The engagement of children in out-of-home care with nursing and allied health professionals: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Children living in out-of-home care (OOHC) have significant unmet health care needs and use more tertiary and specialist health care services compared with children from similar social and economic backgrounds. Allied health professionals and nurses have a central role in health care; however, very little is known about the engagement of children in OOHC with nursing and allied health professionals. This scoping review addresses this knowledge gap. METHODS: A scoping review methodology framework was used to search for relevant articles published between January 1970 and November 2019, identified using three databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL and ProQuest. Selection of studies was based on empirical research about the health of children in OOHC and their engagement with nursing or allied health services. A total of 37 relevant articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. RESULTS: Findings could be summarized under five broad themes: (1) nursing and allied health professionals engaging with children in OOHC to support their health and development, (2) opportunities and challenges for nursing and allied health professionals to engage children in OOHC in healthcare, (3) identification and complexity of healthcare needs, (4) access to healthcare services and (5) coordination of healthcare. CONCLUSIONS: Children in OOHC have multiple healthcare needs that require monitoring and treatment by allied health professionals and the health and development of these children is best supported through comprehensive health screening on entry into OOHC, and community-based, multidisciplinary healthcare while children are living in OOHC. While nurses in hospitals and community settings were found to play a role in health assessment and care coordination targeted at children in OOHC, the literature was silent on the role of allied health professionals in this healthcare approach.

Clarifying workforce flexibility from a division of labor perspective: a mixed methods study of an emergency department team.

BACKGROUND: The need for greater flexibility is often used to justify reforms that redistribute tasks through the workforce. However, "flexibility" is never defined or empirically examined. This study explores the nature of flexibility in a team of emergency doctors, nurse practitioners (NPs), and registered nurses (RNs), with the aim of clarifying the concept of workforce flexibility. Taking a holistic perspective on the team's division of labor, it measures task distribution to establish the extent of multiskilling and role overlap, and explores the behaviors and organizational conditions that drive flexibly. METHODS: The explanatory sequential mixed methods study was set in the Fast Track area of a metropolitan emergency department (ED) in Sydney, Australia. In phase 1, an observational time study measured the tasks undertaken by each role (151 h), compared as a proportion of time (Kruskal Wallis, Mann-Whitney U), and frequency (Pearson chi-square). The time study was augmented with qualitative field notes. In phase 2, 19 semi-structured interviews sought to explain the phase 1 observations and were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: The roles were occupationally specialized: "Assessment and Diagnosis" tasks consumed the largest proportion of doctors' (51.1%) and NPs' (38.1%) time, and "Organization of Care" tasks for RNs (27.6%). However, all three roles were also multiskilled, which created an overlap in the tasks they performed. The team used this role overlap to work flexibly in response to patients' needs and adapt to changing demands. Flexibility was driven by the urgent and unpredictable workload in the ED and enabled by the stability provided by a core group of experienced doctors and nurses. CONCLUSION: Not every healthcare team requires the type of flexibility found in this study since that was shaped by patient needs and the specific organizational conditions of the ED. The roles, tasks, and teamwork that a team requires to "be flexible" (i.e., responsive and adaptable) are highly context dependent. Workforce flexibility therefore cannot be defined as a particular type of reform or role; rather, it should be understood as the capacity of a team to respond and adapt to patients' needs within its organizational context. The study's findings suggest that solutions for a more flexible workforce may lay in the organization of healthcare work.

Determinants of physician assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control using EPOS 2020 criteria and the importance of incorporating patient perspectives of disease control.

BACKGROUND: We identify chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) manifestations associated with how rhinologists assess CRS control, with a focus on patient perspectives (patient-reported CRS control). METHODS: Fifteen rhinologists were provided with real-world data from 200 CRS patients. Participating rhinologists first classified patients' CRS control as "controlled," "partly controlled," and "uncontrolled" using seven CRS manifestations reflecting European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) CRS control criteria (nasal obstruction, drainage, impaired smell, facial pain/pressure, sleep disturbance, use of systemic antibiotics/corticosteroids in past 6 months, and nasal endoscopy findings) and patient-reported CRS control. They then classified patients' CRS control without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control. Interrater reliability and agreement of rhinologist-assessed CRS control with patient-reported CRS control and EPOS guidelines were determined. RESULTS: CRS control classification with and without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control was highly consistent across rhinologists (κw  = 0.758). Rhinologist-assessed CRS control agreed with patient-reported CRS control significantly better when rhinologists had knowledge of patient-reported CRS control (κw  = 0.736 vs. κw  = 0.554, p < 0.001). Patient-reported CRS control, nasal obstruction, drainage, and endoscopy findings were most strongly associated with rhinologists' assessment of CRS control. Rhinologists' CRS control assessments weakly agreed with EPOS CRS control guidelines with (κw  = 0.529) and without (κw  = 0.538) patient-reported CRS control. Rhinologists classified CRS as more controlled than EPOS guidelines in almost 50% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study directly demonstrates the importance of patient-reported CRS control as a dominant influence on rhinologists' CRS control assessment. Knowledge of patient-reported CRS control may better align rhinologists' CRS control assessments and treatment decisions with patients' perspectives.

Workforce flexibility - in defence of professional healthcare work.

Purpose The desirability of having a more flexible workforce is emphasised across many health systems yet this goal is as ambiguous as it is ubiquitous. In the absence of empirical studies in healthcare that have defined flexibility as an outcome, the purpose of this paper is to draw on classic management and sociological theory to reduce this ambiguity. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses the Weberian tool of "ideal types". Key workforce reforms are held against Atkinson's model of functional flexibility which aims to increase responsiveness and adaptability through multiskilling, autonomy and teams; and Taylorism which seeks stability and reduced costs through specialisation, fragmentation and management control. Findings Appeals to an amorphous goal of increasing workforce flexibility make an assumption that any reform will increase flexibility. However, this paper finds that the work of healthcare professionals already displays most of the essential features of functional flexibility but many widespread reforms are shifting healthcare work in a Taylorist direction. This contradiction is symptomatic of a failure to confront inevitable trade-offs in reform: between the benefits of specialisation and the costs of fragmentation; and between management control and professional autonomy. Originality/value The paper questions the conventional conception of "the problem" of workforce reform as primarily one of professional control over tasks. Holding reforms against the ideal types of Taylorism and functional flexibility is a simple, effective way the costs and benefits of workforce reform can be revealed.