Decision making for people living with HIV/AIDS using the theory of innovation diffusion model at the Western Provident Association Turen Foundation.

OBJECTIVES: To describe how people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) make decisions using the diffusion of innovation theory model. Decisions occur when individual decision makers engage in activities that guide choices to adopt or reject a particular innovation. METHODS: This is a descriptive analysis research using a survey method. Data collection was carried out using a decision making questionnaire. The subjects in this research were HIV/AIDS sufferers (PLWHA) who lived in Turen, Indonesia. The number of research subjects was 36 respondents obtained using the purposive sampling technique on January 2023. RESULTS: The research design used the correlation method with a cross sectional approach and the Spearman correlation coefficient statistical test. The research results show significance (2-tailed) of 0.934 (p>0.05). The correlation coefficient results are negative. Where the direction of the correlation produces showed a very weak relationship with a value of 0.014 and the results of the analysis between variables are not the same. This is because the persuasion stage was not tested in the analysis. Research shows that 8 (22.2%) patients rejected the decision making of PLWHA using the diffusion of innovation theory model at the Western Provident Association Turen Foundation, Turen, Indonesia, while 28 (77.7%) patients accepted it. It can be concluded that the majority of decisions made by HIV/AIDS patients at the ADIS Turen Peduli Warga Foundation are accepted. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of HIV/AIDS sufferers is at a good level, their decision making is mostly accepted and there is a meaningful relationship between knowledge and decision making in using a chatbot innovation. The suggestion from the research is that this chatbot innovation can be a source of further research and help provide education for PLWHA patients in everyday life.

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.

Unravelling clinicians' shared decision-making adoption: a qualitative exploration through the lens of diffusion of innovations theory.

OBJECTIVES: This study uses the diffusion of innovations (DOI) theory to comprehensively understand the adoption of shared decision-making (SDM) in clinical practice, specifically focusing on the 'knowledge' and 'persuasion' stages within DOI. We aim to understand the challenges and dynamics associated with SDM adoption, offering insights for more patient-centred decision-making in healthcare. DESIGN: This qualitative study employs a modified framework analysis approach, integrating ethnographic and interview data from prior research, along with additional interviews. The framework used is based on the DOI theory. STUDY SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was conducted in the obstetrics and gynaecology department of a tertiary teaching hospital in the Eastern region of the Netherlands. It included interviews with 20 participants, including gynaecologists, obstetrics registrars and junior doctors currently practising in the department. Additionally, data from prior research conducted within the same department were incorporated, ensuring the maintenance of contextual consistency. RESULTS: Findings reveal a complex interplay between SDM's benefits and challenges. Clinicians value SDM for upholding patient autonomy and enhancing medical practice, viewing it as valuable for medical decision-making. Decision aids are seen as advantageous in supporting treatment decisions. Challenges include compatibility issues between patient and clinician preferences, perceptions of SDM as time-consuming and difficult and limitations imposed by the rapid pace of healthcare and its swift decisions. Additionally, perceived complexity varies by situation, influenced by colleagues' attitudes, with limited trialability and sparsely observed instances of SDM. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians' decision to adopt or reject SDM is multifaceted, shaped by beliefs, cognitive processes and contextual challenges. Cognitive dissonance is critical as clinicians reconcile their existing practices with the adoption of SDM. Practical strategies such as practice assessments, open discussions about SDM's utility and reflective practice through professional development initiatives empower clinicians to make the best informed decision to adopt or reject SDM.

Global health reciprocal innovation: ethical, legal and regulatory considerations.

Global health reciprocal innovation (GHRI) is a recent and more formalised approach to conducting research that recognises and develops innovations (eg, medicines, devices, methodologies) from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). At present, studies using GHRI most commonly adapt innovations from LMICs for use in high-income countries (HICs), although some develop innovations in LMICs and HICs. In this paper, we propose that GHRI implicitly makes two ethical commitments: (1) to promote health innovations from LMICs, especially in HICs, and (2) to conduct studies on health innovations from LMICs in equitable partnerships between investigators in LMICs and HICs. We argue that these commitments take a significant step towards a more equal global health research enterprise while helping to ensure that populations and investigators in LMICs receive equitable benefits from studies using GHRI. However, studies using GHRI can raise potential ethical concerns and face legal and regulatory barriers. We propose ethical, legal and regulatory considerations to help address these concerns and barriers. We hope our recommendations will allow GHRI to move the global health research enterprise forward into an era where all people are treated equally as knowers and learners, while populations in both LMICs and HICs benefit equitably from studies using GHRI.

Implementation of Agile in healthcare: methodology for a multisite home hospital accelerator.

BACKGROUND: The diffusion of innovation in healthcare is sluggish. Evidence-based care models and interventions take years to reach patients. We believe the healthcare community could deliver innovation to the bedside faster if it followed other sectors by employing an organisational framework for efficiently accomplishing work. Home hospital is an example of sluggish diffusion. This model provides hospital-level care in a patient's home instead of in a traditional hospital with equal or better outcomes. Home hospital uptake has steadily grown during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet barriers to launch remain for healthcare organisations, including access to expertise and implementation tools. The Home Hospital Early Adopters Accelerator was created to bring together a network of healthcare organisations to develop tools necessary for programme implementation. METHODS: The accelerator used the Agile framework known as Scrum to rapidly coordinate work across many different specialised skill sets and blend individuals who had no experience with one another into efficient teams. Its goal was to take 40 weeks to develop 20 'knowledge products',or tools critical to the development of a home hospital programme such as workflows, inclusion criteria and protocols. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of the accelerator's implementation, measuring teams' productivity and experience. RESULTS: 18 healthcare organisations participated in the accelerator to produce the expected 20 knowledge products in only 32 working weeks, a 20% reduction in time. Nearly all (97.4%) participants agreed or strongly agreed the Scrum teams worked well together, and 96.8% felt the teams produced a high-quality product. Participants consistently remarked that the Scrum team developed products much faster than their respective organisational teams. The accelerator was not a panacea: it was challenging for some participants to become familiar with the Scrum framework and some participants struggled with balancing participation in the Accelerator with their job duties. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an Agile-based accelerator that joined disparate healthcare organisations into teams equipped to create knowledge products for home hospitals proved both efficient and effective. We demonstrate that implementing an organisational framework to accomplish work is a valuable approach that may be transformative for the sector.

Innovations in cardiac computed tomography: Imaging in coronary artery disease.

Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has emerged as a pivotal tool in the non-invasive evaluation of coronary artery disease (CAD). Recent advancements in imaging techniques, quantitative plaque assessment methods, assessment of coronary physiology, and perivascular coronary inflammation have propelled CCTA to the forefront of CAD management, enabling precise risk stratification, disease monitoring, and evaluation of treatment response. However, challenges persist, including the need for cardiovascular outcomes data for therapy modifications based on CCTA findings and the lack of standardized quantitative plaque assessment techniques to establish universal guidelines for treatment strategies. This review explores the current utilization of CCTA in clinical practice, highlighting its clinical impact and discussing challenges and opportunities for future development. By addressing these nuances, CCTA holds promise for revolutionizing coronary imaging and improving CAD management in the years to come. Ultimately, the goal is to provide precise risk stratification, optimize medical therapy, and improve cardiovascular outcomes while ensuring cost-effectiveness for healthcare systems.

Understanding pathways from implementation to sustainment: a longitudinal, mixed methods analysis of promising practices implemented in the Veterans Health Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) is the United States largest learning health system. The Diffusion of Excellence (DoE) program is a large-scale model of diffusion that identifies and diffuses evidence-informed practices across VHA. During the period of 2016-2021, 57 evidence-informed practices were implemented across 82 VHA facilities. This setting provides a unique opportunity to understand sustainment determinants and pathways. Our objective was to characterize the longitudinal pathways of practices as they transition from initial implementation to long-term sustainment at each facility. METHODS: A longitudinal, mixed-methods evaluation of 82 VHA facilities. Eighty-two facility representatives, chosen by leadership as points-of-contact for 57 DoE practices, were eligible for post-implementation interviews and annual sustainment surveys. Primary outcomes (implementation, sustainment), and secondary outcomes (institutionalization, effectiveness, anticipated sustainment) at four time-points were collected. We performed descriptive statistics and directed content analysis using Hailemariam et al.'s factors influencing sustainment. RESULTS: After approximately five years post-implementation (e.g., 2021 sustainment outcomes), of the 82 facilities, about one-third fully sustained their practice compared to one-third that did not fully sustain their practice because it was in a "liminal" stage (neither sustained nor discontinued) or permanently discontinued. The remaining one-third of facilities had missing 2021 sustainment outcomes. A higher percentage of facilities (70%) had inconsistent primary outcomes (changing over time) compared to facilities (30%) with consistent primary outcomes (same over time). Thirty-four percent of facilities with sustained practices reported resilience since they overcame implementation and sustainment barriers. Facilities with sustained practices reported more positive secondary outcomes compared to those that did not sustain their practice. Key factors facilitating practice sustainment included: demonstrating practice effectiveness/benefit, sufficient organizational leadership, sufficient workforce, and adaptation/alignment with local context. Key factors hindering practice sustainment included: insufficient workforce, not able to maintain practice fidelity/integrity, critical incidents related to the COVID-19 pandemic, organizational leadership did not support sustainment of practice, and no ongoing support. CONCLUSIONS: We identified diverse pathways from implementation to sustainment, and our data underscore that initial implementation outcomes may not determine long-term sustainment outcomes. This longitudinal evaluation contributes to understanding impacts of the DoE program, including return on investment, achieving learning health system goals, and insights into achieving high-quality healthcare in VHA.

Endohepatology: Arrival at the frontier of interventional endosonography.

Endohepatology describes the emerging field where diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are used for the diagnosis and management of liver disease and its sequelae. In this editorial we comment on the article by Gadour et al. The spectrum of EUS-guided procedures includes liver parenchymal and lesional biopsy, abscess drainage, treatment of focal liver lesions, diagnosis of portal hypertension and management of gastric varices. The data suggest that the application of EUS to hepatology is technically feasible and safe, heralding the arrival at a new frontier for EUS. More data, specifically randomised trials comparing EUS to interventional radiology techniques, and continued partnership between endoscopy and hepatology are required to see this field establish itself outside expert tertiary centres.

Aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: Influence of centre volume on TAVR adoption rates and outcomes in France.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter (TAVR) has supplanted surgical (SAVR) aortic valve replacement (AVR). AIM: To evaluate whether adoption of this technology has varied according to centre volume at the nationwide level. METHODS: From an administrative hospital-discharge database, we collected data on all AVRs performed in France between 2007 and 2019. Centres were divided into terciles based on the annual number of SAVRs performed in 2007-2009 ("before TAVR era"). RESULTS: A total of 192,773 AVRs (134,662 SAVRs and 58,111 TAVRs) were performed in 47 centres. The annual number of AVRs and TAVRs increased significantly and linearly in low-volume (<152 SAVRs/year; median 106, interquartile range [IQR] 75-129), middle-volume (152-219 SAVRs/year; median 197, IQR 172-212) and high-volume (>219 SAVRs/year; median 303, IQR 268-513) terciles, but to a greater degree in the latter (+14, +16 and +24 AVRs/centre/year and +16, +19 and +31 TAVRs/centre/year, respectively; PANCOVA<0.001). Charlson Comorbidity Index and in-hospital death rates declined from 2010 to 2019 in all terciles (all Ptrend<0.05). In 2017-2019, after adjusting for age, sex and Charlson Comorbidity Index, there was a trend toward lower death rates in the high-volume tercile (P=0.06) for SAVR, whereas death rates were similar for TAVR irrespective of tercile (P=0.27). Similar results were obtained when terciles were defined based on number of interventions performed in the last instead of the first 3years. Importantly, even centres in the lowest-volume tercile performed a relatively high number of interventions (150 TAVRs/year/centre). CONCLUSIONS: In a centralized public healthcare system, the total number of AVRs increased linearly between 2007 and 2019, mostly due to an increase in TAVR, irrespective of centre volume. Progressive declines in patient risk profiles and death rates were observed in all terciles; in 2017-2019 death rates were similar in all terciles, although lower in high-volume centres for SAVR.

Exploring the Role of Complexity in Health Care Technology Bottom-Up Innovations: Multiple-Case Study Using the Nonadoption, Abandonment, Scale-Up, Spread, and Sustainability Complexity Assessment Tool.

BACKGROUND: New digital technology presents new challenges to health care on multiple levels. There are calls for further research that considers the complex factors related to digital innovations in complex health care settings to bridge the gap when moving from linear, logistic research to embracing and testing the concept of complexity. The nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability (NASSS) framework was developed to help study complexity in digital innovations. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the role of complexity in the development and deployment of innovations by retrospectively assessing challenges to 4 digital health care innovations initiated from the bottom up. METHODS: A multicase retrospective, deductive, and explorative analysis using the NASSS complexity assessment tool LONG was conducted. In total, 4 bottom-up innovations developed in Region Västra Götaland in Sweden were explored and compared to identify unique and shared complexity-related challenges. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in joint insights and individual learning. Overall, the complexity was mostly found outside the actual innovation; more specifically, it related to the organization's readiness to integrate new innovations, how to manage and maintain innovations, and how to finance them. The NASSS framework sheds light on various perspectives that can either facilitate or hinder the adoption, scale-up, and spread of technological innovations. In the domain of condition or diagnosis, a well-informed understanding of the complexity related to the condition or illness (diabetes, cancer, bipolar disorders, and schizophrenia disorders) is of great importance for the innovation. The value proposition needs to be clearly described early to enable an understanding of costs and outcomes. The questions in the NASSS complexity assessment tool LONG were sometimes difficult to comprehend, not only from a language perspective but also due to a lack of understanding of the surrounding organization's system and its setting. CONCLUSIONS: Even when bottom-up innovations arise within the same support organization, the complexity can vary based on the developmental phase and the unique characteristics of each project. Identifying, defining, and understanding complexity may not solve the issues but substantially improves the prospects for successful deployment. Successful innovation within complex organizations necessitates an adaptive leadership and structures to surmount cultural resistance and organizational impediments. A rigid, linear, and stepwise approach risks disregarding interconnected variables and dependencies, leading to suboptimal outcomes. Success lies in embracing the complexity with its uncertainty, nurturing creativity, and adopting a nonlinear methodology that accommodates the iterative nature of innovation processes within complex organizations.