Birang Daruganora: what do Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities need in a new hospital? A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To elicit the Aboriginal community's cultural and healthcare needs and views about six prominent and emerging models of care, to inform the development of a new hospital. DESIGN: Cross-sectional qualitative study co-designed and co-implemented by Aboriginal team members. SETTING: Western Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander healthcare providers (n=2) and community members (n=18) aged between 21 and 60+ years participated in yarning circles (20 participants; 14 female, 6 male). RESULTS: Handwritten notes from yarning circles were inductively analysed to synthesise the cultural and healthcare needs of providers and community members in relation to a new hospital and six models of care. Three primary themes emerged in relation to future hospitals. These were 'culturally responsive spaces', 'culturally responsive systems' and 'culturally responsive models of care'. Strengths (eg, comfort, reduced waiting time, holistic care), barriers (eg, logistics, accessibility, literacy) and enablers (eg, patient navigator role, communication pathways, streamlined processes) were identified for each of the six models of care. CONCLUSIONS: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community members and providers are invested in the co-creation of an innovative, well-integrated hospital that meets the needs of the community. Common themes of respect and recognition, relationships and partnering, and capacity building emerged as important consumer and provider considerations when developing and evaluating care services. Participants supported a range of models citing concerns about accessibility and choice when discussing evidence-based models of care.

Exploring the influence of health system factors on adaptive capacity in diverse hospital teams in Norway: a multiple case study approach.

OBJECTIVES: Understanding flexibility and adaptive capacities in complex healthcare systems is a cornerstone of resilient healthcare. Health systems provide structures in the form of standards, rules and regulation to healthcare providers in defined settings such as hospitals. There is little knowledge of how hospital teams are affected by the rules and regulations imposed by multiple governmental bodies, and how health system factors influence adaptive capacity in hospital teams. The aim of this study is to explore the extent to which health system factors enable or constrain adaptive capacity in hospital teams. DESIGN: A qualitative multiple case study using observation and semistructured interviews was conducted between November 2020 and June 2021. Data were analysed through qualitative content analysis with a combined inductive and deductive approach. SETTING: Two hospitals situated in the same health region in Norway. PARTICIPANTS: Members from 8 different hospital teams were observed during their workday (115 hours) and were subsequently interviewed about their work (n=30). The teams were categorised as structural, hybrid, coordinating and responsive teams. RESULTS: Two main health system factors were found to enable adaptive capacity in the teams: (1) organisation according to regulatory requirements to ensure adaptive capacity, and (2) negotiation of various resources provided by the governing authorities to ensure adaptive capacity. Our results show that aligning to local context of these health system factors affected the team's adaptive capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Health system factors should create conditions for careful and safe care to emerge and provide conditions that allow for teams to develop both their professional expertise and systems and guidelines that are robust yet sufficiently flexible to fit their everyday work context.

Marked variations in medical provider and out-of-pocket costs for radical prostatectomy procedures in Australia.

Objectives Unwarranted clinical variations in radical prostatectomy (RP) procedures are frequently reported, yet less attention is given to the variations in associated costs. This issue can further widen disparities in access to care and provoke questions about the overall value of the procedure. The present paper aimed to delve into the disparities in hospital, medical provider and out-of-pocket costs for RP procedures in Australia, discussing plausible causes and potential policy opportunities. Methods A retrospective cohort study using Medibank Private claims data for RP procedures conducted in Australian hospitals between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2020 was undertaken. Results Considerable variations in both medical provider and out-of-pocket costs were observed across the country, with variations evident between different states or territories. Particularly striking were the discrepancies in the costs charged by medical providers, with a notable contrast between the 10th and 90th percentiles revealing a substantial difference of A$9925. Hospitals in Australia exhibited relatively comparable charges for RP procedures. Conclusions Initiatives such as enhancing transparency regarding individual medical provider costs and implementing fee regulations with healthcare providers may be useful in curbing the variations in RP procedure costs.

Implementation of large, multi-site hospital interventions: a realist evaluation of strategies for developing capability.

BACKGROUND: This study presents guidelines for implementation distilled from the findings of a realist evaluation. The setting was local health districts in New South Wales, Australia that implemented three clinical improvement initiatives as part of a state-wide program. We focussed on implementation strategies designed to develop health professionals' capability to deliver value-based care initiatives for multisite programs. Capability, which increases implementers' ability to cope with unexpected scenarios is key to managing change. METHODS: We used a mixed methods realist evaluation which tested and refined program theories elucidating the complex dynamic between context (C), mechanism (M) and outcome (O) to determine what works, for whom, under what circumstances. Data was drawn from program documents, a realist synthesis, informal discussions with implementation designers, and interviews with 10 key informants (out of 37 identified) from seven sites. Data analysis employed a retroductive approach to interrogate the causal factors identified as contributors to outcomes. RESULTS: CMO statements were refined for four initial program theories: Making it Relevant- where participation in activities was increased when targeted to the needs of the staff; Investment in Quality Improvement- where engagement in capability development was enhanced when it was valued by all levels of the organisation; Turnover and Capability Loss- where the effects of staff turnover were mitigated; and Community-Wide Priority- where there was a strategy of spanning sites. From these data five guiding principles for implementers were distilled: (1) Involve all levels of the health system to effectively implement large-scale capability development, (2) Design capability development activities in a way that supports a learning culture, (3) Plan capability development activities with staff turnover in mind, (4) Increased capability should be distributed across teams to avoid bottlenecks in workflows and the risk of losing key staff, (5) Foster cross-site collaboration to focus effort, reduce variation in practice and promote greater cohesion in patient care. CONCLUSIONS: A key implementation strategy for interventions to standardise high quality practice is development of clinical capability. We illustrate how leadership support, attention to staff turnover patterns, and making activities relevant to current issues, can lead to an emergent learning culture.

Bolstering health systems to cope with the impacts of climate change events: A review of the evidence on workforce planning, upskilling, and capacity building.

BACKGROUND: As global CO2 emissions continue to rise and the 'era of global boiling' takes hold, the health workforce must cope with the challenge of providing care to increasing numbers of patients affected by climate change-related events (e.g., hurricanes, wildfires, floods). In this review, we describe the impacts of these events on the health workforce, and strategies responding to these challenges. METHODS: This rapid systematic review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses and a registered protocol (PROSPERO CRD42023433610). Eight databases were searched in May 2022 and again in June 2023. Empirical studies discussing climate change and workforce policy, planning, preparedness, and capacity were included. Inductive thematic analysis of extracted data was conducted. RESULTS: From the 60 included studies, two categories emerged: the impacts of climate events on the health workforce (n = 39), and workforce responses to and preparations for climate events (n = 58). Thirty-seven studies reported on both categories. Four impact themes were identified: absenteeism, psychological impacts, system breakdown, and unsafe working conditions; and six responses and preparations themes: training/skill development, workforce capacity planning, interdisciplinary collaboration, role flexibility, role incentivisation, and psychological support. CONCLUSION: This review provides an overview of some of the deleterious impacts of climate events on the health workforce, as well as potential strategies for the health workforce to prepare or respond to climate events. Future studies should assess the implementation and effectiveness of these strategies to ensure a continuously improving healthcare system, and a well-supported health workforce.

Is there an association between out-of-pocket hospital costs, quality and care outcomes? A systematic review of contemporary evidence.

BACKGROUND: Out of pocket (OOP) costs vary substantially by health condition, procedure, provider, and service location. Evidence of whether this variation is associated with indicators of healthcare quality and/or health outcomes is lacking. METHODS: The current review aimed to explore whether higher OOP costs translate into better healthcare quality and outcomes for patients in inpatient settings. The review also aimed to identify the population and contextual-level determinants of inpatient out-of-pocket costs. A systematic electronic search of five databases: Scopus, Medline, Psych Info, CINAHL and Embase was conducted between January 2000 to October 2022. Study procedures and reporting complied with PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42022320763). FINDINGS: A total of nine studies were included in the final review. A variety of quality and health outcomes were examined in the included studies across a range of patient groups and specialities. The scant evidence available and substantial heterogeneity created challenges in establishing the nature of association between OOP costs and healthcare quality and outcomes. Nonetheless, the most consistent finding was no significant association between OOP cost and inpatient quality of care and outcomes. INTERPRETATION: The review findings overall suggest no beneficial effect of higher OOP costs on inpatient quality of care and health outcomes. Further work is needed to elucidate the determinants of OOP hospital costs. FUNDING: This study was funded by Medibank Better Health Foundation.

Comparing rates of adverse events detected in incident reporting and the Global Trigger Tool: a systematic review.

Many hospitals continue to use incident reporting systems (IRSs) as their primary patient safety data source. The information IRSs collect on the frequency of harm to patients [adverse events (AEs)] is generally of poor quality, and some incident types (e.g. diagnostic errors) are under-reported. Other methods of collecting patient safety information using medical record review, such as the Global Trigger Tool (GTT), have been developed. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review to empirically quantify the gap between the percentage of AEs detected using the GTT to those that are also detected via IRSs. The review was conducted in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies published in English, which collected AE data using the GTT and IRSs, were included. In total, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were undertaken in hospitals and were published between 2006 and 2022. The studies were conducted in six countries, mainly in the USA (nine studies). Studies reviewed 22 589 medical records using the GTT across 107 institutions finding 7166 AEs. The percentage of AEs detected using the GTT that were also detected in corresponding IRSs ranged from 0% to 37.4% with an average of 7.0% (SD 9.1; median 3.9 and IQR 5.2). Twelve of the fourteen studies found <10% of the AEs detected using the GTT were also found in corresponding IRSs. The >10-fold gap between the detection rates of the GTT and IRSs is strong evidence that the rate of AEs collected in IRSs in hospitals should not be used to measure or as a proxy for the level of safety of a hospital. IRSs should be recognized for their strengths which are to detect rare, serious, and new incident types and to enable analysis of contributing and contextual factors to develop preventive and corrective strategies. Health systems should use multiple patient safety data sources to prioritize interventions and promote a cycle of action and improvement based on data rather than merely just collecting and analysing information.

What factors are considered in hospital funding models? A review of the literature on health services funding in organisation for economic co-operation and development countries.

BACKGROUND: One of the most difficult challenges in healthcare involves equitable allocation of resources. Our review aimed to identify international funding models in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries for government-funded public hospitals and evidence underpinning their efficacy, via review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature. METHODS: Ovid-Medline, Ovid Embase, Scopus, and PubMed were searched for peer-reviewed literature. Advanced Google searches and targeted hand searches of relevant organisational websites identified grey literature. Inclusion criteria were: English language, published between 2011 and 2022, and that the article: (1) focused on healthcare funding; (2) reported on or identified specific factors, indexes, algorithms or formulae associated with healthcare funding; and (3) referred to countries that are members of the OECD, excluding the United States (US). RESULTS: For peer-reviewed literature 1189 abstracts and 35 full-texts were reviewed; six articles met the inclusion criteria. For grey literature, 2996 titles or abstracts and 37 full-texts were reviewed; five articles met the inclusion criteria. Healthcare funding arrangements employed in 15 OECD countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom [UK; specifically, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland]) were identified, but papers reported population-based funding arrangements for specific regions rather than hospital-specific models. CONCLUSIONS: While some models adjusted for deprivation and ethnicity factors, none of the identified documents reported on health systems that adjusted funding allocation for social determinants such as health literacy levels.

A multimethod study of NHS 111 online.

Background: NHS 111 online offers 24-hour access to health assessment and triage. Objectives: This study examined pathways to care, differential access and use, and workforce impacts of NHS 111 online. This study compared NHS 111 with Healthdirect (Haymarket, Australia) virtual triage. Design: Interviews with 80 staff and stakeholders in English primary, urgent and emergency care, and 41 staff and stakeholders associated with Healthdirect. A survey of 2754 respondents, of whom 1137 (41.3%) had used NHS 111 online and 1617 (58.7%) had not. Results: NHS 111 online is one of several digital health-care technologies and was not differentiated from the NHS 111 telephone service or well understood. There is a similar lack of awareness of Healthdirect virtual triage. NHS 111 and Healthdirect virtual triage are perceived as creating additional work for health-care staff and inappropriate demand for some health services, especially emergency care. One-third of survey respondents reported that they had not used any NHS 111 service (telephone or online). Older people and those with less educational qualifications are less likely to use NHS 111 online. Respondents who had used NHS 111 online reported more use of other urgent care services and make more cumulative use of services than those who had not used NHS 111 online. Users of NHS 111 online had higher levels of self-reported eHealth literacy. There were differences in reported preferences for using NHS 111 online for different symptom presentations. Conclusions: Greater clarity about what the NHS 111 online service offers would allow better signposting and reduce confusion. Generic NHS 111 services are perceived as creating additional work in the primary, urgent and emergency care system. There are differences in eHealth literacy between users and those who have not used NHS 111 online, and this suggests that 'digital first' policies may increase health inequalities. Limitations: This research bridged the pandemic from 2020 to 2021; therefore, findings may change as services adjust going forward. Surveys used a digital platform so there is probably bias towards some level of e-Literacy, but this also means that our data may underestimate the digital divide. Future work: Further investigation of access to digital services could address concerns about digital exclusion. Research comparing the affordances and cost-benefits of different triage and assessment systems for users and health-care providers is needed. Research about trust in virtual assessments may show how duplication can be reduced. Mixed-methods studies looking at outcomes, impacts on work and costs, and ways to measure eHealth literacy, can inform the development NHS 111 online and opportunities for further international shared learning could be pursued. Study registration: This study is registered at the research registry (UIN 5392). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research Programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 11, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

NHS 111 services help people who need health advice or care by telephone (using the 111 number) and online (using the web on a smartphone or a computer). Demand for general practitioner and emergency care services keeps increasing, and there are concerns that sometimes people do not use the right services for the health problems that they have. NHS 111 can direct people to services and give advice that helps them carry out more self-care. Previous research suggests that not everyone finds online services easy to use. There is a worry that NHS 111 services may increase work for other health services. Our research used interviews and surveys to find out about the NHS 111 online service. We interviewed 80 people working in or with NHS services to find out about their experiences of NHS 111 online. There was low awareness of NHS 111 online, partly because there are so many other computer technologies and different services available. Interviewees often mixed-up NHS 111 online with the 111 telephone service. People are confused about where to get help. Interviewees also said that NHS 111 creates 'extra work', especially for emergency departments (accident and emergency). We interviewed 41 staff and stakeholders linked with a similar system used in Australia, called Healthdirect, and they had similar concerns. Our survey found that people who had used NHS 111 online were younger and had higher levels of education. People who had used NHS 111 online also had higher eHealth literacy (they were more able to access and understand online health services); however, they were also sicker, reported having more long-term conditions and used more health services. Our research suggests that we need to reduce confusion about what NHS 111 online does, get rid of unnecessary extra work and see whether or not it improves access to care for everyone.

Experience-based codesign approach to improve care in Australian emergency departments for complex consumer cohorts: the MyED project protocol, Stages 1.1-1.3.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) care must adapt to meet current and future demands. In Australia, ED quality measures (eg, prolonged length of stay, re-presentations or patient experience) are worse for older adults with multiple comorbidities, people who have a disability, those who present with a mental health condition, Indigenous Australians, and those with a culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) background. Strengthened ED performance relies on understanding the social and systemic barriers and preferences for care of these different cohorts, and identifying viable solutions that may result in sustained improvement by service providers. A collaborative 5-year project (MyED) aims to codesign, with ED users and providers, new or adapted models of care that improve ED performance, improve patient outcomes and improve patient experience for these five cohorts. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Experience-based codesign using mixed methods, set in three hospitals in one health district in Australia. This protocol introduces the staged and incremental approach to the whole project, and details the first research elements: ethnographic observations at the ED care interface, interviews with providers and interviews with two patient cohorts-older adults and adults with a CALD background. We aim to sample a diverse range of participants, carefully tailoring recruitment and support. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained from the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2022/PID02749-2022/ETH02447). Prior informed written consent will be obtained from all research participants. Findings from each stage of the project will be submitted for peer-reviewed publication. Project outputs will be disseminated for implementation more widely across New South Wales, Australia.

Issues and complexities in safety culture assessment in healthcare.

The concept of safety culture in healthcare-a culture that enables staff and patients to be free from harm-is characterized by complexity, multifacetedness, and indefinability. Over the years, disparate and unclear definitions have resulted in a proliferation of measurement tools, with lack of consensus on how safety culture can be best measured and improved. A growing challenge is also achieving sufficient response rates, due to "survey fatigue," with the need for survey optimisation never being more acute. In this paper, we discuss key challenges and complexities in safety culture assessment relating to definition, tools, dimensionality and response rates. The aim is to prompt critical reflection on these issues and point to possible solutions and areas for future research.

DAta Linkage to Enhance Cancer Care (DaLECC): Protocol of a Large Australian Data Linkage Study.

Cancer is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, accounting for 250 Disability-Adjusted Life Years and 10 million deaths in 2019. Minimising unwarranted variation and ensuring appropriate cost-effective treatment across primary and tertiary care to improve health outcomes is a key health priority. There are few studies that have used linked data to explore healthcare utilisation prior to diagnosis in addition to post-diagnosis patterns of care. This protocol outlines the aims of the DaLECC project and key methodological features of the linked dataset. The primary aim of this project is to explore predictors of variations in pre- and post-cancer diagnosis care, and to explore the economic and health impact of any variation. The cohort of patients includes all South Australian residents diagnosed with cancer between 2011 and 2020, who were recorded on the South Australian Cancer Registry. These cancer registry records are being linked with state and national healthcare databases to capture health service utilisation and costs for a minimum of one-year prior to diagnosis and to a maximum of 10 years post-diagnosis. Healthcare utilisation includes state databases for inpatient separations and emergency department presentations and national databases for Medicare services and pharmaceuticals. Our results will identify barriers to timely receipt of care, estimate the impact of variations in the use of health care, and provide evidence to support interventions to improve health outcomes to inform national and local decisions to enhance the access and uptake of health care services.

Birang Daruganora: a protocol for a qualitative study to elicit Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community views about cultural needs and experiences for a new Australian health facility.

INTRODUCTION: To address challenges regarding the delivery of healthcare, governments and health services are focusing on the implementation of models that are flexible, person-centred, cost-effective and integrate hospital services more closely with primary healthcare and social services. Such models increasingly embed consumer codesign, multidisciplinary teams and leverage digital technologies, such as telehealth, attempting to deliver care more seamlessly and to continually improve services. This paper provides a study protocol to describe a method to explore Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander consumer and healthcare provider needs and expectations for the design and development of a new healthcare facility in Australia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A qualitative study of consumer members' and health providers' needs and expectations. Data collection includes a short consumer-specific and provider-specific, demographic questionnaire and culturally appropriate facilitator-coordinated consultation workshops. Data will be analysed thematically (qualitatively). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, reports to stakeholders and community meetings. This study was reviewed and approved by a health service-based Ethics Committee in New South Wales, Australia and the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Committee.

Australian Genomics: Outcomes of a 5-year national program to accelerate the integration of genomics in healthcare.

Australian Genomics is a national collaborative partnership of more than 100 organizations piloting a whole-of-system approach to integrating genomics into healthcare, based on federation principles. In the first five years of operation, Australian Genomics has evaluated the outcomes of genomic testing in more than 5,200 individuals across 19 rare disease and cancer flagship studies. Comprehensive analyses of the health economic, policy, ethical, legal, implementation and workforce implications of incorporating genomics in the Australian context have informed evidence-based change in policy and practice, resulting in national government funding and equity of access for a range of genomic tests. Simultaneously, Australian Genomics has built national skills, infrastructure, policy, and data resources to enable effective data sharing to drive discovery research and support improvements in clinical genomic delivery.

Standardizing variation: Scaling up clinical genomics in Australia.

PURPOSE: Clinical genomics demands close interaction of physicians, laboratory scientists, and genetic professionals. Taking genomics to scale requires an understanding of the underlying processes from the perspective of nongenetic physicians who are new to the field. We identified components of the processes amenable to adaptation when scaling up clinical genomics. METHODS: Semistructured interviews informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework with nongenetic physicians, who were using clinical genomics in practice, were guided by an annotated process map with 7 steps following the patient's journey. Findings from the individual maps were synthesized into an overview process map and a series of individual maps by common location and specialty. Interviews were analyzed using the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: In total, 16 nongenetic physicians (eg, nephrologists, immunologists) participated, generating 1 overview and 10 individual process maps. Sixteen common steps were identified across clinical specialties and locations, with variations over 9 steps. We report the potential for standardization across these 9 steps. CONCLUSION: When scaling up complex interventions, it is essential to identify steps where variation can be accommodated. With these results we show how process mapping can be used to identify steps where variation is acceptable during scale up to accommodate adaptation to local context, allowing for the inevitable evolution of factors influencing ongoing implementation and sustainability.

The Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project (Mackenzie's Mission): Design and Implementation.

Reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS) provides people with information about their chance of having children with autosomal recessive or X-linked genetic conditions, enabling informed reproductive decision-making. RGCS is recommended to be offered to all couples during preconception or in early pregnancy. However, cost and a lack of awareness may prevent access. To address this, the Australian Government funded Mackenzie's Mission­the Australian Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening Project. Mackenzie's Mission aims to assess the acceptability and feasibility of an easily accessible RGCS program, provided free of charge to the participant. In study Phase 1, implementation needs were mapped, and key study elements were developed. In Phase 2, RGCS is being offered by healthcare providers educated by the study team. Reproductive couples who provide consent are screened for over 1200 genes associated with >750 serious, childhood-onset genetic conditions. Those with an increased chance result are provided comprehensive genetic counseling support. Reproductive couples, recruiting healthcare providers, and study team members are also invited to complete surveys and/or interviews. In Phase 3, a mixed-methods analysis will be undertaken to assess the program outcomes, psychosocial implications and implementation considerations alongside an ongoing bioethical analysis and a health economic evaluation. Findings will inform the implementation of an ethically robust RGCS program.

Innovative models of care for the health facility of the future: a protocol for a mixed-methods study to elicit consumer and provider views.

INTRODUCTION: To address the challenges of rapidly changing healthcare, governments and health services are increasingly emphasising healthcare delivery models that are flexible, person centred, cost-effective and integrate hospital services more closely with primary healthcare and social services. In addition, such models increasingly embed consumer codesign, integration of services, and leverage digital technologies such as telehealth and sophisticated medical records systems. OBJECTIVES: This paper provides a study protocol to describe a method to elicit consumer and healthcare provider needs and expectations for the development of innovative care models. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A literature review identified six key models of care, supported by a common theme of consumer-focused care, along with the international evidence supporting the efficacy of these models. A mixed-methods study of the needs and expectations of consumer members and health providers who reside or work in the area of a new hospital catchment will be undertaken. They will complete a community-specific and provider-specific, short demographic questionnaire (delivered during the recruitment process) and be assigned to facilitator-coordinated online workshops comprising small focus groups. Follow-up interviews will be offered. Culturally and linguistically diverse members and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders and their communities will also be consulted. Data will be analysed thematically (qualitative) and statistically (quantitative), and findings synthesised using a triangulated approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and in a report to stakeholders. This study was reviewed and approved by the relevant Ethics Committee in New South Wales, Australia.

"The times they are a-changin'": A longitudinal, mixed methods case study of a hospital transformation.

BACKGROUND: Changes to hospital infrastructure are inevitable in ever-evolving healthcare systems. The redevelopment of hospitals and opening of new buildings can be a complex and challenging time for staff as they must find ways to deliver safe and high-quality care while navigating the complexities and uncertainties of change. This study explores the perspectives and experiences of staff and patients before and after the opening of a new hospital building as part of a large public hospital redevelopment in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: The study comprised a longitudinal mixed methods case study design. Methods included two rounds of staff surveys (n = 292 participants), two rounds of staff interviews (n = 66), six rounds of patient surveys (n = 255), and analysis of hospital data at tri-monthly intervals over two years. Data were compared before (2019) and after (2020) a new hospital building opened at a publicly funded hospital in Sydney, Australia. RESULTS: Four key themes and perspectives emerged from the interviews including change uncertainty, communication effectiveness, staffing adequacy and staff resilience. Significant differences in staff perceptions of change readiness over time was identified. Specifically, perceptions that the organisational change was appropriate significantly decreased (2019: 15.93 ± 3.86; 2020: 14.13 ± 3.62; p < .001) and perceptions that staff could deal with the change significantly increased (2019: 17.30 ± 4.77; 2020: 19.16 ± 4.36; p = .001) after the building opened compared to before. Global satisfaction scores from patient survey data showed that patient experience significantly declined after the building opened compared to before (2020: 81.70 ± 21.52; 2019: 84.43 ± 18.46)), t(254) = -64.55, p < 0.05, and improved a few months after opening of the new facilities. This coincided with the improvement in staff perceptions in dealing with the change. CONCLUSIONS: Moving into a new hospital building can be a challenging time for staff and patients. Staff experienced uncertainty and stress, and displayed practices of resilience to deliver patient care during a difficult period of change. Policy makers, hospital managers, staff and patients must work together to minimise disruption to patient care and experience. Key recommendations for future hospital redevelopment projects outline the importance of supporting and informing staff and patients during the opening of a new hospital building.