RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Healthcare teams often consist of geographically dispersed members. Virtual worlds can support immersive, high-quality, multimedia interaction between remote individuals; this study investigated use of virtual worlds to support remote healthcare quality improvement team meetings. METHODS: Twenty individuals (12 female, aged 25-67 [M = 42.3, SD = 11.8]) from 6 healthcare quality improvement teams conducted collaborative tasks in virtual world or face-to-face settings. Quality of collaborative task performances were measured and questionnaires and interviews were used to record participants' experiences of conducting the tasks and using the virtual world software. RESULTS: Quality of collaborative task outcomes was high in both face-to-face and virtual world settings. Participant interviews elicited advantages for using virtual worlds in healthcare settings, including the ability of the virtual environment to support tools that cannot be represented in equivalent face-to-face meetings, and the potential for virtual world settings to cause improvements in group-dynamics. Reported disadvantages for future virtual world use in healthcare included the difficulty that people with weaker computer skills may experience with using the software. Participants tended to feel absorbed in the collaborative task they conducted within the virtual world, but did not experience the virtual environment as being 'real'. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual worlds can provide an effective platform for collaborative meetings in healthcare quality improvement, but provision of support to those with weaker computer skills should be ensured, as should the technical reliability of the virtual world being used. Future research could investigate use of virtual worlds in other healthcare settings.
Assuntos
Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente , Interface Usuário-Computador , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Processos Grupais , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Comportamento Social , Software , Inquéritos e Questionários , Análise e Desempenho de TarefasRESUMO
Previously, we showed that 3% (31/1032)of asymptomatic healthcare workers (HCWs) from a large teaching hospital in Cambridge, UK, tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in April 2020. About 15% (26/169) HCWs with symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Rivett et al., 2020). Here, we show that the proportion of both asymptomatic and symptomatic HCWs testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 rapidly declined to near-zero between 25th April and 24th May 2020, corresponding to a decline in patient admissions with COVID-19 during the ongoing UK 'lockdown'. These data demonstrate how infection prevention and control measures including staff testing may help prevent hospitals from becoming independent 'hubs' of SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and illustrate how, with appropriate precautions, organizations in other sectors may be able to resume on-site work safely.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Laboratório Clínico/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Pessoal de Saúde , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Adulto , Doenças Assintomáticas , Betacoronavirus/genética , Betacoronavirus/isolamento & purificação , COVID-19 , Teste para COVID-19 , Infecções Comunitárias Adquiridas/transmissão , Busca de Comunicante , Infecções por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Inglaterra/epidemiologia , Características da Família , Feminino , Unidades Hospitalares , Hospitais de Ensino/organização & administração , Hospitais de Ensino/estatística & dados numéricos , Hospitais Universitários/organização & administração , Hospitais Universitários/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Controle de Infecções , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/organização & administração , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nasofaringe/virologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Pandemias/prevenção & controle , Admissão do Paciente/estatística & dados numéricos , Pneumonia Viral/diagnóstico , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Pneumonia Viral/prevenção & controle , Prevalência , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase em Tempo Real , SARS-CoV-2 , Avaliação de SintomasRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although widely recommended as an effective approach to quality improvement (QI), the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle method can be challenging to use, and low fidelity of published accounts of the method has been reported. There is little evidence on the fidelity of PDSA cycles used by front-line teams, nor how to support and improve the method's use. Data collected from 39 front-line improvement teams provided an opportunity to retrospectively investigate PDSA cycle use and how strategies were modified to help improve this over time. METHODS: The fidelity of 421 PDSA cycles was reviewed using a predefined framework and statistical analysis examined whether fidelity changed over three annual rounds of projects. The experiences of project teams and QI support staff were investigated through document analysis and interviews. RESULTS: Although modest, statistically significant improvements in PDSA fidelity occurred; however, overall fidelity remained low. Challenges to achieving greater fidelity reflected problems with understanding the PDSA methodology, intention to use and application in practice. These problems were exacerbated by assumptions made in the original QI training and support strategies: that PDSA was easy to understand; that teams would be motivated and willing to use PDSA; and that PDSA is easy to apply. QI strategies that evolved to overcome these challenges included project selection process, redesign of training, increased hands-on support and investment in training QI support staff. CONCLUSION: This study identifies support strategies that may help improve PDSA cycle fidelity. It provides an approach to assess minimum standards of fidelity which can be replicated elsewhere. The findings suggest achieving high PDSA fidelity requires a gradual and negotiated process to explore different perspectives and encourage new ways of working.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Melhoria de Qualidade/organização & administração , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde/organização & administração , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/organização & administração , Humanos , Inovação Organizacional , Ensaios Clínicos Pragmáticos como Assunto , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles provide a structure for iterative testing of changes to improve quality of systems. The method is widely accepted in healthcare improvement; however there is little overarching evaluation of how the method is applied. This paper proposes a theoretical framework for assessing the quality of application of PDSA cycles and explores the consistency with which the method has been applied in peer-reviewed literature against this framework. METHODS: NHS Evidence and Cochrane databases were searched by three independent reviewers. Empirical studies were included that reported application of the PDSA method in healthcare. Application of PDSA cycles was assessed against key features of the method, including documentation characteristics, use of iterative cycles, prediction-based testing of change, initial small-scale testing and use of data over time. RESULTS: 73 of 409 individual articles identified met the inclusion criteria. Of the 73 articles, 47 documented PDSA cycles in sufficient detail for full analysis against the whole framework. Many of these studies reported application of the PDSA method that failed to accord with primary features of the method. Less than 20% (14/73) fully documented the application of a sequence of iterative cycles. Furthermore, a lack of adherence to the notion of small-scale change is apparent and only 15% (7/47) reported the use of quantitative data at monthly or more frequent data intervals to inform progression of cycles. DISCUSSION: To progress the development of the science of improvement, a greater understanding of the use of improvement methods, including PDSA, is essential to draw reliable conclusions about their effectiveness. This would be supported by the development of systematic and rigorous standards for the application and reporting of PDSAs.
Assuntos
Melhoria de Qualidade , Humanos , Inovação Organizacional , Melhoria de Qualidade/organização & administração , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/organização & administraçãoRESUMO
The implementation of evidence-based treatments to deliver high-quality care is essential to meet the healthcare demands of aging populations. However, the sustainable application of recommended practice is difficult to achieve and variable outcomes well recognised. The NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement Sustainability Model (SM) was designed to help healthcare teams recognise determinants of sustainability and take action to embed new practice in routine care. This article describes a formative evaluation of the application of the SM by the National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for Northwest London (CLAHRC NWL). Data from project teams' responses to the SM and formal reviews was used to assess acceptability of the SM and the extent to which it prompted teams to take action. Projects were classified as 'engaged,' 'partially engaged' and 'non-engaged.' Quarterly survey feedback data was used to explore reasons for variation in engagement. Score patterns were compared against formal review data and a 'diversity of opinion' measure was derived to assess response variance over time. Of the 19 teams, six were categorized as 'engaged,' six 'partially engaged,' and seven as 'non-engaged.' Twelve teams found the model acceptable to some extent. Diversity of opinion reduced over time. A minority of teams used the SM consistently to take action to promote sustainability but for the majority SM use was sporadic. Feedback from some team members indicates difficulty in understanding and applying the model and negative views regarding its usefulness. The SM is an important attempt to enable teams to systematically consider determinants of sustainability, provide timely data to assess progress, and prompt action to create conditions for sustained practice. Tools such as these need to be tested in healthcare settings to assess strengths and weaknesses and findings disseminated to aid development. This study indicates the SM provides a potentially useful approach to measuring teams' views on the likelihood of sustainability and prompting action. Securing engagement of teams with the SM was challenging and redesign of elements may need to be considered. Capacity building and facilitation appears necessary for teams to effectively deploy the SM.