612, 2021.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34164593

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To describe baseline technology use within the head and neck cancer (HNC) population prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data. SETTING: The NHIS is a survey of population health administered in person annually to a nationally representative sample of noninstitutionalized US residents via a complex clustered sampling design. METHODS: Data regarding technology use, cancer history, and demographics were extracted from the NHIS. The study population comprised individuals who completed the NHIS Sample Adult survey from 2012 to 2018 and self-reported a cancer diagnosis. Poisson regression was used to evaluate associations between demographics and general or health-related technology use and prevalence ratios reported. RESULTS: Patients with HNC were less likely to use general technology (computers, internet, or email) when compared with other patients with cancer (60% vs 73%, P < .001), although this difference was not statistically significant after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Among patients with HNC, older age, lower education, and lower income were negatively associated with general technology use (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59-0.87] for age 65-79 years vs <50 years; aPR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85] for high school vs master; aPR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.48-0.91] for income 100%-200% vs >400% federal poverty level). Older age and lower education were negatively associated with health-related technology use (aPR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.32-0.67] for age 65-79 years vs <50 years; aPR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.30-0.74] for high school vs master). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic disparities exist in technology use rates among patients with HNC. Access to technology may pose a barrier to telehealth visits for many patients with HNC due to the unique socioeconomic demographics of this patient population.

9.
Int J Qual Health Care ; 33(2)2021 Apr 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33864362

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Newly intensified use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in emergency departments presents teamwork challenges affecting the quality and safety of care at the frontlines. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative study to categorize and describe barriers to teamwork posed by PPE and distancing in the emergency setting. METHODS: We conducted 55 semi-structured interviews between June 2020 and August 2020 with personnel from two emergency departments serving in a variety of roles. We then performed a thematic analysis to identify and construct patterns of teamwork challenges into themes. RESULTS: We discovered two types of challenges to teamwork: material barriers related to wearing masks, gowns and powered air-purifying respirators, and spatial barriers implemented to conserve PPE and limit coronavirus exposure. Both material and spatial barriers resulted in disrupted communication, roles and interpersonal relationships, but they did so in unique ways. Material barriers muffled information flow, impeded team member recognition and role/task division, and reduced belonging and cohesion while increasing interpersonal strain. Spatial barriers resulted in mediated communication and added physical and emotional distance between teammates and patients. CONCLUSION: Our findings identify specific aspects of how intensified PPE use disrupts teamwork and can inform efforts to ensure care quality and safety in emergency settings as PPE use continues during and, potentially beyond, the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Pessoal de Saúde/psicologia , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente/normas , Equipamento de Proteção Individual , Distanciamento Físico , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Barreiras de Comunicação , Humanos , Relações Interpessoais , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Papel (figurativo) , São Francisco/epidemiologia
10.
Int J Surg ; 89: 105944, 2021 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33862259

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Recent efforts to increase access to safe and high-quality surgical care in low- and middle-income countries have proven successful. However, multiple facilities implementing the same safety and quality improvement interventions may not all achieve successful outcomes. This heterogeneity could be explained, in part, by pre-intervention organizational characteristics and lack of readiness of surgical facilities. In this study, we describe the process of developing and content validating the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The new tool was developed in two stages. First, qualitative results from a Safe Surgery 2020 intervention were combined with findings from a literature review of organizational readiness and change. Second, through iterative discussions and expert review, the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool was content validated. RESULTS: The Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool includes 14 domains and 56 items measuring the readiness of surgical facilities in low- and middle-income countries to implement surgical safety and quality improvement interventions. This multi-dimensional and multi-level tool offers insights into facility members' beliefs and attitudes at the individual, team, and facility levels. A panel review affirmed the content validity of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool. CONCLUSION: The Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool is a theory- and evidence-based tool that can be used by change agents and facility leaders in low- and middle-income countries to assess the baseline readiness of surgical facilities to implement surgical safety and quality improvement interventions. Next steps include assessing the reliability and validity of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool, likely resulting in refinements.


Assuntos
Inovação Organizacional , Melhoria de Qualidade , Gestão da Segurança/métodos , Gestão da Segurança/normas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/normas , Países em Desenvolvimento , Humanos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
11.
Infect Drug Resist ; 12: 229-234, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30666138

RESUMO

Vector-borne infectious diseases continue to be a major threat to public health. Although some prevention and treatment modalities exist for these diseases, resistance to such modalities, exacerbated by global climate change, remains a fundamental challenge. Developments in genomic engineering technologies present a new front in battling vector-borne illnesses; however, there is a lack of consensus over the scope and consequences of these approaches. In this article, we use malaria as a case study to address the developments and controversies surrounding gene drives, a novel genomic engineering technology. We draw attention to the themes of infection control, resistance, and reversibility using a science and technology studies framework. Unlike other current prevention and treatment modalities, gene drives have the capacity to alter not only single organisms but also entire species and ecologies. Therefore, broader public and scientific engagement is needed to inform a more inclusive discussion between clinicians, researchers, policy makers, and society.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA