RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Health care services must deliver high-quality, evidence-based care that represents sound value. Disinvestment is the process of withdrawing resources from any existing health care practices that deliver low gain for their cost and reallocating these toward practices that are more effective, efficient, and cost-effective, thus benefiting patients and the community. PURPOSE: This is the first review to examine the responses of health care staff to disinvestment and investigate the factors that increase the likelihood of these staff accepting disinvestment or reallocation of resources from the health services they provide. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of five electronic databases using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) framework. A critical appraisal process of the quality of the included studies was performed by two authors. We undertook a thematic synthesis of the qualitative data to develop an overarching narrative. RESULTS: Twelve studies were identified for synthesis and all found that the disinvestment process was challenging and controversial for those health care staff involved. Negative staff reactions to disinvestment identified were anxiety, disempowerment, distrust, and feelings of being dismissed and disrespected. Engagement with disinvestment was observed when staff were invited to participate in a process they considered transparent and in the best interests of the community. PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS: Health care staff have a strong professional identity associated with autonomy in their decision making in the provision of health care services. Disinvestment from a service that health care staff can usually choose to provide threatens this identity. Engaging clinical champions to lead change, using rigorous patient outcome data, and transparent decision-making processes may assist health care staff to embrace a new identity as innovators and accept disinvestment in low-value health care.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Instalações de Saúde , HumanosRESUMO
PURPOSE: To examine whether the effects of psychosocial and vocational interventions delivered in the first 3 mo post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) are effective for improving work outcomes compared with other interventions. METHODS: A search was completed for English language publications up to March 2016 across 4 electronic databases and gray literature. Inclusion criteria were (1) psychosocial and/or vocational interventions; (2) adults 18 years or older with an AMI who were within the first 3 mo post-AMI; (3) randomized or clinically controlled trials; and (4) reporting of at least 1 return-to-work (RTW) outcome: including return to paid/unpaid employment, either full-time or part-time, to the previous job role or on modified duties. Studies were independently screened by 2 reviewers and graded using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias. A narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of the included studies was undertaken. RESULTS: Eighteen studies of varying quality were analyzed. Individually delivered psychosocial and vocational interventions may improve work rates at 3 mo (relative risk = 1.17; P = .05) when compared with usual care but there was no difference at 6 or 12 mo. People receiving group or individual psychological/vocational counselling returned to work 6.11 d sooner than those who received usual care (95% CI, -6.95 to -5.26; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although psychosocial and vocational interventions show promise in people within 3 mo of AMI, compelling evidence is still limited. There is a need for more detailed, high-quality studies with valid comparison groups and adequate follow-up.