RESUMO
Introduction: Health systems worldwide face the challenge of increasing population health with high-quality care and reducing health care expenditure growth. In pursuit for a solution, regional cross-sectoral partnerships aim to reorganize and integrate services across public health, health care and social care. Although the complexity of regional partnerships demands an incremental strategy, it is yet not known how learning works within these partnerships. To understand learning in regional cross-sectoral partnerships for health, this study aims to map the concept Learning Health System (LHS). Methods: This mapping review used a qualitative text analysis approach. A literature search was conducted in Embase and was limited to English-language papers published in the period 2015-2020. Title-abstract screening was performed using established exclusion criteria. During full-text screening, we combined deductive and inductive coding. The concept LHS was disentangled into aims, design elements, and process of learning. Data extraction and analysis were performed in MAX QDA 2020. Results: In total, 155 articles were included. All articles used the LHS definition of the Institute of Medicine. The interpretation of the concept LHS varied widely. The description of LHS contained 25 highly connected aims. In addition, we identified nine design elements. Most elements were described similarly, only the interpretation of stakeholders, data infrastructure and data varied. Furthermore, we identified three types of learning: learning as 1) interaction between clinical practice and research; 2) a circular process of converting routine care data to knowledge, knowledge to performance; and performance to data; and 3) recurrent interaction between stakeholders to identify opportunities for change, to reveal underlying values, and to evaluate processes. Typology 3 was underrepresented, and the three types of learning rarely occurred simultaneously. Conclusion: To understand learning within regional cross-sectoral partnerships for health, we suggest to specify LHS-aim(s), operationalize design elements, and choose deliberately appropriate learning type(s).
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Future doctors must be trained in giving appropriate care to terminal patients. In several countries, medical curricula have been reviewed for the attention devoted to end-of-life care (ELC). In the Netherlands, no formal review had been performed. Therefore, the aim of this study was to provide an overview of the Dutch medical curricula regarding ELC. METHODS: We formed a checklist based on international standards consisting of five domains of ELC education that are considered essential. Firstly, we studied the Dutch national blueprint on medical education. Secondly, using a questionnaire based on the checklist we studied the curricula of the eight medical faculties. A questionnaire was sent to all Dutch medical faculties to study the compulsory courses of the curricula. To assess the elective courses, we consulted the study guides. RESULTS: The national blueprint included four of the five domains of ELC. None of the eight medical faculties taught all domains specifically on ELC; they were taught within other courses. Most attention was given to the domains on psychological, sociological, cultural and spiritual aspects; communication and conversational techniques; and juridical and ethical aspects. One faculty taught an elective course that included all essential aspects of the international standards. DISCUSSION: Our study shows that ELC is currently insufficiently mentioned in the national blueprint and that none of the faculties fully integrated ELC as a part of their compulsory medical curricula. To improve ELC education, we recommend the Dutch Federation of University Medical Centres to add the five ELC domains to the national blueprint and we recommend the medical faculties to review their curricula and offer a separate and compulsory course on ELC to prepare their students for their future medical practice.