Resilience and mindfulness among radiological personnel in Norway, their relationship and their impact on quality and safety- a questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Stress and burnout are widespread problems among radiological personnel Individual and organizational resilience and mindfulness offer protection against burnout. AIM: To investigate the level of resilience and mindfulness among radiological personnel, the associations between organizational resilience, individual resilience, and mindfulness, and how these factors impact the quality of care provided in radiological departments. METHODS: An online questionnaire consisting of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, the Benchmark Resilience Tool, and questions regarding burnout, and quality and safety was used. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics, bivariate correlation and standard multiple regression. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Few participants considered burnout a significant challenge. Individual and organizational resilience were low (30.40 ± 4.92 and 63.21 ± 13.63 respectively), and mindfulness was high (4.29 ± 0.88). There was a significant correlation between individual and organizational resilience (p = 0.004), between individual resilience and mindfulness (p = 0.03), and between organizational resilience and mindfulness (p = 0.02). Individual and organizational resilience affect each other. However; neither significantly affect quality and safety, nor mindfulness.

Impact of an online training tool on individual and organizational resilience and mindfulness among radiological personnel in Norway.

BACKGROUND: Heavy workloads and increasing demands for productivity have contributed to rising rates of stress and burnout among radiological staff. Different forms of mindfulness and resilience-training might assist with stress management and protect these employees against burnout. AIM: The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of an online training tool on individual and organizational resilience, mindfulness and quality of care. METHODS: An online questionnaire was used, consisting of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, the Benchmark Resilience Tool, and questions pertaining to quality, safety, and burnout (baseline = 68 participants between July 2022 - October 2022, follow-up = 13 participants between November 2022 - February 2023). Descriptive statistics and a paired-sampled t-test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Few participants reported completing any of the exercises. The baseline group had significantly higher mean resilience (p = 0.018) and mindfulness scores (p = < 0.001), mean decrease in scores was 7.46 for resilience and 1.7 for mindfulness. In conclusion, both individual and organizational resilience are perceived as low among radiological personnel in Norway. However, it does not seem to affect quality and safety.

Health care personnel's perception of guideline implementation for musculoskeletal imaging: a process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The increasing complexity and variability in radiology have significantly fueled the need for guidelines. There are many methods for disseminating and implementing guidelines however; and obtaining lasting changes has been difficult. Implementation outcome is usually measured in a decrease in unwarranted examinations, and qualitative data are rarely used. This study's aim was to evaluate a guideline implementation process and identify factors influencing implementation outcome using qualitative data. METHODS: Seven general practitioners and five radiological personnel from a Norwegian county participated in four focus group interviews in 2019. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, where some categories were predetermined, while most were drawn from the data. RESULTS: Four main categories were developed from the data material. 1) Successful/unsuccessful parts of the implementation, 2) perceived changes/lack of changes after the implementation, 3) environment-related factors that affected guideline use, and 4) User related factors that affect guideline use. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that clinical guideline implementation is difficult, despite the implementation strategy being tailored to the target groups. Several environment- and user-related factors contributed to the lack of changes experienced in practice for both general practitioners and radiological personnel.

Development and conduction of an active re-implementation of the Norwegian musculoskeletal guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: Significant geographical variations in the use of diagnostic imaging have been demonstrated in Norway and elsewhere. Non-traumatic musculoskeletal conditions is one area where this has been demonstrated. A national musculoskeletal guideline was implemented in response by online publishing and postal dissemination in Norway in 2014 by national policy makers. The objective of our study was to develop and conduct an intervention as an active re-implementation of this guideline in one Norwegian county to investigate and facilitate guideline adherence. The development and implementation process is reported here, to facilitate understanding of the future evaluation results of this study. RESULTS: The consolidated framework for implementation research guided the intervention development and implementation. The implementation development was also based on earlier reported success factors in combination with interviews with general practitioners and radiologists regarding facilitators and barriers to guideline adherence. A combined implementation strategy was developed, including educational meetings, shortening of the guideline and easier access. All the aspects of the implementation strategy were adapted towards general practitioners, radiological personnel and the Norwegian Labor and Welfare Administration. Sixteen educational meetings were held, and six educational videos were made for those unable to attend, or where meetings could not be held.

Barriers and facilitators for guideline adherence in diagnostic imaging: an explorative study of GPs' and radiologists' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic imaging has been a part of medicine for the last century. It has been difficult to implement guidelines in this field, and unwarranted imaging has been a frequent problem. Some work has been done to explain these phenomena separately. Identifying the barriers to and facilitators of guideline use has been one strategy. The aim of this study is to offer a more comprehensive explanation of deviations from the guideline by studying the two phenomena together. METHODS: Eight general practitioners and 10 radiologists from two counties in Norway agreed to semi-structured interviews. Topics covered in the interviews were knowledge of the guideline, barriers to and facilitators of guideline use, implementation of guidelines and factors that influence unwarranted imaging. RESULTS: Several barriers to and facilitators of guideline use were identified. Among these are lack of time, pressure from patients, and guidelines being too long, rigid or unclear. Facilitators of guideline use were easy accessibility and having the guidelines adapted to the target group. Some of the factors that influence unwarranted imaging are lack of time, pressure from patients and availability of imaging services. CONCLUSION: There are similarities between the perceived barriers for guideline adherence and the perceived factors that influence unwarranted imaging. There may be a few reasons that explains the deviation from guidelines, and the amount of unwarranted imaging.