The health service perspective on determinants of success in allied health student research project collaborations: a qualitative study guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

BACKGROUND: A research culture in health care organisations is associated with improved healthcare performance. Allied health (AH) students undertake research training as part of their professional degree qualifications. This may include participation in research projects, sometimes undertaken in association with health services. Co-supervision of these projects by health service staff provides research capacity building opportunities and staff-centred outcomes for the individuals involved, as well as improvements in clinical knowledge and practice within the local area. Also, publications from these projects contribute to the wider evidence base. Identification of barriers and facilitators to engagement in, and conduct of, these projects may optimise systems for improved health service outcomes. METHODS: This formative evaluation used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide analysis of qualitative data obtained from semi-structured interviews with health service-employed allied health professionals, including clinicians and research fellows, who had supervised students on clinical-related research placements within the previous five years. RESULTS: Eleven AH clinicians described 18 collaborative projects with 24 students from five AH disciplines across four universities. Three health service-employed AH research fellows described their involvement in these and other student research projects. Twenty key determinant constructs were identified and mapped across all five CFIR domains. Facilitators included health service cosmopolitanism, project adaptability and implementation climate (compatibility). Health service-employed research fellows provided readiness for implementation and a facilitator for project execution. The main barriers identified were cost to staff in workload and personal time and aspects related to project complexity. Differing student characteristics affected the relative advantage of collaborative projects in positive and negative manners. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the facilitators and barriers to the conduct of collaborative AH student research projects. Addressing these determinants when establishing each new project may enable health services to optimise communication, role delineation and project success, and thus ultimately, healthcare performance and patient care.

Measuring performance in allied health professional role substitution models of care: a clinician survey.

BACKGROUND: Professional role substitution models of care have emerged as a key strategy to address increasing healthcare demand. Gaining insights from those actively engaged in the process of these models' implementation and evaluation is pivotal to ensuring sustainability and further successful implementation. The purpose of this study was to describe allied-health clinicians' perceptions, practice, and experiences of healthcare performance evaluation in professional role substitution models of care. METHODS: Data were collected via an online platform between 22 June - 22 July 2022 using a combination of convenience and network-based sampling of allied-health clinicians involved or interested in the implementation and evaluation of professional role substitution models of care. Clinicians answered 25 questions which consisted of demographic and targeted questions regarding performance evaluation across six domains of healthcare quality (effectiveness, safety, appropriateness, access & equity, continuity of care, and cost, efficiency, productivity & sustainability). RESULTS: A total of 102 clinicians accessed the survey, with 72 providing complete survey data. Eleven allied-health professions were represented, working across twelve specialities in thirteen hospital and health services. Whilst most allied-health clinicians (93-100%) supported measuring performance in each of the six healthcare quality domains, only 26-58% were measuring these domains in practice. Allied-health leadership support (62.5%), clinician drive (62.5%), consumer engagement (50%) and medical support (46%) were enablers whilst a lack of resources (human, time, financial (47%)), healthcare performance frameworks and/or policies (40%) were identified as barriers. Given the opportunity, clinicians would invest the most financial resources in digital solutions as a core strategy to improve performance evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Allied-health professionals expressed strong support for principles of performance evaluation, however in practice, performance evaluation is still in its infancy in professional role substitution models of care. Organisations can implement strategies that maximise the enablers whilst addressing barriers identified to improve performance evaluation in these models of care.

Experiences of hospital allied health professionals in collaborative student research projects: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Active engagement in research by healthcare organisations and clinicians is associated with improvements in healthcare performance. Barriers to research engagement by clinician allied health (AH) professionals include competing priorities from high clinical workloads, lack of research skills and confidence, and lack of supportive research relationships. Collaboration with universities on joint clinical research projects is well recognised as a means of building health service research capacity. Research projects undertaken by students as part of their qualifying degree represent one such opportunity. However, there are few reports evaluating these collaborations from the health service perspective. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis to explore the experiences of AH professionals in the co-supervision of students completing research placements as part of their professional degree course. RESULTS: Fourteen health service employees from six allied health disciplines described collaborations on research projects with 24 students from four different universities. Student placements and projects varied widely in length of placement, extent of collaboration, supervision structure and study design. Three overarching themes were identified in the AH professional co-supervision experience: 1) Professional growth; 2) Mismatch with expectations; and 3) Focus on the student. Project outcomes were categorised from the health system perspective. These were 1) Healthcare performance improvements, including local increases in staff clinical practice knowledge and wider contributions to the evidence base; 2) Research capacity gains within the health service, including research knowledge and skill development, collaborative linkages and opportunity for future research; and 3) Staff-centred outcomes including increased job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the potential for AH professional supervision of students on research placements to contribute to healthcare performance improvements and research capacity gains within health services, alongside providing personal benefits for the AH professionals involved. Early consultation with a health service-employed research specialist may support health professional and student learning, team collaboration and project coordination for these student projects.

Prospective validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria for identifying malnutrition in hospitals: A protocol and feasibility pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to pilot a protocol for prospective validation of the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition (GLIM) criteria in hospital patients and evaluate its feasibility and patient acceptability. METHODS: The validation protocol follows the GLIM consortium's rigorous methodological guidance. Protocol feasibility was assessed against criteria on recruitment (≥50%) and data collection completion (≥80%); protocol acceptability was assessed via patient satisfaction surveys and interviews. Adult inpatients in a tertiary hospital underwent four nutrition assessments (each by a different assessor); two Subjective Global Assessments (SGAs) and two GLIM assessments. All five GLIM criteria were assessed with bioelectrical impedance analysis used for muscle mass. Interrater reliability, criterion validity, and predictive validity were reported to detect trends. RESULTS: All primary feasibility criteria were met (consent rate 76%; data for GLIM criterion validity collected on 83% participants). Of predictive outcome data, 100% of hospital-related data, 82% of 6-month mortality data, and 39% of 6-month health-related quality of life data were collected. The mean (SD) age of participants was 61.0 ± 16.2 years, and 51.5% were male. The median (interquartile range) length of stay and body mass index were 7 (4-15) days and 25.6 (24.2-33.0) kg/m2, respectively. GLIM criteria diagnosed 70% of the patients as malnourished vs 55% with SGA. Most patients found the data collection acceptable with minimal burden. CONCLUSION: The methods outlined in this rigorous GLIM validation protocol are feasible to undertake in hospitals and acceptable to patients. This paper provides practical methodological guidance for future prospective GLIM validation studies.

Unlocking potential: a qualitative exploration guiding the implementation and evaluation of professional role substitution models in healthcare.

BACKGROUND: As role substitution models gain prominence in healthcare, understanding the factors shaping their effectiveness is paramount. This study aimed to investigate factors that impact the implementation and performance evaluation of professional role substitution models in healthcare, with a focus on understanding the variables that determine their success or failure in adoption, execution, continuity, and outcomes. METHODS: The exploratory qualitative study used semi-structured interviews with key opinion leaders, decision makers, facilitators, recipients, and frontline implementers, who had influence and involvement in the implementation of professional role substitution models. Data analysis was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: Between November 2022 and April 2023, 39 stakeholders were interviewed. Factors influencing implementation and evaluation of allied health professional role substitution models of care aligned with the five core CFIR domains (innovation, outer setting, inner setting, individuals, implementation process) and outcome domain incorporating implementation and innovation outcomes. The six themes identified within these CFIR domains were, respectively; i) Examining the dynamics of innovation catalysts, evidence, advantages, and disadvantages; ii) Navigating the complex landscape of external factors that influence implementation and evaluation; iii) Impact of internal structural, political, and cultural contexts; iv) The roles and contributions of individuals in the process; v) Essential phases and strategies for effective implementation; and vi) The assessment of outcomes derived from allied health professional role substitution models. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights the complex interplay of contextual and individual factors that influence the implementation and performance evaluation of professional role substitution models. It emphasises the need for collaboration among diverse stakeholders to navigate the challenges and leverage the opportunities presented by expanded healthcare roles. Understanding these multifaceted factors can contribute to the development of an empowered workforce and a healthcare system that is more efficient, effective, safe, and sustainable, ultimately benefiting patients.

Impacts of the Early COVID-19 Response on Allied Health Staff Within an Australian Tertiary Health Service: A Qualitative Study.

Purpose: Understanding the experiences and needs of healthcare workers is crucial in strengthening healthcare system resilience during times of change. We aimed to explore allied health (AH) professionals' perceptions of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic response on their work experiences. Participants and Methods: Qualitative descriptive study using thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with AH professionals employed in a large Australian health service. Results: Four themes were conceptualized from interviews of 21 AH clinicians and consolidated with six AH managers. Impacts were at personal, service, and systems levels. An overarching theme of "acceptance of circumstances due to the pandemic" influenced experiences within each level. Service changes included service cessation, remote service delivery, new COVID-19 protocols and role or work location alterations. Some staff were empowered in making practice changes, while others lost research or career opportunities. Despite low COVID-19-related hospitalizations and fatalities, staff reported stresses from workload changes and fear for self or loved ones. Open, clear communication assisted in alleviating anxiety, while perceived involvement in decision making and administrative and/or technical support for implementation of new processes facilitated change management processes. Conclusion: The study demonstrates the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic response on AH professionals. Gleaned in a context with limited community disease transmission and without the challenges of providing care for large numbers of COVID-19 patients, the findings have implications for change management within health services in any context in which rapid change is required. The wellbeing of the workforce should be forefront. Clear communication is critical, with staff involved in decision-making where possible. The needs of vulnerable staff should be considered with clear processes and eligibility guidelines to ensure provision of appropriate support and transparency of decision making. Workloads should be monitored, and adequate infrastructure, technical support and training provided for new initiatives or processes.

Patient Preferences for Attributes that Characterise Alternative Models of Care in Gastroenterology: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

OBJECTIVES: Increased demand for gastroenterology services has resulted in growing waitlists, with patients at risk of exceeding clinically recommended wait-times. Given limited healthcare resources, expanded scope models of care are an option to help address this demand, but little is known about patient preferences for these models of care. METHODS: Low-risk gastroenterology patients (n = 1198) referred to an outpatient tertiary service in Australia over a 2-year period were invited to participate in an unlabelled discrete choice experiment with seven attributes: primary healthcare professional, wait-time, continuity of care, consultation length, manner and communication skills, reassurance, and cost. These were developed using qualitative research, literature review, and stakeholders' experiences. A d-efficient fractional design was used to construct four blocks of 12 choice sets, with two alternatives. A 13th choice set was included as a data and quality check. Latent class and mixed logit regression were used for analysis. The resulting preference parameters for individual attributes were then used to calculate willingness to pay and willingness to wait. RESULTS: Overall, the model based on the 347 respondents suggested no strong preference for professional background. All other attributes were statistically significant predictors of preference (p < 0.001), with respondents willing to make significant trade-offs (time and cost) before accepting deterioration in attributes. There was strong emphasis on manner and communication skills, with a clinician who listens and provides good explanations overwhelmingly the most important attribute. Latent class analysis identified two patient segments who differed in their preference for the primary treating healthcare professional (doctor or dietitian) based on exposure to either traditional medical or non-medical professional role substitution model. CONCLUSIONS: Patients have strong but varied preferences for gastroenterology services based on whether they have been exposed to expanded scope models of care. Design and implementation of new models of care need to consider strategies to overcome any perceived loss in utility or deterioration in healthcare quality for those unfamiliar with professional role substitution.

Role substitution of specialist medical doctors with allied-health professionals: A qualitative exploration of patients' experiences and perceptions of healthcare quality.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The need to improve patient access, offer increased choice and improve patient outcomes whilst maintaining safe care is driving the healthcare workforce to evolve. Extending allied-health scope of practice by integrating models of care that traverse traditional professional boundaries has been one such strategy. This study explored patients' acceptance and experiences of four allied-health extended scope of practice models of care. The study aimed to identify dimensions of quality healthcare that matter to patients and describe the extent to which they perceived these to be delivered in allied-health professional role substitution models of care. METHODS: Qualitative methodology using semistructured interviews were conducted with 29 participants who had received treatment from an allied-health professional role substitution model. This was a purposeful sample with recruitment across genders, ages and social backgrounds. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and independently analysed by two researchers using a thematic approach. RESULTS: Six major themes were identified which revealed dimensions of healthcare quality that were important to participants: Balancing expectations and overall satisfaction; Timely access and convenience; Continuity, integration and coordination of care; Clinician expert skills, professional manner and interpersonal attributes; Financial considerations when receiving care; and Perceptions of treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights participants' views and experiences of allied-health extended scope of practice models of care. Service delivery models were an acceptable alternative to traditional specialist medical care with the perception that extended scope of practice models of care delivered many aspects of quality care that mattered to patients.

Measuring performance of professional role substitution models of care against traditional medical care in healthcare-A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify outcome measures used to evaluate performance of healthcare professional role substitution against usual medical doctor or specialist medical doctor care to facilitate our understanding of the adequacy of these measures in assessing quality of healthcare delivery. METHODS: Using a systematic approach, we searched Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science from database inception until May 2020. Studies that presented original comparative data on at least one outcome measure were included following screening by two authors. Findings were synthesized, and outcome measures classified into six domains which included: effectiveness, safety, appropriateness, access, continuity of care, efficiency, and sustainability which were informed by the Institute of Medicine dimensions of healthcare quality, the Australian health performance framework, and Levesque and Sutherland's integrated performance measurement framework. RESULTS: One thirty five articles met the inclusion criteria, describing 58 separate outcome measures. Safety of role substitution models of care was assessed in 80 studies, effectiveness (n = 60), appropriateness (n = 40), access (n = 36), continuity of care (n = 6), efficiency and productivity (n = 45). Two-thirds of the studies that assessed productivity and efficiency performed an economic analysis (n = 27). The quality and rigour of evaluations varied substantially across studies, with two-thirds of all studies measuring and reporting outcomes from only one or two of these domains. CONCLUSIONS: There are a growing number of studies measuring the performance of non-medical healthcare professional substitution roles. Few have been subject to robust evaluations, and there is limited evidence on the scientific rigour and adequacy of outcomes measured. A systematic and coordinated approach is required to support healthcare settings in assessing the value of non-medical role substitution healthcare delivery models.

Dietitian first gastroenterology clinic: an initiative to reduce wait lists and wait times for gastroenterology outpatients in a tertiary hospital service.

OBJECTIVE: The demand for outpatient gastroenterology medical specialist consultations is above what can be met within budgetary and staffing constraints. This study describes the establishment of a dietitian first gastroenterology clinic to address this issue, the patient journey and its impact on wait lists and wait times in a tertiary gastroenterology service. DESIGN: A dietitian first gastroenterology clinic model was developed and a mixed-methods approach used to evaluate the impact of the service over a 21-month period. SETTING: Gold Coast University Hospital, Queensland, Australia (a public tertiary hospital). PATIENTS: 658 patients were triaged to the clinic between June 2016 and March 2018. INTERVENTION: A dietitian first gastroenterology clinic for low-risk gastroenterology patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We examined demographic, referral, wait list, wait time and service activity data, patient satisfaction and patient journey. RESULTS: At the time of audit, 399 new (67.9% female) and 307 review patients had been seen. Wait times for eligible patients reduced from 280 to 66 days and the percentage of those in breach of their recommended wait times reduced from 95% to zero. The average time from referral to discharge was 117.8 days with an average of 2.4 occasions of service. 277 patients (69.4%) had been discharged to the care of their general practitioner and 43 patients (10.7%) had an expedited specialist medical review. Patient surveys indicated a high level of satisfaction. CONCLUSION: A dietitian first gastroenterology model of care helps improve patient flow, reduces wait times and may be useful elsewhere to address outpatient gastroenterology service pressures.

A dietitian-first gastroenterology clinic results in improved symptoms and quality of life in patients referred to a tertiary gastroenterology service.

BACKGROUND: The Dietitian First Gastroenterology Clinic (DFGC) is an initiative that has been established in response to increased gastroenterology clinical demand resulting in increased number of patients waiting outside clinically recommended timeframes for specialist care. In this clinic, a dietitian is the primary contact for eligible patients referred to tertiary gastroenterology services and provides assessment and management strategies for patients under the clinical governance of a gastroenterology consultant. This service has previously been shown to reduce patient wait-times and induce excellent patient satisfaction. Evaluation of models of care need to consider patient health outcomes as a key indicator for overall health service effectiveness. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of DFGC on patient related health outcomes. METHODS: This study utilised a pretest-posttest design of patients seen in the DFGC who met the diagnostic criteria for irritable bowel syndrome using the Rome IV criteria Consenting participants completed the validated symptom-severity (IBS-SSS) and health-related quality of life (IBSQoL) assessments. Paired sample t-tests were used to analyse differences pre- and post-management in the DFGC. Univariate mixed effects analyses were conducted to examine associations between IBS-SSS, IBSQoL and patient demographics. RESULTS: A total of 80 of 122 patients seen in the DFGC were recruited and completed baseline data, with 60 (75%) completing follow up assessments. The average participant age was 35.6 years (75% female), and IBS subtypes; IBS-C 15.0%, IBS-D 38.3%, IBS-M 26.7% and IBS-U 20.0%. Participants experienced significant reductions in symptom severity based on IBS-SSS (300.1 vs 151.7; p < 0.001) independent of IBS subtype, age or gender, with 88% (53/60) experiencing a clinically significant improvement. Quality of life significantly improved for all IBS subtypes (p < 0.001) across all subscales except food avoidance (p = 0.11). There was a moderate negative correlation between the changes in symptom severity and quality of life (R = 0.432, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Management in the DFGC provided positive patient health outcomes demonstrated by improvements in symptom severity and QoL.