RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: There is significant variation in processes and outcomes of care for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), suggesting opportunities to improve quality of care. We aimed to determine whether a structured quality of care program can improve IBD outcomes, including the need for unplanned health care utilization. METHODS: We used a structured approach to improve adult IBD care in 27 community-based gastroenterology practices and academic medical centers. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and health care utilization were collected at clinical visits. Outcomes were monitored monthly using statistical process control charts; improvement was defined by special cause (nonrandom) variation over time. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to patient-level data. Nineteen process changes were offered to improve unplanned health care utilization. Ten outcomes were assessed, including disease activity, remission status, urgent care need, recent emergency department use, hospitalizations, computed tomography scans, health confidence, corticosteroid or opioid use, and clinic phone calls. RESULTS: We collected data prospectively from 20,382 discrete IBD visits. During the 15-month project period, improvement was noted across multiple measures, including need for urgent care, hospitalization, steroid use, and opioid utilization. Adjusted multivariable modeling showed significant improvements over time across multiple outcomes including urgent care need, health confidence, emergency department utilization, hospitalization, corticosteroid use, and opioid use. Attendance at monthly coached webinars was associated with improvement. DISCUSSION: Outcomes of IBD care were improved using a structured quality improvement program that facilitates small process changes, sharing of best practices, and ongoing feedback. Spread of these interventions may facilitate broad improvement in IBD care when applied to a large population.
Asunto(s)
Atención Ambulatoria/normas , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/terapia , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Adulto , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: COVID-19, a respiratory disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged in 2019 and led to a worldwide pandemic in 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a massive natural experiment in the formation of mitigation strategies to prevent cases and to provide effective healthcare for those afflicted. Regional differences in the impact of the pandemic on morbidity and mortality have been driven by political and regional differences in the coproduction of public health and social policy. We explored the United States (US) experience of COVID-19 for trends and correlations with other nations and also at the national, regional, state and local levels. OBJECTIVE: To identify geographic and temporal trends in the spread of COVID-19 in the United States. METHODS: Population data on COVID-19 cases and mortality were acquired on a daily basis from multiple publicly available databases, including the New York Times and Johns Hopkins University. At each geographic level (national, state and county), geographic entities' reported cases were evaluated for correlations using linear least-squares methods to identify patterns of correlation in the cases independent of scale. We evaluated for two specific characteristics: (i) the nature of the curvature of the line linking across percentile scores, ranging from concave to convex and (ii) the area under this curve, indicating how effectively a selected region (nation, state and county) is linked to its entire containing unit (world, country and state). We used this approach to identify three distinct COVID behavior phenotypes, each of which consisted of a number of states in the USA. RESULTS: We found that COVID activity in the USA follows a unique trend compared to other countries and that within the USA during the first year of the pandemic, three initial COVID phenotypes emerged: (i) the metropolitan outbreak (early outbreak phenotype); (ii) the regional outbreak (summer peak phenotype) and (iii) trans-regional outbreak (fall/winter peak phenotype), which, taken in sum, represent the overall USA national trend. Each phenotype has specific behavioral characteristics and is composed of a cluster of different states experiencing different conditions. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a new opportunity for public health strategy in the pandemic, namely to apply targeted public health approaches to address the specific needs of each phenotype. In the future, we should create databases that capture key health and hardship data elements at the smallest geographic level possible and use these to track trends, predict the future and apply targeted coproduction approaches to more effectively and efficiently safeguard population health, economic vitality and social well-being.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Brotes de Enfermedades , Humanos , Pandemias , Salud Pública , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: COVID-19, a respiratory disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, emerged in 2019 and led to a worldwide pandemic in 2020. The COVID-19 pandemic has been a massive natural experiment in the formation of mitigation strategies to prevent cases and to provide effective healthcare for those afflicted. Regional differences in the impact of the pandemic on morbidity and mortality have been driven by political and regional differences in the coproduction of public health and social policy. We explored the United States (US) experience of COVID-19 for trends and correlations with other nations and also at the national, regional, state and local levels. OBJECTIVE: To identify geographic and temporal trends in the spread of COVID-19 in the United States. METHODS: Population data on COVID-19 cases and mortality were acquired on a daily basis from multiple publicly available databases, including the New York Times and Johns Hopkins University. At each geographic level (national, state and county), geographic entities' reported cases were evaluated for correlations using linear least-squares methods to identify patterns of correlation in the cases independent of scale. We evaluated for two specific characteristics: (i) the nature of the curvature of the line linking across percentile scores, ranging from concave to convex and (ii) the area under this curve, indicating how effectively a selected region (nation, state and county) is linked to its entire containing unit (world, country and state). We used this approach to identify three distinct COVID behavior phenotypes, each of which consisted of a number of states in the USA. RESULTS: We found that COVID activity in the USA follows a unique trend compared to other countries and that within the USA during the first year of the pandemic, three initial COVID phenotypes emerged: (i) the metropolitan outbreak (early outbreak phenotype); (ii) the regional outbreak (summer peak phenotype) and (iii) trans-regional outbreak (fall/winter peak phenotype), which, taken in sum, represent the overall USA national trend. Each phenotype has specific behavioral characteristics and is composed of a cluster of different states experiencing different conditions. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a new opportunity for public health strategy in the pandemic, namely to apply targeted public health approaches to address the specific needs of each phenotype. In the future, we should create databases that capture key health and hardship data elements at the smallest geographic level possible and use these to track trends, predict the future and apply targeted coproduction approaches to more effectively and efficiently safeguard population health, economic vitality and social well-being.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Brotes de Enfermedades , Humanos , Pandemias , Salud Pública , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The greatest challenge confronting political, public health, business, education and social welfare leaders in the COVID pandemic era is to restore the economy, businesses and schools without further risking public health. The 'COVID Compass' project aims to provide helpful information to guide local decisions by tracking state and local policies over time and their impact on a balanced set of outcomes-health metrics, economic trends and social hardship indicators. METHODS: We selected a parsimonious set of 'local level' health, economic and hardship outcomes and linked them to 'local level' actions aimed to decrease COVID-19 health effects and to mitigate hardship for people, businesses and the economy. Data trends will be released frequently (e.g. weekly and monthly) to show changes in health economic and social hardship 'outcomes' (based on quantitative data), alongside policy, health care, public health and individual/social 'actions' (based on both qualitative and quantitative data). RESULTS: Work on initial analytic and visualization prototypes of the COVID Compass is currently in progress at national, state and local levels. CONCLUSION: Building a national, regional and local integrated database platform that captures upstream policies, actions and behaviors and links them to downstream health, economic and social hardship outcomes will offer a more comprehensive view of the data necessary for decision-makers and citizens to more effectively and intelligently monitor and mitigate harms caused by the pandemic.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Salud Pública , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Coproduction of healthcare services by patients and professionals is seen as an increasingly important mechanism to support person-centred care delivery. Coproduction invites a deeper understanding of what persons sometimes called 'patients' bring to development of a service. Yet, little is known about tools that may help elicit that information. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to explore potential benefits and limitations of an electronic pre-visit survey (PVS) and dashboard by studying uptake and experiences within the inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) community. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-method evaluation of patients and clinicians using the IBD Qorus PVS and dashboard at 24 programmes participating in the IBD Qorus learning health system. We analysed (i) descriptive statistics and thematic analyses of 537 patient surveys, (ii) semi-structured interviews with seven patients and six care teams and (iii) usage data collected between 25 March 2019 and 26 April 2020. RESULTS: Nearly two-thirds (64%; n = 38) of clinicians enrolled ≥25 patients into IBD Qorus; 59% (n = 29) of clinicians received ≥25 electronic PVS, with 3834 PVS received during the study period. Post-visit evaluation surveys were completed by patients following 26% (n = 993) of PVS completions. Among patients who reported using the dashboard for 1 or more months (n = 537), two-thirds (65%, n = 344) used the dashboard at a clinic visit and one-third used it outside the clinic (33%, n = 176). Most patients who used the dashboard during a clinic visit said it was helpful in discussions with their clinician (82%), in talking about what matters most (76%) and in making healthcare decisions (71%). Patients using the dashboard during the clinic visit reported higher levels of shared decision-making than those who did not use the dashboard (82% vs. 65%, P < 0.001). This relationship remained significant after controlling for receipt of care at a clinic with the highest levels of patient-reported shared decision-making (odds ratio: 2.1; confidence interval: 1.3-3.3). Patients and clinicians found the greatest value in using the PVS and dashboard to share concerns and symptoms, prepare for a visit and support discussions during the visit. The lack of integration with existing electronic health records (EHRs) limited clinician usage of the PVS and dashboard. CONCLUSIONS: The PVS and dashboard created a shared language, which supported coproduction and shared decision-making and facilitated a shared understanding of goals, concerns, symptoms and well-being. To support uptake, future systems should reduce implementation burden for healthcare professionals and integrate seamlessly with existing EHR systems and workflows.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino , Sistemas de Atención de Punto , Toma de Decisiones , Atención a la Salud , Humanos , Enfermedades Inflamatorias del Intestino/terapia , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Ninety percent of health care systems now offer patient portals to access electronic health records (EHRs) in the United States, but only 15% to 30% of patients use these platforms. Using PubMed, the authors identified 53 studies published from September 2013 to June 2019 that informed best practices and priorities for future research on patient engagement with EHR data through patient portals, These studies mostly involved outpatient settings and fell into 3 major categories: interventions to increase use of patient portals, usability testing of portal interfaces, and documentation of patient and clinician barriers to portal use. Interventions that used one-on-one patient training were associated with the highest portal use. Patients with limited health or digital literacy faced challenges to portal use. Clinicians reported a lack of workflows to support patient use of portals in routine practice. These studies suggest that achieving higher rates of patient engagement through EHR portals will require paying more attention to the needs of diverse patients and systematically measuring usability as well as scope of content. Future work should incorporate implementation science approaches and directly address the key role of clinicians and staff in promoting portal use.
Asunto(s)
Registros Electrónicos de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Alfabetización en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Participación del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Investigación Cualitativa , Humanos , Portales del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in routine clinical practice provides opportunities to "feed-forward" the patient's perspective to his/her clinical team to inform planning and management. This data can also be aggregated to "feedback" population-level analytics that can inform treatment decision-making, predictive modeling, population-based care, and system-level quality improvement efforts. METHODS AIDING INTERPRETATION AND ACTING ON RESULTS: Three case studies demonstrate a number of system-level features which aid effective PRO interpretation: (1) feed-forward and feedback information flows; (2) score interpretation aids; (3) cascading measurement; (4) registry-enabled learning health care systems; and (5) the maturational development of information systems. DISCUSSION: The case studies describe the developmental span of feed-forward PRO programs-from simple to mature applications. The Concord Hospital (CH) Multiple Sclerosis Neurobehavioral Clinic exemplifies a simple application in which PRO data are used before and during clinic visits by patients and clinicians to inform care. The Dartmouth-Hitchcock (D-H) Spine Center exemplifies a mature program which utilizes population-level analytics to provide decision support by predicting outcomes for different treatment options. The Swedish Rheumatology Quality (SRQ) Registry epitomizes an exceptional application which has spread to multiple systems across an entire country. KEY POINTS: Feed-forward and feedback PRO information systems can better inform, involve, and support clinicians, patients and families, and allow health systems to monitor and improve system performance and population health outcomes. Ideal systems have the capability for multilevel analyses at patient, system, and population levels, and an information technology infrastructure that is linked to associated workflows and a supportive practice culture. As systems mature, they progress beyond the ability to describe and inform towards higher level capabilities including prediction and decision support. Finally, there is additional promise for the integration of patient-reported information that is adjusted (or weighted) by preferences and values to guide shared decision-making and inform individualized precision health care in the future.
Asunto(s)
Retroalimentación , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Desarrollo de Programa , Artritis Reumatoide/terapia , Recolección de Datos/métodos , Toma de Decisiones , Humanos , Esclerosis Múltiple/psicología , Estudios de Casos Organizacionales , Educación del Paciente como Asunto , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , Sistema de Registros , Traumatismos Vertebrales , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , SueciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is a distinct difference between what we know and what we do in healthcare: a gap that is impairing the quality of the care and increasing the costs. Quality improvement efforts have been made worldwide by learning collaboratives, based on recognized continual improvement theory with limited scientific evidence. The present study of 132 quality improvement projects in Norway explores the conditions for improvement from the perspectives of the frontline healthcare professionals, and evaluates the effectiveness of the continual improvement method. METHODS: An instrument with 25 questions was developed on prior focus group interviews with improvement project members who identified features that may promote or inhibit improvement. The questionnaire was sent to 189 improvement projects initiated by the Norwegian Medical Association, and responded by 70% (132) of the improvement teams. A sub study of their final reports by a validated instrument, made us able to identify the successful projects and compare their assessments with the assessments of the other projects. A factor analysis with Varimax rotation of the 25 questions identified five domains. A multivariate regression analysis was used to evaluate the association with successful quality improvements. RESULTS: Two of the five domains were associated with success: Measurement and Guidance (p = 0.011), and Professional environment (p = 0.015). The organizational leadership domain was not associated with successful quality improvements (p = 0.26). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that quality improvement projects with good guidance and focus on measurement for improvement have increased likelihood of success. The variables in these two domains are aligned with improvement theory and confirm the effectiveness of the continual improvement method provided by the learning collaborative. High performing professional environments successfully engaged in patient-centered quality improvement if they had access to: (a) knowledge of best practice provided by professional subject matter experts, (b) knowledge of current practice provided by simple measurement methods, assisted by (c) improvement knowledge experts who provided useful guidance on measurement, and made the team able to organize the improvement efforts well in spite of the difficult resource situation (time and personnel). Our findings may be used by healthcare organizations to develop effective infrastructure to support improvement and to create the conditions for making quality and safety improvement a part of everyone's job.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud/normas , Personal de Salud/normas , Seguridad del Paciente/normas , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , Conducta Cooperativa , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Liderazgo , Noruega , Objetivos Organizacionales , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/normas , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Patients at the center of care is often the stated focus of clinicians and healthcare services. The quality and safety movement has shown that effective organization of care is needed, in addition to professional skills. This movement has provided professionals and others with methods to improve both organization and practice for patients. These methods include measurement to give those carrying out improvement feedback about the effects of their changes. New types of measures that enable patients to report treatment outcomes can now be use in quality improvement and quality reporting to bring a renewed focus on making care more patient-centered. Although used for some time in research, these measures are relatively new tools for quality improvement and not all research measures are suitable for everyday feedback or improvement projects. The purpose of the paper is to provide an introduction to the use and value of patient-reported outcome measures in quality improvement and to give practical guidance and resources for using PROMs for quality improvement. It draws on the authors' experiences using patient reported outcomes measures for quality research and improvement and their workshop at the 2016 Tokyo ISQUA conference, as well as on reviews and guidance documents about the use of PROMs. It does not provide a comprehensive and systematic review of research, but an overview and introduction to PROMs for quality improvement.
Asunto(s)
Atención al Paciente/normas , Medición de Resultados Informados por el Paciente , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administración , Retroalimentación , Humanos , Resultado del TratamientoAsunto(s)
Acreditación , Liderazgo , Atención a la Salud , Instituciones de Salud , Humanos , PolíticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Modifiable risks account for a large fraction of disease and death, but clinicians and patients lack tools to identify high risk populations or compare the possible benefit of different interventions. METHODS: We used data on the distribution of exposure to 12 major behavioral and biometric risk factors inthe US population, mortality rates by cause, and estimates of the proportional hazards of risk factor exposure from published systematic reviews to develop a risk prediction model that estimates an adult's 10 year mortality risk compared to a population with optimum risk factors. We compared predicted risk to observed mortality in 8,241 respondents in NHANES 1988-1994 and NHANES 1999-2004 with linked mortality data up to the end of 2006. RESULTS: Predicted risk showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.84 (standard error 0.01) for women and 0.84 (SE 0.01) for men. Across deciles of predicted risk, mortality was accurately predicted in men ((Χ (2) statistic = 12.3 for men, p=0.196) but slightly overpredicted in the highest decile among women (Χ (2) statistic = 22.8, p=0.002). Mortality risk was highly concentrated; for example, among those age 30-44 years, 5.1 % (95 % CI 4.1 % - 6.0 %) of the male and 5.9 % (95 % CI 4.8 % - 6.9 %) of the female population accounted for 25 % of the risk of death. CONCLUSION: The risk model accurately predicted mortality in a representative sample of the US population and could be used to help inform patient and provider decision-making, identify high risk groups, and monitor the impact of efforts to improve population health.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial aimed to determine the comparative effectiveness of surgical care versus nonoperative care by measuring longitudinal values: outcomes, satisfaction, and costs. METHODS: This paper aims to summarize available evidence from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial by addressing 2 important questions about outcomes and costs for 3 types of spine problem: (1) how do outcomes and costs of spine patients differ depending on whether they are treated surgically compared with nonoperative care? (2) What is the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year for surgical care over nonoperative care? RESULTS: After 4 years of follow-up, patients with 3 spine conditions that may be treated surgically or nonoperatively have systematic differences in value endpoints. The average surgical patient enjoys better health outcomes and higher treatment satisfaction but incurs higher costs. CONCLUSIONS: Spine care is preference sensitive and because outcomes, satisfaction, and costs vary over time and between patients, data on value can help patients make better-informed decisions and help payers know what their dollars are buying.
Asunto(s)
Dolor de la Región Lumbar/cirugía , Calidad de Vida , Columna Vertebral/cirugía , Adulto , Índice de Masa Corporal , Comorbilidad , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Satisfacción del Paciente , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Recuperación de la FunciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Bringing new therapies to patients with rare diseases depends in part on optimizing clinical trial conduct through efficient study start-up processes and rapid enrollment. Suboptimal execution of clinical trials in academic medical centers not only results in high cost to institutions and sponsors, but also delays the availability of new therapies. Addressing the factors that contribute to poor outcomes requires novel, systematic approaches tailored to the institution and disease under study. OBJECTIVE: To use clinical trial performance metrics data analysis to select high-performing cystic fibrosis (CF) clinical research teams and then identify factors contributing to their success. DESIGN: Mixed-methods research, including semi-structured qualitative interviews of high-performing research teams. PARTICIPANTS: CF research teams at nine clinical centers from the CF Foundation Therapeutics Development Network. APPROACH: Survey of site characteristics, direct observation of team meetings and facilities, and semi-structured interviews with clinical research team members and institutional program managers and leaders in clinical research. KEY RESULTS: Critical success factors noted at all nine high-performing centers were: 1) strong leadership, 2) established and effective communication within the research team and with the clinical care team, and 3) adequate staff. Other frequent characteristics included a mature culture of research, customer service orientation in interactions with study participants, shared efficient processes, continuous process improvement activities, and a businesslike approach to clinical research. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical research metrics allowed identification of high-performing clinical research teams. Site visits identified several critical factors leading to highly successful teams that may help other clinical research teams improve clinical trial performance.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/organización & administración , Fibrosis Quística , Equipos de Administración Institucional/organización & administración , Centros Médicos Académicos , Adulto , Benchmarking , Niño , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Selección de PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most widely performed elective procedures; however, there are wide variations in cost and quality among facilities where the procedure is performed. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to (1) develop a generalizable clinical care pathway for primary TJA using inputs from clinical, academic, and patient stakeholders; and (2) identify system- and patient-level processes to provide safe, effective, efficient, and patient-centered care for patients undergoing TJA. METHODS: We used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to design a care pathway that spans 14 months beginning with the presurgical office visit and concluding 12 months after discharge. We derived care suggestions from interviews with 16 hospitals selected based on readmission rates, cost, and quality (n = 10) and author opinion (n = 6). A 32-member multistakeholder panel refined the pathway during a 1-day workshop. Participants were selected based on leadership in orthopaedic (n = 4) and anesthesia (n = 1) specialty societies; involvement in organizations specializing in safety and high reliability care (n = 3), lean production/consumption of care (n = 3), and patient experience of care (n = 3); membership in an interdisciplinary care team of a hospital selected for interviewing (n = 8); recent receipt of a TJA (n = 1); and participation in the pathway development team (n = 9). RESULTS: The care pathway includes 40 suggested processes to improve care, 37 techniques to reduce waste, and 55 techniques to improve communication. Central themes include standardization and process improvement, interdisciplinary communication and collaboration, and patient/family engagement and education. Selected recommendations include standardizing care protocols and staff roles; aligning information flow with patient and process flow; identifying a role accountable for care delivery and communication; managing patient expectations; and stratifying patients into the most appropriate care level. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a multidisciplinary clinical care pathway for patients undergoing TJA based on principles of high-value care. The pathway is ready for clinical testing and context-specific adaptation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo , Vías Clínicas , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Atención Dirigida al Paciente , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Artroplastia de Reemplazo/efectos adversos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo/economía , Artroplastia de Reemplazo/normas , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Conducta Cooperativa , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Vías Clínicas/economía , Vías Clínicas/normas , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud/economía , Prestación Integrada de Atención de Salud/normas , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Comunicación Interdisciplinaria , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/economía , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/normas , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Educación del Paciente como Asunto , Seguridad del Paciente , Atención Dirigida al Paciente/economía , Atención Dirigida al Paciente/normas , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Desarrollo de Programa , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/economía , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/normas , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/economía , Indicadores de Calidad de la Atención de Salud/normas , Derivación y Consulta , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos , Flujo de TrabajoRESUMEN
AIM: To investigate health care improvement team coaching activities from the perspectives of coachees, coaches and unit leaders in two national improvement collaboratives. BACKGROUND: Despite numerous methods to improve health care, inconsistencies in success have been attributed to factors that include unengaged staff, absence of supportive improvement resources and organisational inertia. METHODS: Mixed methods sequential exploratory study design, including quantitative and qualitative data from interprofessional improvement teams who received team coaching. The coachees (n = 382), coaches (n = 9) and leaders (n = 30) completed three different data collection tools identifying coaching actions perceived to support improvement activities. RESULTS: Coachees, coaches and unit leaders in both collaboratives reported generally positive perceptions about team coaching. Four categories of coaching actions were perceived to support improvement work: context, relationships, helping and technical support. CONCLUSIONS: All participants agreed that regardless of who the coach is, emphasis should include the four categories of team coaching actions. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Leaders should reflect on their efforts to support improvement teams and consider the four categories of team coaching actions. A structured team coaching model that offers needed encouragement to keep the team energized, seems to support health care improvement.
Asunto(s)
Relaciones Interprofesionales , Liderazgo , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Conducta Cooperativa , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/organización & administración , Grupo de Atención al Paciente/normas , Mejoramiento de la Calidad/organización & administraciónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Recognition of the importance and difficulty of engaging physicians in organisational change has sparked an explosion of literature. The social identity approach, by considering engagement in terms of underlying group identifications and intergroup dynamics, may provide a framework for choosing among the plethora of proposed engagement techniques. This paper seeks to address this issue. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors examined how four disparate organisations engaged physicians in change. Qualitative methods included interviews (109 managers and physicians), observation, and document review. FINDINGS: Beyond a universal focus on relationship-building, sites differed radically in their preferred strategies. Each emphasised or downplayed professional and/or organisational identity as befit the existing level of inter-group closeness between physicians and managers: an independent practice association sought to enhance members' identity as independent physicians; a hospital, engaging community physicians suspicious of integration, stressed collaboration among separate, equal partners; a developing integrated-delivery system promoted alignment among diverse groups by balancing "systemness" with subgroup uniqueness; a medical group established a strong common identity among employed physicians, but practised pragmatic co-operation with its affiliates. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The authors cannot confirm the accuracy of managers perceptions of the inter-group context or the efficacy of particular strategies. Nonetheless, the findings suggested the fruitfulness of social identity thinking in approaching physician engagement. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Attention to inter-group dynamics may help organisations engage physicians more effectively. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This study illuminates and explains variation in the way different organisations engage physicians, and offers a theoretical basis for selecting engagement strategies.
Asunto(s)
Conducta Cooperativa , Difusión de Innovaciones , Relaciones Interprofesionales , Motivación , Médicos de Atención Primaria , Práctica de Grupo , Administradores de Instituciones de Salud , Investigación Cualitativa , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Maternity care services in the United Kingdom have undergone drastic changes due to pandemic-related restrictions. Prior research has shown maternity care during the pandemic was negatively experienced by women and led to poor physical and mental health outcomes in pregnancy. A synthesis is required of published research on women's experiences of maternity care during the latter half of the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: To update a previous systematic review of maternity care experiences during the pandemic to June 2021, exploring experiences of maternity care specifically within the United Kingdom and how they may have changed, in order to inform future maternity services. METHODS: A systematic review of qualitative literature was conducted using comprehensive searches of five electronic databases and the Cochrane COVID Study Register, published between 1 June 2021 and 13 October 2022, and further updated to 30 September 2023. Thematic Synthesis was utilised for data synthesis. FINDINGS: Of 21,860 records identified, 27 studies were identified for inclusion. Findings included 14 descriptive themes across the five core concepts: (1)Care-seeking and experience; (2)Virtual care; (3)Self-monitoring; (4)COVID-19 vaccination; (5)Ethical future of maternity care. DISCUSSION: Our findings in the UK are consistent with those globally, and extend those of the previous systematic review, particularly about women's perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest the following are important to women for future maternity care: personalisation and inclusiveness; clear and evidence-based communication to facilitate informed decision-making; and achieving balance between social commitments and time spent settling into motherhood.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Servicios de Salud Materna , Investigación Cualitativa , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/psicología , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Femenino , Reino Unido , Embarazo , Adulto , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/psicología , Pandemias , Estudios de Seguimiento , Satisfacción del PacienteRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Depression is common in Parkinson's disease (PD) but is underrecognized clinically. Although systematic screening is a recommended strategy to improve depression recognition in primary care practice, it has not been widely used in PD care. METHODS: The 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) was implemented at 5 movement disorders clinics to screen PD patients. Sites developed processes suited to their clinical workflow. Qualitative interviews with clinicians and patients provided information on feasibility, acceptability, and perceived utility. RESULTS: Prior to implementation, depression screening was recorded in 12% using a formal instrument; 64% were screened informally by clinical interview, and no screening was recorded in 24%. Of 1406 patients seen for follow-up care during the implementation period, 88% were screened, 59% using the GDS-15 (self-administered in 51% and interviewer administered in 8%), a nearly 5-fold increase in formal screening. Lack of clinician or staff time and inability to provide the GDS-15 to the patient ahead of the visit were the most commonly cited reasons for lack of screening using the GDS-15; 378 (45%) patients completing the GDS-15 screened positive for depression, and 137 were enrolled for a 12-month prospective follow-up. Mean GDS-15 scores improved from 8.8 to 7.0 (P < 0.0001) and the 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire emotional subscore from 42.2 to 36.7 (P = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: Depression screening in PD using a formal instrument can be achieved at much higher levels than is currently practiced, but there are barriers to implementing this in clinical practice. An individual site-specific process is necessary to optimize screening rates.
RESUMEN
Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is the process by which patients and clinicians exchange information and preferences to come to joint healthcare decisions. Clinical dashboards can support SDM by collecting, distilling, and presenting critical information, such as patient-reported outcomes (PROs), to be shared at points of care and in between appointments. We describe the implementation strategies and outcomes of a multistakeholder collaborative process known as "co-design" to develop a PRO-informed clinical dashboard to support SDM for patients with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods: Across 14 sessions, two multidisciplinary teams comprising patients, care partners, clinicians, and other stakeholders iteratively co-designed an SDM dashboard for either advanced cancer (N = 25) or CKD (N = 24). Eligible patients, care partners, and frontline clinicians were identified by six physician champions. The co-design process included four key steps: (1) define "the problem", (2) establish context of use, (3) build a consensus on design, and (4) define and test specifications. We also evaluated our success in implementing the co-design strategy using measures of fidelity, acceptability, adoption, feasibility, and effectiveness which were collected throughout the process. Results: Mean (M) scores across implementation measures of the co-design process were high, including observer-rated fidelity and adoption of co-design practices (M = 19.1 on a 7-21 scale, N = 36 ratings across 9 sessions), as well as acceptability based on the perceived degree of SDM that occurred during the co-design process (M = 10.4 on a 0 to 12 adapted collaboRATE scale). Capturing the feasibility and adoption of convening multistakeholder co-design teams, min-max normalized scores (ranging from 0 to 1) of stakeholder representation demonstrated that, on average, 95% of stakeholder types were represented for cancer sessions (M = 0.95) and 85% for CKD sessions (M = 0.85). The co-design process was rated as either "fully" or "partially" effective by 100% of respondents, in creating a dashboard that met its intended objective. Conclusions: A co-design process was successfully implemented to develop SDM clinical dashboards for advanced cancer and CKD care. We discuss key strategies and learnings from this process that may aid others in the development and uptake of patient-centered healthcare innovations.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To assess the use of a co-designed patient-reported outcome (PRO) clinical dashboard and estimate its impact on shared decision-making (SDM) and symptomatology in adults with advanced cancer or chronic kidney disease (CKD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a clinical PRO dashboard within the Northwestern Medicine Patient-Reported Outcomes system, enhanced through co-design involving 20 diverse constituents. Using a single-group, pretest-posttest design, we evaluated the dashboard's use among patients with advanced cancer or CKD between June 2020 and January 2022. Eligible patients had a visit with a participating clinician, completed at least two dashboard-eligible visits, and consented to follow-up surveys. PROs were collected 72 h prior to visits, including measures for chronic condition management self-efficacy, health-related quality of life (PROMIS measures), and SDM (collaboRATE). Responses were integrated into the EHR dashboard and accessible to clinicians and patients. RESULTS: We recruited 157 participants: 66 with advanced cancer and 91 with CKD. There were significant improvements in SDM from baseline, as assessed by collaboRATE scores. The proportion of participants reporting the highest level of SDM on every collaboRATE item increased by 15 percentage points from baseline to 3 months, and 17 points between baseline and 6-month follow-up. Additionally, there was a clinically meaningful decrease in anxiety levels over study period (T-score baseline: 53; 3-month: 52; 6-month: 50; P < .001), with a standardized response mean (SRM) of -0.38 at 6 months. DISCUSSION: PRO clinical dashboards, developed and shared with patients, may enhance SDM and reduce anxiety among patients with advanced cancer and CKD.