Responsive and resilient healthcare? 'Moments of Resilience' in post-hospitalisation services for COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 caused disruption to healthcare services globally, resulting in high numbers of hospital admissions and with those discharged often requiring ongoing support. Within the UK, post-discharge services typically developed organically and were shaped over time by local need, funding, and government guidance. Drawing on the Moments of Resilience framework, we explore the development of follow-up services for hospitalised patients by considering the links between resilience at different system levels over time. This study contributes to the resilient healthcare literature by providing empirical evidence of how diverse stakeholders developed and adapted services for patients following hospitalisation with COVID-19 and how action taken at one system level influenced another. METHODS: Qualitative research comprising comparative case studies based on interviews. Across three purposively selected case studies (two in England, one in Wales) a total of 33 semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinical staff, managers and commissioners who had been involved in developing and/or implementing post-hospitalisation follow-up services. The interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. Analysis was conducted with the aid of NVivo 12. RESULTS: Case studies demonstrated three distinct examples of how healthcare organisations developed and adapted their post-discharge care provision for patients, post-hospitalisation with COVID-19. Initially, the moral distress of witnessing the impact of COVID-19 on patients who were being discharged coupled with local demand gave clinical staff the impetus to take action. Clinical staff and managers worked closely to plan and deliver organisations' responses. Funding availability and other contextual factors influenced situated and immediate responses and structural adaptations to the post-hospitalisation services. As the pandemic evolved, NHS England and the Welsh government provided funding and guidance for systemic adaptations to post-COVID assessment clinics. Over time, adaptations made at the situated, structural, and systemic levels influenced the resilience and sustainability of services. CONCLUSIONS: This paper addresses understudied, yet inherently important, aspects of resilience in healthcare by exploring when and where resilience occurs across the healthcare system and how action taken at one system level influenced another. Comparison across the case studies showed that organisations responded in similar and different ways and on varying timescales to a disruption and national level strategies.

Role of coproduction in the sustainability of innovations in applied health and social care research: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Innovations such as toolkits and frameworks are developed through applied health and social care research, to address identified gaps in quality or safety of care. The intention is to subsequently implement these innovations into practice to bring about improvements. Challenges can arise from poor choice of implementation strategies or lack of alignment to local contexts. Research has identified the importance of involving and engaging patients, health professionals and other stakeholders in the design and delivery of the underpinning research, and in informing subsequent implementation. However, how and why such coproduction influences the sustainability of innovations in health and social care is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to identify and present the available evidence regarding the role of coproduction in the sustainability of innovations in applied health and social care research. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review includes papers related to the role of coproduction in the sustainability of innovations in applied health and social care research published in peer-reviewed journals. The review is limited to articles reporting applied health and social care research conducted in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and MEDLINE were searched for studies. Titles and abstracts were screened by two independent reviewers for assessment against the inclusion criteria, followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Data were extracted using a data extraction form developed by the reviewers. The completed forms were imported into NVivo and analysed using basic qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Our review provides insight into the role of coproduction in the sustainability of innovations in applied health and social care research. Our findings highlight that sustainability is a dynamic process, supported by coproduction activities such as ongoing collaborative partnerships; these can be planned for in both the research design and implementation phases of a project.

Exploring the role of advanced clinical practitioners (ACPs) and their contribution to health services in England: A qualitative exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: An extended role being explored globally is the advanced clinical practitioner (ACP). In England this is an extended role for allied health professions, nurses and midwives in a range of settings. OBJECTIVES: This paper focuses on three research questions: 1) What is the role of ACPs in England? 2) What are the barriers and facilitators to implementing the role? and 3) What is the contribution of ACPs to health services in England? DESIGN/SETTING: A qualitative, exploratory study to explore perspectives on the ACP role in a range of clinical settings. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited 63 stakeholders, including 34 nurses, working in a ACP role or ACP education. A purposive snowball sampling technique identified participants meeting inclusion criteria. METHODS: One-to-one semi-structured interviews throughout 2020, recorded and transcribed verbatim, anonymised and thematically analysed. RESULTS: The ACP role in England was undertaken in a broad range of clinical contexts. In England 'advanced clinical practitioner' was not a protected title. There were high levels of variability and ambiguity of understanding and deployment of the ACP role in England. Facilitators to the implementation process included training and education, clinical supervision and organisational support. Lack of protection for the role and variances in experience were barriers. Employer support facilitated development of the ACP role, however where support was limited, at either an individual or organisation level, this was a barrier. Our study highlighted the wide range of ways the ACP role benefitted patient outcomes and workforce development. CONCLUSIONS: This study outlines the contribution that ACPs can make to health services, contributing factors and key barriers and facilitators to implementing this role. The work showed the positive contribution ACPs can make to service redesign, workforce development and patient outcomes, whilst accepting there is much work to do to ensure protected status and parity across all professions and clinical contexts.

A typology of healthcare pathways after hospital discharge for adults with COVID-19: the evolution of UK services during pandemic conditions.

Introduction: Over half of post-COVID-hospitalisation adults have persistent symptoms 2 years after discharge, providing a challenge for individuals and healthcare systems. We therefore aimed to describe a typology of UK healthcare pathways post-hospital discharge as a first step towards understanding clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different healthcare pathways. Methods: In 2021, we surveyed hospital sites taking part in the UK Post-hospital COVID-19 (PHOSP-COVID) study. The online survey explored the availability of proactive follow-up, patient selection, involvement of multidisciplinary teams, investigations, assessment and access to mental health and rehabilitation interventions. The typology was defined by a three-stage process: 1) using the survey results to develop a bespoke algorithm to inform a draft classification, 2) a stakeholder event for refinement and 3) finalisation between the Project Advisory Group and research team. The bespoke algorithm was used to map each site onto the classification with further mapping by level of mental health and rehabilitation provision. Results: 70% of hospital sites (45 out of 64) responded to the survey. 82% (37 out of 45) reported delivering a follow-up service after hospital discharge during the first few months of the pandemic. Only 13 out of 37 services (35%) were delivered by permanent staff. The final typology of five categories included no proactive follow-up, and a matrix of four groups based on patient selection (prespecified subgroup/all patients) and complexity of assessment (low/high). The complexity of assessment, rehabilitation and mental health interventions was variable within sites. Discussion: We describe the first typology of post-hospitalisation COVID-19 healthcare pathways to enable modelling of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to inform future policy. Our results highlight the heterogeneity and vulnerability of healthcare services after COVID-19 hospitalisation.