Patient-Centered Innovation: Involving Patients in Open Social Innovation.

BACKGROUND: Involving patients in the health-care delivery innovation has many benefits. Open social innovation (OSI) presents a fitting lens to examine and advance patient engagement in innovation. OSI offers a participatory approach to innovation, in which diverse groups of participants collaboratively generate ideas and scale solutions on complex social challenges. PURPOSE: This study: (1) describes a pilot application of OSI, in which individuals serving on a hospital's patients and family advisory councils (PFACs) were invited to participate in an innovation contest; and (2) explores the extent to which patients' beliefs about their role in innovation relate to their participation in the contest. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We conducted an innovation contest that invited PFAC members to share ideas that would improve patient experiences and then vote on and select the ideas that they wanted to see move forward. We measured patients' beliefs about their role in innovation in a survey before the contest. RESULTS: Twenty individuals submitted 27 ideas. Patients who expressed preference for more involvement in innovation were more likely to participate. CONCLUSIONS: Using OSI may help expand patient engagement in innovation, particularly among those who want to be more involved but do not feel authorized to voice ideas in traditional advisory committees. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: OSI spurred collaboration among patients, clinicians, quality improvement staff, hospital administrators, and other stakeholders in idea generation, elaboration, and implementation. More experimentation and research are needed to understand how OSI can be leveraged to capture patients' voice and incorporate them in care delivery innovation.

Mission possible: open innovation in nursing and patient care services at Massachusetts General Hospital.

OBJECTIVES: Although front-line nurses and staff are uniquely positioned to identify the inefficiencies and gaps in care delivery, formal processes are not always in place to hear from those very employees. DESIGN: We established a scalable process that embodies open innovation principles, to broaden and distribute the innovation locus. SETTING: Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA. PARTICPITANTS: We invited 8800+ nurses and other direct caregivers to participate in organisational problem solving. INTERVENTIONS: We solicited employees to (1) identify pain points and develop solutions and (2) crowd vote to indicate which ideas they want to see implemented. RESULTS: 177 employees submitted 225 ideas, and 928 cast a vote. The 40 participants who submitted top-voted ideas were invited to develop a detailed implementation plan; of those, 27 submitted one. Four ideas emerged as winners. CONCLUSIONS: Formulating a clear call for ideas, securing leadership buy-in and generating excitement about the process were essential to our efforts. Challenges associated with opening the innovation process involved managing a large volume of participants and submissions, and providing on-the-go training to nurses and staff who were not used to being asked to participate in organisational problem solving.

Engaging frontline employees using innovation contests: Lessons from Massachusetts General Hospital.

In this article, we describe how innovation contests-a vehicle to crowdsource ideas and problem-solving efforts-propelled frontline employees to exert discretionary efforts in organizational problem-solving at Massachusetts General Hospital. As designers and administrators of four innovation contests in three disease centers, we share firsthand knowledge of how the contests enabled clinicians and administrative staff, whose primary job is delivering high-quality patient care, to become involved in ideation, selection, and implementation of their own ideas. We describe the processes that we designed and implemented, ideas that these processes generated, and findings from interviewing employees about their experiences afterwards. Our findings suggest that the benefits of implementing innovation contests were multifaceted. To employees, the contests provided a platform to voice suggestions and participate in any aspect of the innovation process that they found interesting. To managers, the contests revealed real, empirical issues affecting operation and patient care based on frontline employees' knowledge. To the organization as a whole, the contests promoted collaborative problem-solving among likeminded, innovative employees.

Realignment treatment for medial tibiofemoral osteoarthritis: randomised trial.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this 30-week randomised crossover trial was to determine whether a multi-modal realignment treatmentwould be successful in relieving pain and improving function among persons with medial tibiofemoral osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The authors conducted a double-blind randomised crossover trial of a multi-modal realignment treatment for medial tibiofemoral OA. Trial participants met American College of Rheumatology criteria for OA, with knee pain, aching or stiffness on most days of the past month and radiographic evidence of a definite osteophyte with predominant medial tibiofemoral OA. The authors tested two different treatments: (A) control treatment consisting of a neutral knee brace (no valgus angulation), flat unsupportive foot orthoses and shoes with a flexible mid-sole; and (B) active treatment consisting of a valgus knee brace, customised neutral foot orthoses and shoes designed for motion control. For each subject, the trial lasted 30 weeks, including 12 weeks each of active treatment and control treatment separated by a 6-week washout period. The primary outcome of the linear regression model was change in knee pain and function, as assessed by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: 80 participants with medial tibiofemoral OA were randomised. Their mean age was 62 years, their mean body mass index was 34 kg/m(2) and their mean WOMAC Pain score was 9.2 (0-20 scale). There was no evidence of a carryover effect. The regression model demonstrated that the mean difference in pain between the active treatment and the control treatment was -1.82 units (95% CI -3.05 to -0.60; p=0.004) on the WOMAC Pain scale, indicating a small but statistically significant decrease in pain with the multi-modal active treatment. For WOMAC Function, the realignment intervention had a non-significant effect on function, with a -2.90 unit decrease (95% CI -6.60 to 0.79) compared with the control condition (p=0.12). CONCLUSION: Multi-modal realignment treatment decreases pain in persons with medial tibiofemoral OA.

Knee alignment does not predict incident osteoarthritis: the Framingham osteoarthritis study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship of knee malalignment to the occurrence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) among subjects without radiographic OA at baseline to determine whether malalignment is a risk factor for incident disease or simply a marker of increasing disease severity. METHODS: We selected 110 incident tibiofemoral (TF) OA case knees (76 subjects) and 356 random control knees (178 subjects) from among participants in the Framingham Osteoarthritis Study. Case knees did not have OA at baseline (1992-1994 examination) but had developed OA (Kellgren/Lawrence grade>or=2) at followup (2002-2005 examination) (mean of 8.75 years between examinations). Control knees did not have OA at baseline. Standardized digital radiographs of the fully extended knee with weight-bearing were read using a standard protocol and eFilm viewing software. We measured the anatomic axis, the condylar angle, the tibial plateau angle, and the condylar tibial plateau angle. The interobserver intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) ranged from 0.93 to 0.96 and the intraobserver ICC from 0.94 to 0.97. In a knee-specific analysis, we examined the relationship of each alignment measurement to the risk of TF OA using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). We used the same approach to assess the association between each alignment measurement and the risk of medial TF OA. RESULTS: Subjects in the case population were older and had a higher BMI than the controls. The alignment values were normally distributed and were not different between the cases and the controls. After adjustment for age, sex and BMI, there was no significant increase in incident OA in the highest quartile compared with the lowest quartile category for any of the alignment measures (P for trend for anatomic axis and condylar tibial plateau angle was 0.83 and 0.80, respectively). Similar results were also observed for medial compartment OA. CONCLUSION: We found that baseline knee alignment is not associated with either incident radiographic TF OA or medial TF OA. These results suggest that malalignment is not a risk factor for OA, but rather is a marker of disease severity and/or its progression.