Exploring Clinical Decision-Making among the Uro-oncology Multidisciplinary Team: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this qualitative study was to understand the clinical decision-making process among the genitourinary oncology (GU) multidisciplinary team (MDT) and how patients are engaged in the process. DATA SOURCES: A qualitative descriptive study design was conducted and has been reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies (COREQ). Members of the GU MDT were recruited from a metropolitan tertiary hospital and cancer regional center in Australia serving a population of 550,000. Semistructured interviews were conducted, and the audiorecordings were transcribed; an inductive thematic analysis was used to provide insight from multiple perspectives. CONCLUSION: Three themes emerged: (1) the role and scope of the uro-oncology MDT, (2) lack of person-centered clinical decision-making, and (3) the barriers and facilitators. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the MDT discussions transitioned to virtual application, which was found to be convenient and efficient and improved attendance. The GU cancer MDT had a prominent biomedical focus that lacked person-centered considerations. Additional research is needed to explore how person-centered outcomes can be incorporated into the clinical decision-making process. IMPLICATION FOR NURSING PRACTICE: The GU MDT is increasingly important in the care of uro-oncology patients. There appears to be barriers to the implementation of person-centered discussions in the MDT. The effective delivery of multidisciplinary care is contingent on an appropriate mechanism for collaborative communication between all MDT members and patients given the limited involvement of the patient in the MDT itself.

'It enables the carers to see the person first': Qualitative evaluation of point-of-care digital management system in residential aged care.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate acceptability, efficiency, and quality of a new digital care management system in a residential aged care home (RACH). BACKGROUND: Improving care quality and efficiency in RACH, while simultaneously upgrading data management, is a priority for communities and governments. DESIGN: Participatory action research with mixed methods data collection was employed to evaluate a digital care management system implemented at a 169-bed RACH. This paper reports qualitative findings of the 2-year evaluation. METHODS: Qualitative data were collected using focus groups with residents, visitors, nurses, managers, care workers, and consultants; resident/visitor and staff hallway interviews and responses to open-ended questions in online staff surveys. Data were analysed thematically under the four predetermined study objectives. Reporting adhered to COREQ guidelines. RESULTS: 325 data captures from 88 participants, over seven data sources were coded. Findings indicate that the system was acceptable to both residents and staff due to perceptions of time-saving and improved quality of care. Increased efficiency was perceived through timeliness as well as reduced time spent retrieving and documenting information. Quality of care was improved through care scheduling individualised to resident needs, with reminders to avoid missed care. Relatives were reassured and activities were scheduled to loved one's preferences. The co-design implementation process was successful through commitment to quality from leadership teams and prioritising the focus on the holistic needs of the residents. CONCLUSION: A strong emphasis on co-design with care staff in developing and implementing the digital care system contributed to a system that supported nursing and care work, facilitated reporting and documentation, and improved resident care and well-being including identification of missed care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses, carers, administrators, and advocates can support the co-design creation of information systems that suit the workflow of an organisation and keep the focus on individualised models of care provision.

A co-designed health information system implementation into residential aged care: A mixed-method evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Internationally, the adoption of technology into residential aged care settings has been slow and fraught with multiple challenges for residents, staff and service providers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the acceptability, efficiency, and quality of health information system implementation into aged care. METHODS: Three-stage, mixed-methods participatory action research, concurrent with the natural experiment of a co-designed health information system implementation into a 169-bed aged care home in Australia. Data were collected pre-, during, and post implementation between 2019 and 2021. Qualitative data included focus groups, interviews, and observations. Quantitative data included work observations, pedometers, record audits, incident reports and staff and resident surveys. There were 162 participants composed of 65 aged care residents, 90 staff, and 7 managers/consultants. RESULTS: Improved work efficiency included reduced staff time searching for information (6%); reduced nurse time on documentation (20.4% to 6.4%), and 25% less steps. Documentation improvement included resident assessments (68% to 96%); resident-focused goals (56% to 88%) and evaluations (31% to 88%). The staff reported being better equipped to manage the 'delicacies of dignity'. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a health information system into a residential aged care facility was associated with improved resident-focused care and staff efficiency. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Technology can support nurses and care staff to spend more time with residents in residential aged care homes, improve the quality of resident care, and assist meeting regulatory reporting requirements. Flexible and tailored co-design strategies can enhance both effectiveness and success of technology implementation into residential aged care.

Ten statements to support nurse leaders implement e-health tools for nursing work in hospitals: A modified Delphi study.

AIM: To use expert consensus to develop guidance for nurse leaders implementing e-health tools to support nursing work in hospitals. BACKGROUND: Nurse leaders are increasingly required to make decisions about the selection, development, implementation and optimisation of e-health tools for nursing work in hospitals. Guidance in this rapidly evolving and complex space is limited. DESIGN: A two-phase modified Delphi study. METHODS: Phase one involved in-depth interviews with five nursing informatics experts. Analysis used the qualitative framework method, informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), to develop statements for an anonymous online Delphi scoring survey. This was distributed using snowball sampling methods to Australian nurse informatics leaders and experts. Final analysis involved synthesis of qualitative and quantitative data. The study adheres to the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) checklist. RESULTS: Ten guidance statements to support nurse leaders to implement e-health tools in hospitals were developed from the synthesis of qualitative interview data and 29 experts' responses to the 55-item Delphi response survey. CONCLUSION: Implementation of e-health tools for nursing work is complex in health settings and requires careful examination of multiple factors and interactions between clinicians, tools, service users and the health organisation. This research proposes ten statements to support nurse leaders with decisions about implementing e-health tools to support nursing work in hospitals. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The ten statements developed by this research provide a resource to assist policy and practice decisions about e-tools to ensure they are suited to supporting nursing work. Nurse leaders can use the ten statements for guidance in the selection, development, implementation and optimisation of e-health tools to ensure suitability and adaptation for nursing work in hospitals.