Pediatric head injury guideline use in Sweden: a cross-sectional survey on determinants for successful implementation of a clinical practice guideline.

BACKGROUND: The Scandinavian Neurotrauma Committee guideline (SNC-16) was developed and published in 2016, to aid clinicians in management of pediatric head injuries in Scandinavian emergency departments (ED). The objective of this study was to explore determinants for use of the SNC-16 guideline by Swedish ED physicians. METHODS: This is a nationwide, cross-sectional, web-based survey in Sweden. Using modified snowball sampling, physicians managing children in the ED were invited via e-mail to complete the validated Clinician Guideline Determinants Questionnaire between February and May, 2023. Baseline data, data on enablers and barriers for use of the SNC-16 guideline, and preferred routes for implementation and access of guidelines in general were collected and analyzed descriptively and exploratory with Chi-square and Fisher's tests. RESULTS: Of 595 invitations, 198 emergency physicians completed the survey (effective response rate 33.3%). There was a high reported use of the SNC-16 guideline (149/195; 76.4%) and a strong belief in its benefits for the patients (188/197; 95.4% agreement). Respondents generally agreed with the guideline's content (187/197; 94.9%) and found it easy to use and navigate (188/197; 95.4%). Some respondents (53/197; 26.9%) perceived a lack of organizational support needed to use the guideline. Implementation tools may be improved as only 58.9% (116/197) agreed that the guideline includes such. Only 37.6% (74/197) of the respondents agreed that the guideline clearly describes the underlying evidence supporting the recommendation. Most respondents prefer to consult colleagues (178/198; 89.9%) and guidelines (149/198; 75.3%) to gain knowledge to guide clinical decision making. Four types of enablers for guideline use emerged from free-text answers: ease of use and implementation, alignment with local guidelines and practice, advantages for stakeholders, and practicality and accessibility. Barriers for guideline use were manifested as: organizational challenges, medical concerns, and practical concerns. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest high self-reported use of the SNC-16 guideline among Swedish ED physicians. In updated versions of the guideline, focus on improving implementation tools and descriptions of the underlying evidence may further facilitate adoption and adherence. Measures to improve organizational support for guideline use and involvement of patient representatives should also be considered.

Health-related quality of life and long-term symptoms among patients with non-severe covid-19 - a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of covid-19 patients experience non-severe disease. Nonetheless, long-term symptoms may be common and the impact on quality of life is uncertain. This study aims to examine these aspects in a prospective, longitudinal cohort. METHODS: Non-hospitalised patients with PCR-confirmed covid-19 were prospectively invited to self-report assessments of background data, symptoms and recovery, illness perception (BIPQ) and health-related quality of life (HR-Qol) measured by EQ5D-VAS. RESULTS: 154 patients were included (mean age 46 years, 69% female). The majority of participants (65%) had symptoms for 1-4 weeks and 12% more than 6 months. The most common symptoms were initially malaise, fatigue, headache, fever and cough and the most common long-term symptoms were impaired physical condition, fatigue, anosmia and headache. The BIPQ index had a negative correlation with the EQ5D-VAS score after the infection, but not with long-term symptoms. Mean differences in the EQ5D-VAS score were significantly lower after the infection and patients with long-term symptoms had a more pronounced negative effect in EQ5D-VAS scores. CONCLUSION: We found that most patients with non-severe covid-19 reported symptoms for 1-4 weeks and approximately 10% developed long-term symptoms. Non-severe covid-19 seems to have a negative influence on HR-Qol, especially in patients with long-term symptoms and with a greater burden from the disease. None of the initial symptoms could predict the presence of long-term symptoms.

The structure of quality systems is important to the process and outcome, an empirical study of 386 hospital departments in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Clinicians, nurses, and managers in hospitals are continuously confronted by new technologies and methods that require changes to working practice. Quality systems can help to manage change while maintaining a high quality of care. A new model of quality systems inspired by the works of Donabedian has three factors: structure (resources and administration), process (culture and professional co-operation), and outcome (competence development and goal achievement). The objectives of this study were to analyse whether structure, process, and outcome can be used to describe quality systems, to analyse whether these components are related, and to discuss implications. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed and sent to a random sample of 600 hospital departments in Sweden. The adjusted response rate was 75%. The data were analysed with confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling in LISREL. This is to our knowledge the first large quantitative study that applies Donabedian's model to quality systems. RESULTS: The model with relationships between structure, process, and outcome was found to be a reasonable representation of quality systems at hospital departments (p = 0.095, indicating no significant differences between the model and the data set). Structure correlated strongly with process (0.72) and outcome (0.60). Given structure, process also correlated with outcome (0.20). CONCLUSION: The model could be used to describe and evaluate single quality systems or to compare different quality systems. It could also be an aid to implement a systematic and evidence-based system for working with quality improvements in hospital departments.

Quality improvement designs are related to the degree of organisation of quality systems: an empirical study of hospital departments.

Quality systems can help departments do the right things and do things right, but organisation and design need to be considered. The aim was to analyse whether quality systems that include certain quality improvement designs differ with regard to organisational factors and degrees of organisation. A questionnaire was developed and sent to a random sample of 600 hospital departments in Sweden (response rate=75%). A k-means cluster analysis was used to group departments into three degrees of organisation. Analyses of variance were done to study differences in organisational factors and quality improvement designs among the clusters. LISREL analyses were done to study the relationships between organisational factors and quality improvement designs. The results showed that quality systems that included certain quality improvement designs differed with regard to the organisational factors available resources, administration, culture, cooperation, and goal achievement. The results also showed that departments with quality systems of different organisational degrees used different quality improvement designs. Some quality improvement designs may require a quality system with a high degree of organisation to support a successful implementation. The appended questionnaire could be used to plan implementations and evaluate their results.

Different types and aspects of quality systems and their implications. A thematic comparison of seven quality systems at a university hospital.

Policy makers and managers face a difficult challenge in keeping up with the changing organisations and methods of health care. Organised systematic quality work, that is, quality systems, can make this task easier. The aim here was to study different quality systems, identify common characteristics, find types of quality systems and discuss the practical implications of the results. The study was designed as a qualitative study of seven clinics with quality systems at a large university hospital in Sweden. Purposefully selected, 19 managers or quality co-ordinators were interviewed. The interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. Six organisational aspects were present in the interviews: resources, administration, culture, co-operation, goal achievement and development of competence. The aspects were used to categorise the clinics' systems into three types: local, centralised and integrated systems. The responses indicated that local systems had a decentralised organisation, allowing for a high degree of adaptability. Centralised systems were reported to be more top-down orientated, allowing for a highly predictable output. Integrated systems were reported to have a management style that emphasized co-operation, allowing for both good adaptability and predictability. Policy makers and managers could use the described aspects and types of quality systems to help decide what type of quality system to implement in a specific setting, as a base line for evaluation, or as a framework for developing existing quality systems.