Organizational learning in surgery in Tanzania's health system: a descriptive cross-sectional study.

Organizational learning is critical for delivering safe, high-quality surgical care, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where perioperative outcomes remain poor. While current investments in LMICs prioritize physical infrastructure, equipment, and staffing, investments in organizational learning are equally important to support innovation, creativity, and continuous improvement of surgical quality. This study aims to assess the extent to which health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone perform as learning organizations from the perspectives of surgical providers. The insights gained from this study can motivate future quality improvement initiatives and investments to improve surgical outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using data from an adapted survey to explore the key components of organizational learning, including a supportive learning environment, effective learning processes, and encouraging leadership. Our sample included surgical team members and leaders at 20 facilities (health centers, district hospitals, and regional hospitals). We calculated the average of the responses at individual facilities. Responses that were 5+ on a 7-point scale or 4+ on a 5-point scale were considered positive. We examined the variation in responses by facility characteristics using a one-way ANOVA or Student's t-test. We used univariate and multiple regression to assess relationships between facility characteristics and perceptions of organizational learning. Ninety-eight surgical providers and leaders participated in the survey. The mean facility positive response rate was 95.1% (SD 6.1%). Time for reflection was the least favorable domain with a score of 62.5% (SD 35.8%). There was variation by facility characteristics including differences in time for reflection when comparing by level of care (P = .02) and location (P = .01), and differences in trying new approaches (P = .008), capacity building (P = .008), and information transfer (P = .01) when comparing public versus faith-based facilities. In multivariable analysis, suburban centers had less time for reflection than urban facilities (adjusted difference = -0.48; 95% CI: -0.95, -0.01; P = .046). Surgical team members reported more positive responses compared to surgical team leaders. We found a high overall positive response rate in characterizing organizational learning in surgery in 20 health facilities in Tanzania's Lake Zone. Our findings identify areas for improvement and provide a baseline for assessing the effectiveness of change initiatives. Future research should focus on validating the adapted survey and exploring the impact of strong learning environments on surgical outcomes in LMICs. Organizational learning is crucial in surgery and further research, funding, and policy work should be dedicated to improving learning cultures in health facilities.

A practical tool for managing change: cross-sectional psychometric assessment of the safe surgery organizational readiness tool.

BACKGROUND: Strengthening health systems through planned safety and quality improvement initiatives is an imperative to achieve more equitable, resilient, and effective care. And yet, years of organizational behavior research demonstrate that change initiatives often fall short because managers fail to account for organizational readiness for change. This finding remains true especially among surgical safety and quality improvement initiatives in low-income countries and middle-income countries. In this study, our aim was to psychometrically assess the construct validity and internal consistency of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool (SSORT), a short survey tool designed to provide change leaders with insight into facility infrastructure that supports learning and readiness to undertake change. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To demonstrate generalizability and achieve a large sample size ( n =1706) to conduct exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), a collaboration between seven surgical and anesthesia safety and quality improvement initiatives was formed. Collected survey data from health care workers were divided into pilot, exploration, and confirmation samples. The pilot sample was used to assess feasibility. The exploration sample was used to conduct EFA, while the confirmation sample was used to conduct CFA. Factor internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. RESULTS: Results of the EFA retained 9 of the 16 proposed factors associated with readiness to change. CFA results of the identified 9 factor model, measured by 28 survey items, demonstrated excellent fit to data. These factors (appropriateness, resistance to change, team efficacy, team learning orientation, team valence, communication about change, learning environment, vision for sustainability, and facility capacity) were also found to be internally consistent. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that communication, team learning, and supportive environment are components of change readiness that can be reliably measured prior to implementation of projects that promote surgical safety and quality improvement in low-income countries and middle-income countries. Future research can link performance on identified factors to outcomes that matter most to patients.

Assessing health care leadership and management for resilience and performance during crisis: The HERO-36.

BACKGROUND: Whereas organizational literature has provided much insight into the conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of organizational leadership and management during emergencies, measures to operationalize related effective practices during crises remain sparse. PURPOSE: To address this need, we developed the Healthcare Emergency Response Optimization survey, which set out to examine the leadership and management practices in health care organizations that support resilience and performance during crisis. METHODOLOGY: We administered an online survey in April to May 2022 to health care administrators and frontline staff intimately involved in their hospital's emergency response during the COVID-19 pandemic, which included a sample of 379 respondents across nine rural and urban hospitals (response rate: 44.4%). We used confirmatory factor analysis and quantile regressions to examine the results. RESULTS: Applying confirmatory factor analysis, we retained 36 items in our survey that comprised eight measures for formal and informal practices to assess crisis leadership and management. To test effectiveness of the specified practices, we regressed self-reported resilience and performance measures on the formality and informality scores. Findings show that informal practices mattered most for resilience, whereas formal practices mattered most for performance. We also identified specific practices (anticipation, transactional and relational interactions, and ad hoc collaborations) for resilience and performance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: These validated measures of organizational practices assess emergency response during crisis, with an emphasis on the actions and decisions of leadership as well as the management of organizational structures and processes. Organizations using these measures may subsequently modify preparedness and planning approaches to better manage future crises.

Research capacity, motivators and barriers to conducting research among healthcare providers in Tanzania's public health system: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Building health research capacity in low- and middle-income countries is essential to achieving universal access to safe, high-quality healthcare. It can enable healthcare workers to conduct locally relevant research and apply findings to strengthen their health delivery systems. However, lack of funding, experience, know-how, and weak research infrastructures hinders their ability. Understanding research capacity, engagement, and contextual factors that either promote or obstruct research efforts by healthcare workers can inform national strategies aimed at building research capacity. METHODS: We used a convergent mixed-methods study design to understand research capacity and research engagement of healthcare workers in Tanzania's public health system, including the barriers, motivators, and facilitators to conducting research. Our sample included 462 randomly selected healthcare workers from 45 facilities. We conducted surveys and interviews to capture data in five categories: (1) healthcare workers research capacity; (2) research engagement; (3) barriers, motivators, and facilitators; (4) interest in conducting research; and (5) institutional research capacity. We assessed quantitative and qualitative data using frequency and thematic analysis, respectively; we merged the data to identify recurring and unifying concepts. RESULTS: Respondents reported low experience and confidence in quantitative (34% and 28.7%, respectively) and qualitative research methods (34.5% and 19.6%, respectively). Less than half (44%) of healthcare workers engaged in research. Engagement in research was positively associated with: working at a District Hospital or above (p = 0.006), having a university degree or more (p = 0.007), and previous research experience (p = 0.001); it was negatively associated with female sex (p = 0.033). Barriers to conducting research included lack of research funding, time, skills, opportunities to practice, and research infrastructure. Motivators and facilitators included a desire to address health problems, professional development, and local and international collaborations. Almost all healthcare workers (92%) indicated interest in building their research capacity. CONCLUSION: Individual and institutional research capacity and engagement among healthcare workers in Tanzania is low, despite high interest for capacity building. We propose a fourfold pathway for building research capacity in Tanzania through (1) high-quality research training and mentorship; (2) strengthening research infrastructure, funding, and coordination; (3) implementing policies and strategies that stimulate engagement; and (4) strengthening local and international collaborations.

Centralization and democratization: Managing crisis communication in health care delivery.

BACKGROUND: Communication is an essential organizational process for responding to adversity. Managers are often advised to communicate frequently and redundantly during crises. Nonetheless, systematic investigation of how information receivers perceive organizational communication amid crises has remained lacking. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to characterize features of effective internal crisis communication by examining how information-sharing processes unfolded during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODOLOGY: Between June and August 2020, we conducted 55 semistructured interviews with emergency department workers practicing in a variety of roles. We analyzed interview transcripts following constructivist constant comparative methods. RESULTS: Our findings revealed that at the onset of COVID-19 pandemic response, emergency department workers struggled with immense fear and anxiety amid high uncertainty and equivocality. Frequent and redundant communication, however, resulted in information delivery and uptake problems, worsening anxiety, and interpersonal tension. These problems were ameliorated by the emergence of contextual experts who centralized and democratized communication. Centralization standardized information received across roles, work schedules, and settings while decoupling internal communication from turbulence in the environment. Democratization made information accessible in a way that all could understand. It also ensured information senders' receptiveness to feedback from information receivers. Centralization and democratization together worked to reduce sensed uncertainty and equivocality, which reduced anxiety and interpersonal tension. CONCLUSION: Establishing frequent and redundant communication strategies does not necessarily address the anxiety and interpersonal tension produced by uncertainty and equivocality in crises. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Centralization and democratization of crisis communication can reduce anxiety, improve coordination, and promote a safer workplace and patient care environment.

Implementing surgical mentorship in a resource-constrained context: a mixed methods assessment of the experiences of mentees, mentors, and leaders, and lessons learned.

BACKGROUND: A well-qualified workforce is critical to effective functioning of health systems and populations; however, skill gaps present a challenge in low-resource settings. While an emerging body of evidence suggests that mentorship can improve quality, access, and systems in African health settings by building the capacity of health providers, less is known about its implementation in surgery. We studied a novel surgical mentorship intervention as part of a safe surgery intervention (Safe Surgery 2020) in five rural Ethiopian facilities to understand factors affecting implementation of surgical mentorship in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: We designed a convergent mixed-methods study to understand the experiences of mentees, mentors, hospital leaders, and external stakeholders with the mentorship intervention. Quantitative data was collected through a survey (n = 25) and qualitative data through in-depth interviews (n = 26) in 2018 to gather information on (1) intervention characteristics including areas of mentorship, mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics, (2) organizational context including facilitators and barriers to implementation, (3) perceived impact, and (4) respondent characteristics. We analyzed the quantitative and qualitative data using frequency analysis and the constant comparison method, respectively; we integrated findings to identify themes. RESULTS: All mentees (100%) experienced the intervention as positive. Participants perceived impact as: safer and more frequent surgical procedures, collegial bonds between mentees and mentors, empowerment among mentees, and a culture of continuous learning. Over 70% of all mentees reported their confidence and job satisfaction increased. Supportive intervention characteristics included a systems focus, psychologically safe mentee-mentor relationships, and mentor characteristics including generosity with time and knowledge, understanding of local context, and interpersonal skills. Supportive organizational context included a receptive implementation climate. Intervention challenges included insufficient clinical training, inadequate mentor support, and inadequate dose. Organizational context challenges included resource constraints and a lack of common understanding of the intervention. CONCLUSION: We offer lessons for intervention designers, policy makers, and practitioners about optimizing surgical mentorship interventions in resource-constrained settings. We attribute the intervention's success to its holistic approach, a receptive climate, and effective mentee-mentor relationships. These qualities, along with policy support and adapting the intervention through user feedback are important for successful implementation.

Team and leadership factors and their relationship to burnout in emergency medicine during COVID-19: A 3-wave cross-sectional study.

Objective: We examined the relationship of team and leadership attributes with clinician feelings of burnout over time during the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: We surveyed emergency medicine personnel at 2 California hospitals at 3 time points: July 2020, December 2020, and November 2021. We assessed 3 team and leadership attributes using previously validated psychological scales (joint problem-solving, process clarity, and leader inclusiveness) and burnout using a validated scale. Using logistic regression models we determined the associations between team and leadership attributes and burnout, controlling for covariates. Results: We obtained responses from 328, 356, and 260 respondents in waves 1, 2, and 3, respectively (mean response rate = 49.52%). The median response for feelings of burnout increased over time (2.0, interquartile range [IQR] = 2.0-3.0 in wave 1 to 3.0, IQR = 2.0-3.0 in wave 3). At all time points, greater process clarity was associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.36 [0.19, 0.66] in wave 1 to 0.24 [0.10, 0.61] in wave 3). In waves 2 and 3, greater joint problem-solving was associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (OR [95% CI] = 0.61 [0.42, 0.89], 0.54 [0.33, 0.88]). Leader inclusiveness was also associated with lower odds of feeling burnout (OR [95% CI] = 0.45 [0.27, 0.74] in wave 1 to 0.41 [0.24, 0.69] in wave 3). Conclusions: Process clarity, joint problem-solving, and leader inclusiveness are associated with less clinician burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic, pointing to potential benefits of focusing on team and leadership factors during crisis. Leader inclusiveness may wane over time, requiring effort to sustain.

How psychological safety and feeling heard relate to burnout and adaptation amid uncertainty.

BACKGROUND: Psychological safety-the belief that it is safe to speak up-is vital amid uncertainty, but its relationship to feeling heard is not well understood. PURPOSE: The aims of this study were (a) to measure feeling heard and (b) to assess how psychological safety and feeling heard relate to one another as well as to burnout, worsening burnout, and adaptation during uncertainty. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of emergency department staff and clinicians (response rate = 52%; analytic N = 241) in July 2020. The survey measured psychological safety, feeling heard, overall burnout, worsening burnout, and perceived process adaptation during the COVID-19 crisis. We assessed descriptive statistics and construct measurement properties, and we assessed relationships among the variables using generalized structural equation modeling. RESULTS: Psychological safety and feeling heard demonstrated acceptable measurement properties and were correlated at r = .54. Levels of feeling heard were lower on average than psychological safety. Psychological safety and feeling heard were both statistically significantly associated with lower burnout and greater process adaptation. Only psychological safety exhibited a statistically significant relationship with less worsening burnout during crisis. We found evidence that feeling heard mediates psychological safety's relationship to burnout and process adaptation. CONCLUSION: Psychological safety is important but not sufficient for feeling heard. Feeling heard may help mitigate burnout and enable adaptation during uncertainty. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: For health care leaders, expanding beyond psychological safety to also establish a feeling of being heard may further reduce burnout and improve care processes.

Moving Forward from COVID-19: Organizational Dimensions of Effective Hospital Emergency Management.

Federal investment in emergency preparedness has increased notably since the 9/11 attacks, yet it is unclear if and how US hospital readiness has changed in the 20 years since then. In particular, understanding effective aspects of hospital emergency management programs is essential to improve healthcare systems' readiness for future disasters. The authors of this article examined the state of US hospital emergency management, focusing on the following question: During the COVID-19 pandemic, what aspects of hospital emergency management, including program components and organizational characteristics, were most effective in supporting and improving emergency preparedness and response? We conducted semistructured interviews of emergency managers and leaders at 12 urban and rural hospitals across the country. Through qualitative analysis of content derived from examination of transcripts from our interviews, we identified 7 dimensions of effective healthcare emergency management: (1) identify capable leaders; (2) assure robust institutional support; (3) design effective, tiered communications systems; (4) embrace the hospital incident command system to delineate roles and responsibilities; (5) actively promote collaboration and team building; (6) appreciate the necessity of training and exercises; and (7) balance structure and flexibility. These dimensions represent the unique and critical intersection of organizational factors and emergency management program characteristics at the core of hospital emergency preparedness and response. Extending these findings, we provide several recommendations for hospitals to better develop and sustain what we call a response culture in supporting effective emergency management.

Patterns of Technology Use Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer and Implications for Telehealth.

OBJECTIVE: To describe baseline technology use within the head and neck cancer (HNC) population prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data. SETTING: The NHIS is a survey of population health administered in person annually to a nationally representative sample of noninstitutionalized US residents via a complex clustered sampling design. METHODS: Data regarding technology use, cancer history, and demographics were extracted from the NHIS. The study population comprised individuals who completed the NHIS Sample Adult survey from 2012 to 2018 and self-reported a cancer diagnosis. Poisson regression was used to evaluate associations between demographics and general or health-related technology use and prevalence ratios reported. RESULTS: Patients with HNC were less likely to use general technology (computers, internet, or email) when compared with other patients with cancer (60% vs 73%, P < .001), although this difference was not statistically significant after controlling for sociodemographic factors. Among patients with HNC, older age, lower education, and lower income were negatively associated with general technology use (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR], 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59-0.87] for age 65-79 years vs <50 years; aPR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85] for high school vs master; aPR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.48-0.91] for income 100%-200% vs >400% federal poverty level). Older age and lower education were negatively associated with health-related technology use (aPR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.32-0.67] for age 65-79 years vs <50 years; aPR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.30-0.74] for high school vs master). CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic disparities exist in technology use rates among patients with HNC. Access to technology may pose a barrier to telehealth visits for many patients with HNC due to the unique socioeconomic demographics of this patient population.

Development and content validation of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool: A quality improvement study.

BACKGROUND: Recent efforts to increase access to safe and high-quality surgical care in low- and middle-income countries have proven successful. However, multiple facilities implementing the same safety and quality improvement interventions may not all achieve successful outcomes. This heterogeneity could be explained, in part, by pre-intervention organizational characteristics and lack of readiness of surgical facilities. In this study, we describe the process of developing and content validating the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The new tool was developed in two stages. First, qualitative results from a Safe Surgery 2020 intervention were combined with findings from a literature review of organizational readiness and change. Second, through iterative discussions and expert review, the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool was content validated. RESULTS: The Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool includes 14 domains and 56 items measuring the readiness of surgical facilities in low- and middle-income countries to implement surgical safety and quality improvement interventions. This multi-dimensional and multi-level tool offers insights into facility members' beliefs and attitudes at the individual, team, and facility levels. A panel review affirmed the content validity of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool. CONCLUSION: The Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool is a theory- and evidence-based tool that can be used by change agents and facility leaders in low- and middle-income countries to assess the baseline readiness of surgical facilities to implement surgical safety and quality improvement interventions. Next steps include assessing the reliability and validity of the Safe Surgery Organizational Readiness Tool, likely resulting in refinements.

Masked and distanced: a qualitative study of how personal protective equipment and distancing affect teamwork in emergency care.

BACKGROUND: Newly intensified use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in emergency departments presents teamwork challenges affecting the quality and safety of care at the frontlines. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative study to categorize and describe barriers to teamwork posed by PPE and distancing in the emergency setting. METHODS: We conducted 55 semi-structured interviews between June 2020 and August 2020 with personnel from two emergency departments serving in a variety of roles. We then performed a thematic analysis to identify and construct patterns of teamwork challenges into themes. RESULTS: We discovered two types of challenges to teamwork: material barriers related to wearing masks, gowns and powered air-purifying respirators, and spatial barriers implemented to conserve PPE and limit coronavirus exposure. Both material and spatial barriers resulted in disrupted communication, roles and interpersonal relationships, but they did so in unique ways. Material barriers muffled information flow, impeded team member recognition and role/task division, and reduced belonging and cohesion while increasing interpersonal strain. Spatial barriers resulted in mediated communication and added physical and emotional distance between teammates and patients. CONCLUSION: Our findings identify specific aspects of how intensified PPE use disrupts teamwork and can inform efforts to ensure care quality and safety in emergency settings as PPE use continues during and, potentially beyond, the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic.

Gene drives as a response to infection and resistance.

Vector-borne infectious diseases continue to be a major threat to public health. Although some prevention and treatment modalities exist for these diseases, resistance to such modalities, exacerbated by global climate change, remains a fundamental challenge. Developments in genomic engineering technologies present a new front in battling vector-borne illnesses; however, there is a lack of consensus over the scope and consequences of these approaches. In this article, we use malaria as a case study to address the developments and controversies surrounding gene drives, a novel genomic engineering technology. We draw attention to the themes of infection control, resistance, and reversibility using a science and technology studies framework. Unlike other current prevention and treatment modalities, gene drives have the capacity to alter not only single organisms but also entire species and ecologies. Therefore, broader public and scientific engagement is needed to inform a more inclusive discussion between clinicians, researchers, policy makers, and society.