Evidence-based Medication knowledge Brokers in Residential Aged CarE (EMBRACE): protocol for a helix-counterbalanced randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical practice guidelines recommend against the routine use of psychotropic medications in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Knowledge brokers are individuals or groups who facilitate the transfer of knowledge into practice. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using knowledge brokers to translate Australia's new Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of Psychotropic Medications in People Living with Dementia and in Residential Aged Care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Evidence-based Medication knowledge Brokers in Residential Aged CarE (EMBRACE) trial is a helix-counterbalanced randomised controlled trial. The 12-month trial will be conducted in up to 19 RACFs operated by four Australian aged care provider organisations in Victoria, New South Wales, Western Australia and Queensland. RACFs will be randomised to receive three levels of implementation strategies (knowledge broker service, pharmacist-led quality use of medications education activities and distribution of the Guidelines and supporting materials) across three medication contexts (antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants). Implementation strategies will be delivered by an embedded on-site aged care pharmacist working at a system level across each participating RACF. All RACFs will receive all implementation strategies simultaneously but for different medication contexts. The primary outcome will be a composite dichotomous measure of 6-month RACF-level concordance with Guideline recommendations and good practice statements among people using antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants for changed behaviours. Secondary outcomes will include proportion of residents with Guideline concordant use of antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antidepressants measured at the RACF-level and proportion of residents with psychotropic medication use, hospitalisation, falls, falls with injury, polypharmacy, quality of life, activities of daily living, medication incidents and behavioural incidents measured at the RACF-level. DISCUSSION: The EMBRACE trial investigates a novel guideline implementation strategy to improve the safe and effective use of psychotropic medications in RACFs. We anticipate that the findings will provide new information on the potential role of knowledge brokers for successful and cost-effective guideline implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12623001141639. Registered 6 November 2023 - retrospectively registered, https://www.anzctr.org.au/TrialSearch.aspx .

From Promise to Practice: How Health Researchers Understand and Promote Transdisciplinary Collaboration.

There is an increasing emphasis on transdisciplinary research to address the complex challenges faced by health systems. However, research has not adequately explored how members of transdisciplinary research teams perceive, understand, and promote transdisciplinary collaboration. As such, there is a need to investigate collaborative behaviors, knowledge, and the impacts of transdisciplinary research. To address this gap, we conducted a longitudinal realist evaluation of transdisciplinary collaboration within a 5-year National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Center of Research Excellence in Transdisciplinary Frailty Research. The current study aimed to explore researchers' perceptions and promotion of transdisciplinary research specifically within the context of frailty research using qualitative methods. Participants described transdisciplinary research as a collaborative and integrative approach that involves individuals from various disciplines working together to tackle complex research problems. However, participants often used terms like interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary interchangeably, indicating that a shared understanding of transdisciplinary research is needed. Barriers to transdisciplinary collaboration included time constraints, geographical distance, and entrenched collaboration patterns. To overcome these challenges, participants suggested implementing strategies such as creating a shared vision and goals, establishing appropriate collaboration systems and structures, and role modeling collaborative behaviors, values, and attitudes. Our findings underscore the need for practical knowledge in developing transdisciplinary collaboration and leadership skills across different career stages. In the absence of formal training, sustained and immersive programs that connect researchers with peers, educators, and role models from various disciplines and provide experiential learning opportunities, may be valuable in fostering successful transdisciplinary collaboration.

The ILC Maine statement: Time for the fundamental care [r]evolution.

AIM: The aim of this study was to present the third position statement from the International Learning Collaborative (ILC). The ILC is the foremost global organization dedicated to transforming fundamental care. Internationally, fundamental care is reported to be poorly delivered, delayed or missed, negatively impacting patients, their families/carers and healthcare staff and systems. Overcoming this global challenge requires profound transformation in how our healthcare systems value, deliver and evaluate fundamental care. This transformation will take both evolutionary and revolutionary guises. In this position statement, we argue how this [r]evolutionary transformation for fundamental care can and must be created within clinical practice. DESIGN: Position paper. METHODS: This position statement stems from the ILC's annual conference and Leadership Program held in Portland, Maine, USA, in June 2023. The statement draws on the discussions between participants and the authors' subsequent reflections and synthesis of these discussions and ideas. The conference and Leadership Program involved participants (n = 209) from 13 countries working primarily within clinical practice. RESULTS: The statement focuses on what must occur to transform how fundamental care is valued, prioritized and delivered within clinical practice settings globally. To ensure demonstrable change, the statement comprises four action-oriented strategies that must be systematically owned by healthcare staff and leaders and embedded in our healthcare organizations and systems: Address non-nursing tasks: reclaim and protect time to provide high-value fundamental care. Accentuate the positive: change from deficit-based to affirmative language when describing fundamental care. Access evidence and assess impact: demonstrate transformation in fundamental care by generating relevant indicators and impact measures and rigorously synthesizing existing research. Advocate for interprofessional collaboration: support high-quality, transdisciplinary fundamental care delivery via strong nursing leadership. CONCLUSION: The ILC Maine Statement calls for ongoing action - [r]evolution - from healthcare leaders and staff within clinical practice to prioritize fundamental care throughout healthcare systems globally. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: We outline four action-oriented strategies that can be embedded within clinical practice to substantially transform how fundamental care is delivered. Specific actions to support these strategies are outlined, providing healthcare leaders and staff a road map to continue the transformation of fundamental care within our healthcare systems. IMPACT: Fundamental care affects everyone across their life course, regardless of care context, clinical condition, age and/or the presence of disability. This position statement represents a call to action to healthcare leaders and staff working specifically in clinical practice, urging them to take up the leadership challenge of transforming how fundamental care is delivered and experience globally. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients, service users and caregivers were involved in the ILC annual conference, thus contributing to the discussions that shaped this position statement. WHAT DOES THIS PAPER CONTRIBUTE TO THE WIDER GLOBAL CLINICAL COMMUNITY?: The strategies and actions outlined in this position statement are relevant to all clinical settings globally, providing practical strategies and actions that can be employed to enhance fundamental care for all patients and their families/carers. By outlining the importance of both evolutionary and revolutionary change, we identify ways in which healthcare systems globally can begin making the necessary steps towards radical fundamental care transformation, regardless of where they are in the change journey.

The quality of care delivered to residents in long-term care in Australia: an indicator-based review of resident records (CareTrack Aged study).

BACKGROUND: This study estimated the prevalence of evidence-based care received by a population-based sample of Australian residents in long-term care (LTC) aged ≥ 65 years in 2021, measured by adherence to clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. METHODS: Sixteen conditions/processes of care amendable to estimating evidence-based care at a population level were identified from prevalence data and CPGs. Candidate recommendations (n = 5609) were extracted from 139 CPGs which were converted to indicators. National experts in each condition rated the indicators via the RAND-UCLA Delphi process. For the 16 conditions, 236 evidence-based care indicators were ratified. A multi-stage sampling of LTC facilities and residents was undertaken. Trained aged-care nurses then undertook manual structured record reviews of care delivered between 1 March and 31 May 2021 (our record review period) to assess adherence with the indicators. RESULTS: Care received by 294 residents with 27,585 care encounters in 25 LTC facilities was evaluated. Residents received care for one to thirteen separate clinical conditions/processes of care (median = 10, mean = 9.7). Adherence to evidence-based care indicators was estimated at 53.2% (95% CI: 48.6, 57.7) ranging from a high of 81.3% (95% CI: 75.6, 86.3) for Bladder and Bowel to a low of 12.2% (95% CI: 1.6, 36.8) for Depression. Six conditions (skin integrity, end-of-life care, infection, sleep, medication, and depression) had less than 50% adherence with indicators. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of adherence to evidence-based care for people in LTC using multiple conditions and a standardised method. Vulnerable older people are not receiving evidence-based care for many physical problems, nor care to support their mental health nor for end-of-life care. The six conditions in which adherence with indicators was less than 50% could be the focus of improvement efforts.

A Human-Centered Approach to Measuring the Impact of Evidence-Based Online Resources.

Evidence-based online resources aim to combat vulnerabilities associated with health misinformation, evidence misalignment, and science illiteracy. Yet, it is a challenge to measure and demonstrate their impacts beyond looking at proxies for success (e.g., numbers of followers and likes). Addressing this gap, we introduce an emerging evaluation and verify its functionality in delivering optimal impact and sustainability measures for an evidence-based video resource on frailty.

Piloting a Big Data Epidemiology Approach to Support Frail, Homebound, and Bedridden People.

Frail, homebound, and bedridden people (FHBP) are people living at home whose daily life is physically limited to the boundary of their houses because of their ongoing health, energy, and psychosocial or socio-functional impairments. This definition needs a scientific, systematic, and data-driven view of the distribution (frequency, pattern) and determinants (causes, risk factors) of health-related states and adverse events experienced by FHBP. Thus, we piloted a big data epidemiology approach (Multiple Correspondence Analysis and data visualization) from 300 survey responses about FHBP experiences and identified a positive correlation between perceived health status and reported impairments.

How and where does "care" fit within seminal life-course approaches? A narrative review and critical analysis.

AIMS: To map the concepts of the caring life-course theory that are used in life-course approaches from different disciplines; establish whether there is a common recognition of, or language used, to describe care in those life-course approaches; and identify the role and contribution of care to the life-course literature. DESIGN: This discursive paper uses a narrative review process to explore points of convergence and divergence between life-course approaches and the caring life-course theory. METHODS: Categories for analysis were developed deductively and inductively, focusing on the constructs of fundamental care, capacity and capability, care network, care transition, care trajectory and care biography. RESULTS: We identified four disciplinary perspectives: (1) life-course sociology; (2) life-course epidemiology; (3) lifespan developmental psychology; and (4) life-course health development. While six core constructs of the caring life-course theory were described, either explicitly or implicitly, in existing life-course approaches, no single approach fully describes the role and contribution of care across the lifespan. CONCLUSION: Life-course approaches have largely neglected the contribution and role of care in informing the life-course discourse. This review highlights the significance of care beyond traditional healthcare settings and recognizes it as a fundamental human need for well-being and development, which can contribute to existing life-course literature. IMPLICATION FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: There is a need to understand care as a complex system and embrace a whole-system, life-course approach to enable nurses and other healthcare professionals to provide high-quality, patient-centred care. IMPACT: Incorporating care within a life-course approach provides opportunities to integrate and deliver care centred around the person, their life transitions, trajectories and care networks, including informal carers and healthcare professionals. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients or members of the public were not involved in this study as it is a discursive paper based on the relevant literature.

'I wasn't made to feel like a nut case after all': A qualitative story completion study exploring healthcare recipient and carer perceptions of good professional caregiving relationships.

BACKGROUND: Professional caregiving relationships are central to quality healthcare but are not always developed to a consistently high standard in clinical practice. Existing literature on what constitutes high-quality relationships and how they should be developed is plagued by dyadic conceptualisations; discipline, context and condition-specific research; and the absence of healthcare recipient and informal carer voices. This study aimed to address these issues by exploring how healthcare recipients and carers conceptualise good professional caregiving relationships regardless of discipline, care setting and clinical condition. DESIGN: A qualitative story completion approach was used. Participants completed a story in response to a hypothetical stem that described a healthcare recipient (and, in some instances, carer) developing a good relationship with a new healthcare provider. Stories were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 35 healthcare recipients and 37 carers (n = 72 total). RESULTS: Participants' stories were shaped by an overarching discourse that seeking help from new providers can elicit a range of unwanted emotions for both recipients and carers (e.g., anxiety, fear, dread). These unwanted emotions were experienced in relation to recipients' presenting health problems as well as their anticipated interactions with providers. Specifically, recipient and carer characters were fearful that providers would dismiss their concerns and judge them for deciding to seek help. Good relationships were seen to develop when healthcare providers worked to relieve or minimise these unwanted emotions, ensuring healthcare recipients and carers felt comfortable and at ease with the provider and the encounter. Participants positioned healthcare providers as primarily responsible for relieving recipients' and carers' unwanted emotions, which was achieved via four approaches: (1) easing into the encounter, (2) demonstrating interest in and understanding of recipients' presenting problems, (3) validating recipients' presenting problems and (4) enabling and respecting recipient choice. Participants' stories also routinely oriented to temporality, positioning relationships within recipients' and carers' wider care networks and biographical and temporal contexts. CONCLUSION: The findings expand our understanding of professional caregiving relationships beyond dyadic, static conceptualisations. Specifically, the findings suggest that high-quality relationships might be achieved via a set of core healthcare provider behaviours that can be employed across disciplinary, context and condition-specific boundaries. In turn, this provides a basis to support interprofessional education and multidisciplinary healthcare delivery, enabling different healthcare disciplines, specialties, and teams to work from the same understanding of what is required to develop high-quality relationships. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The findings are based on stories from 72 healthcare recipient and carer participants, providing rich insight into their conceptualisations of high-quality professional caregiving relationships.

Unsafe care in residential settings for older adults: a content analysis of accreditation reports.

Residents of aged care services can experience safety incidents resulting in preventable serious harm. Accreditation is a commonly used strategy to improve the quality of care; however, narrative information within accreditation reports is not generally analysed as a source of safety information to inform learning. In Australia, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission (ACQSC), the sector regulator, undertakes over 500 accreditation assessments of residential aged care services against eight national standards every year. From these assessments, the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission generates detailed Site Audit Reports. In over one-third (37%) of Site Audit Reports, standards relating to Personal and Clinical Care (Standard 3) are not being met. The aim of this study was to identify the types of resident Safety Risks that relate to Personal and Clinical Care Standards not being met during accreditation or re-accreditation. These data could inform priority setting at policy, regulatory, and service levels. An analytical framework was developed based on the World Health Organization's International Classification for Patient Safety and other fields including Clinical Issue (the issue related to the incident impacting the resident, e.g. wound/skin or pain). Information relating to safety incidents in the Site Audit Reports was extracted, and a content analysis undertaken using the analytical framework. Clinical Issue and the International Classification for Patient Safety-based classification were combined to describe a clinically intuitive category ('Safety Risks') to describe ways in which residents could experience unsafe care, e.g. diagnosis/assessment of pain. The resulting data were descriptively analysed. The analysis included 65 Site Audit Reports that were undertaken between September 2020 and March 2021. There were 2267 incidents identified and classified into 274 types of resident Safety Risks. The 12 most frequently occurring Safety Risks account for only 32.3% of all incidents. Relatively frequently occurring Safety Risks were organisation management of infection control; diagnosis/assessment of pain, restraint, resident behaviours, and falls; and multiple stages of wounds/skin management, e.g. diagnosis/assessment, documentation, treatment, and deterioration. The analysis has shown that accreditation reports contain valuable data that may inform prioritization of resident Safety Risks in the Australian residential aged care sector. A large number of low-frequency resident Safety Risks were detected in the accreditation reports. To address these, organizations may use implementation science approaches to facilitate evidence-based strategies to improve the quality of care delivered to residents. Improving the aged care workforces' clinical skills base may address some of the Safety Risks associated with diagnosis/assessment and wound management.

My Wellbeing Journal: Development of a communication and goal-setting tool to improve care for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity.

BACKGROUND: Chronic conditions and multimorbidity, the presence of two or more chronic conditions, are increasingly common in older adults. Effective management of chronic conditions and multimorbidity in older adults requires a collaborative and person-centred approach that considers the individual's goals, preferences and priorities. However, ensuring high-quality personalised care for older adults with multimorbidity can be challenging due to the complexity of their care needs, limited time and a lack of patient preparation to discuss their personal goals and preferences with their healthcare team. OBJECTIVE: To codesign a communication and goal-setting tool, My Wellbeing Journal, to support personalised care planning for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. DESIGN: We drew on an experience-based codesign approach to develop My Wellbeing Journal. This article reports on the final end-user feedback, which was collected via an online survey with older adults and their carers. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Older adults with chronic conditions, multimorbidity and informal carers living in Australia. Personalised care planning was considered in the context of primary care. RESULTS: A total of 88 participants completed the online survey. The survey focused on participants' feedback on the tool in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, satisfaction and errors encountered. This feedback resulted in modifications to My Wellbeing Journal, which can be used during clinical encounters to facilitate communication, goal setting and progress tracking. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians and carers can use the tool to guide discussions with older adults about their care planning and help them set realistic goals that are meaningful to them. The findings of this study could be used to inform the development of recommendations for healthcare providers to implement person-centred, goal-oriented care for older adults with chronic conditions and multimorbidity. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Older adults living with chronic conditions and multimorbidity and their carers have contributed to the development of a tool that has the potential to significantly enhance the experience of personalised care planning. Their direct involvement as collaborators has ensured that the tool is optimised to meet the standards of effectiveness and usability.

Exploring the role of a facilitator in supporting family carers when embedding the iSupport for Dementia programme in care services: A qualitative study.

AIMS: To explore stakeholders' perceptions of a facilitator's role in supporting carers when embedding iSupport for Dementia psychoeducation program, in care services. METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study design was applied. Data were collected from workshops and interviews with carers of people living with dementia (PLWD)and with health and social care professionals from two tertiary hospitals and two community aged care organisations across three Australian states between October 2021 and March 2022. A thematic analysis was used to analyse data. The COREQ guideline was followed to report our findings. RESULTS: A total of 30 family carers and 45 health and social care professionals participated in the study. Three main themes and seven subthemes were identified from the data. We described the main themes as (1) the facilitator's role at the time of dementia diagnosis, (2) the facilitator's role throughout the everyday dementia care journey and (3) the facilitator's role during transition moments. CONCLUSIONS: Caring for family members with dementia is demanding and stressful for carers. Embedding a facilitator-enabled iSupport for Dementia program in hospital and community aged care settings has the potential to mitigate sources of stress associated with care recipient factors, carer factors and care service factors, and improve the health and well-being of carers and those for whom they care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Our findings will inform the establishment of iSupport facilitators appointed by dementia care providers in hospital and community care settings and help determine their roles and responsibilities in delivering the iSupport program. Our findings relate to nurse-led and coordinated dementia care in hospital and community aged care settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study was co-designed with stakeholders from two aged care organisations and two tertiary hospitals. The study participants were staff employed by these organisations and carers of PLWD who were service users.

Wicked problems in a post-truth political economy: a dilemma for knowledge translation.

The discipline of knowledge translation (KT) emerged as a way of systematically understanding and addressing the challenges of applying health and medical research in practice. In light of ongoing and emerging critique of KT from the medical humanities and social sciences disciplines, KT researchers have become increasingly aware of the complexity of the translational process, particularly the significance of culture, tradition and values in how scientific evidence is understood and received, and thus increasingly receptive to pluralistic notions of knowledge. Hence, there is now an emerging view of KT as a highly complex, dynamic, and integrated sociological phenomenon, which neither assumes nor creates knowledge hierarchies and neither prescribes nor privileges scientific evidence. Such a view, however, does not guarantee that scientific evidence will be applied in practice and thus poses a significant dilemma for KT regarding its status as a scientific and practice-oriented discipline, particularly within the current sociopolitical climate. Therefore, in response to the ongoing and emerging critique of KT, we argue that KT must provide scope for relevant scientific evidence to occupy an appropriate position of epistemic primacy in public discourse. Such a view is not intended to uphold the privileged status of science nor affirm the "scientific logos" per se. It is proffered as a counterbalance to powerful social, cultural, political and market forces that are able to challenge scientific evidence and promote disinformation to the detriment of democratic outcomes and the public good.

Testing a model for person-centred pain management: A systematic review and synthesis guided by the Fundamentals of Care framework.

AIMS: To test a model for person-centred pain management using qualitative evidence in the literature and refine it based on the results. DESIGN: A qualitative systematic review with thematic synthesis using the Fundamentals of Care framework. METHODS AND DATA SOURCES: A literature search in February 2021 in six scientific databases: CINAHL, PsycInfo, Pubmed, Scopus, Social Science Premium Collection and Web of Science, reported using ENTREQ and PRISMA. Quality assessment was performed for the individual studies. Thematic analysis and the GRADE-CERQual approach were used in the synthesis including the assessment of confidence in the evidence. RESULTS: The model was tested against the evidence in 15 studies appraised with moderate or high quality and found represented in the literature but needed to be expanded. A refined model with a moderate/high confidence level of evidence presents elements to be used in a holistic care process; The nurse is guided to establish a trusting relationship with the patient and enable communication to identify and meet pain management needs using pharmacological and non-pharmacological management. Nurse leaders are guided to support this process by providing the right contextual conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The strengths of the confidence level in the refined model, and that it is represented from the nurse and patient perspectives in nursing research across countries and cultures, support our recommendation for empirical evaluation. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The model links the knowledge of pain management elements from individual studies together into actions to be performed in clinical practice. It also outlines the organizational support needed to make this happen. Nurses and nursing leaders are suggested to test the model to implement person-centred pain management in clinical practice. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. IMPACT: What Problem Did the Study Address? There is a need to transfer available evidence of person-centred pain management into practice to relieve the patient from pain. What Were the Main Findings? Person-centred pain management is of high priority for patients and nurses around the world and can be performed in a holistic care process including patient-nurse trust and communication, supported by contextual conditions to deliver timely pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management addressing the patient's physical, psychosocial and relational care needs. Where and on Whom will the Research Have an Impact? The model is to be tested and evaluated in clinical practice to guide the providers to relieve the patient from pain. REPORTING METHOD: Relevant EQUATOR guidelines were used to report the study: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement.

Measuring person-centred pain management: Development of a questionnaire using the fundamentals of care framework.

AIM: To develop and test a questionnaire using the Fundamentals of Care framework to measure person-centred pain management. DESIGN: Cross-sectional exploratory descriptive design. METHODS: Development in three phases: (a) literature search for questionnaires measuring person-centred pain management, (b) seven-step process developing items using thematic analysis, (c) initial feasibility and validity testing. Theoretical and empirical evidence was used, including the 'Strategic and Clinical Quality Indicators in Postoperative Pain management' questionnaire, the Fundamentals of Care framework and person-centredness principles. Theoretical experts (n = 2) reviewed the questionnaire, further evaluated by providers (n = 5) and patients (n = 5) using a think-aloud process, and by additional questions in the questionnaire answered by n = 100 patients. The questionnaire was tested February to March 2021, at four surgical wards in a university hospital. RESULTS: The evaluation showed initial support for feasibility and validity, and the questionnaire was found to represent and be sensitive to capture the patients' experiences of person-centred pain management and being easy to answer. The 100 patients with acute abdominal pain who answered the questionnaire (aged 18-89 years, 46 women and 54 men), identified missing elements of fundamental care in their pain management, indicating that the questionnaire is sensitive to capture specific areas for improvement. CONCLUSION: This first attempt at transforming the essential components of person-centred pain management into measurable items in a questionnaire was found promising. The questionnaire is suggested to be further tested for psychometric properties and patient benefit to provide clinical guidance in acute surgical care to meet the patient care need of pain management. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The developed questionnaire addresses the need of nurses and nursing leaders to evaluate the delivery of person-centred pain management in acute surgical care, to relieve the patient from pain. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and providers were involved in testing the questionnaire.

Co-designing, measuring, and optimizing innovations and solutions within complex adaptive health systems.

Objective: To introduce, describe, and demonstrate the emergence and testing of an evaluation method that combines different logics for co-designing, measuring, and optimizing innovations and solutions within complex adaptive health systems. Method: We describe the development and preliminary testing of a framework to evaluate new ways of using and implementing knowledge (innovations) and technological solutions to solve problems via co-design methods and measurable approaches such as data science. The framework is called PROLIFERATE; it is initially located within the ecological logic: complexity science, by investigating the evolving and emergent properties of systems, but also embraces the mechanistic logic of implementation science (IS) (i.e., getting evidence-based interventions into practice); and the social logic, as the study of individuals, groups, and organizations. Integral to this logic mixture is measuring person-centered parameters (i.e., comprehension, emotional responses, barriers, motivations, and optimization strategies) concerning any evaluated matter across the micro, meso, and macro levels of systems. We embrace the principles of Nilsen's taxonomy to demonstrate its adaptability by comparing and encompassing the normalization process theory, the 2 × 2 conceptual map of influence on behaviors, and PROLIFERATE. Results: Snapshots of ongoing research in different healthcare settings within Australia are offered to demonstrate how PROLIFERATE can be used for co-designing innovations, tracking their optimization process, and evaluating their impacts. The exemplification involves the evaluation of Health2Go (the design and implementation of an innovative procedure: interdisciplinary learning within an allied health service-community-based) and RAPIDx_AI (an artificial intelligence randomized clinical trial being tested to improve the cardiac care of patients within emergency departments-tertiary care). Conclusion: PROLIFERATE is one of the first frameworks to combine ecological, mechanistic, and social logic models to co-design, track, and evaluate complex interventions while operationalizing an innovative complexity science approach: the knowledge translation complexity network model (KT-cnm). It adds a novel perspective to the importance of stakeholders' agency in the system by considering their sociodemographic characteristics and experiences within different healthcare settings (e.g., procedural innovations such as "interdisciplinary learning" for Health2Go, and tech-enabled solutions such as RAPIDx_AI). Its structured facilitation processes engage stakeholders in dynamic and productive ways while measuring and optimizing innovation within the complexities of health systems.

Instruments Measuring Self-Care and Self-Management of Chronic Conditions by Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Scoping Review.

Given the high prevalence of chronic conditions and multimorbidity in older adults, there is a need to better conceptualize and measure self-care and self-management to promote a person-centered approach. This scoping review aimed to identify and map instruments measuring self-care and self-management of chronic conditions by older adults. We searched six electronic databases, charted data from the studies and tools and reported the results in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A total of 107 articles (103 studies) containing 40 tools were included in the review. There was substantial variation in the tools in terms of their aims and scope, structure, theoretical foundations, how they were developed, and the settings in which they have been used. The quantity of tools demonstrates the importance of assessing self-care and self-management. Consideration of the purpose, scope, and theoretical foundation should guide decisions about tools suitable for use in research and clinical practice.

How transdisciplinary research teams learn to do knowledge translation (KT), and how KT in turn impacts transdisciplinary research: a realist evaluation and longitudinal case study.

BACKGROUND: Transdisciplinary research and knowledge translation are increasingly regarded as key concepts underpinning applied research across the health and social sciences, due to their presumed potential in addressing complex, "wicked" problems and improving the use of research in practice and policy, respectively. Despite sharing an impact mandate, the relationship between transdisciplinary research collaboration and knowledge translation remains unclear. In response, we examined the relationship between transdisciplinary collaboration and knowledge translation to generate these understandings with a view towards maximizing the impact of collaborative efforts. METHODS: We undertook a realist evaluation and longitudinal case study of a 5-year National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Centre of Research Excellence in Transdisciplinary Frailty Research. Data were collected between February 2017 and March 2020 over three rounds of theory development, refinement and testing using interviews, observation, document review and visual elicitation as data sources. The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University of Adelaide approved this study. RESULTS: Iterative analysis of narrative interviews and visual data led to the development of three overarching programme theories explicating the reciprocal relationship between KT understandings and transdisciplinary team process. These programme theories revolve around the concept of a network, which we define in alignment with extant theoretical literature on network mechanisms and complex networks as graphically representable networks of agents/people (nodes) joined by social relationships (links). Our findings demonstrate that under the right contextual conditions, transdisciplinary team members respond through an improved ability to (1) navigate the network, (2) negotiate the network and (3) mobilize the network. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates the reciprocity and mutually supportive relationship between transdisciplinary research and knowledge translation. Our findings suggest that embedding a collaborative knowledge translation framework and providing resources such as facilitation and distributed leadership within a transdisciplinary team can improve collaboration and support transdisciplinary research objectives.