Learning together for better health using an evidence-based Learning Health System framework: a case study in stroke.

BACKGROUND: In the context of expanding digital health tools, the health system is ready for Learning Health System (LHS) models. These models, with proper governance and stakeholder engagement, enable the integration of digital infrastructure to provide feedback to all relevant parties including clinicians and consumers on performance against best practice standards, as well as fostering innovation and aligning healthcare with patient needs. The LHS literature primarily includes opinion or consensus-based frameworks and lacks validation or evidence of benefit. Our aim was to outline a rigorously codesigned, evidence-based LHS framework and present a national case study of an LHS-aligned national stroke program that has delivered clinical benefit. MAIN TEXT: Current core components of a LHS involve capturing evidence from communities and stakeholders (quadrant 1), integrating evidence from research findings (quadrant 2), leveraging evidence from data and practice (quadrant 3), and generating evidence from implementation (quadrant 4) for iterative system-level improvement. The Australian Stroke program was selected as the case study as it provides an exemplar of how an iterative LHS works in practice at a national level encompassing and integrating evidence from all four LHS quadrants. Using this case study, we demonstrate how to apply evidence-based processes to healthcare improvement and embed real-world research for optimising healthcare improvement. We emphasize the transition from research as an endpoint, to research as an enabler and a solution for impact in healthcare improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The Australian Stroke program has nationally improved stroke care since 2007, showcasing the value of integrated LHS-aligned approaches for tangible impact on outcomes. This LHS case study is a practical example for other health conditions and settings to follow suit.

The Role of Human-Centered Design in Healthcare Innovation: a Digital Health Equity Case Study.

Healthcare delivery has become more complicated, particularly with the addition of digital tools and advanced technologies that can further exacerbate existing disparities. New approaches to solve complex, multi-faceted problems are needed. Human-centered design (HCD), also known as design thinking, is an innovative set of methods to develop solutions to these types of issues using collaborative, team-based, and empathetic approaches focused on end user experiences. Originally advanced in technology sectors, HCD has garnered growing attention in quality improvement, healthcare redesign, and public health and medical education. During the COVID-19 pandemic, our healthcare organization recognized notable differences in utilization of virtual (video-based) services among specific patient populations. In response, we mobilized, and using HCD, we collectively brainstormed ideas, rapidly developed prototypes, and iteratively adapted solutions to work toward addressing this digital divide and clinic and systems-level struggles with improving and maintaining digital health access. HCD approaches create a cohesive team-based structure that permits the dismantling of organizational hierarchies and departmental silos. Here we share lessons learned on implementing HCD into clinical care settings and how HCD can result in the development of site-specific, patient-centered innovations to address access disparities and to improve digital health equity.

Tools and frameworks for evaluating the implementation of learning health systems: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Despite increased interest in learning health systems (LHS), a paucity of guidance and tools for evaluating LHS implementation exists. To address this, we aim to undertake a scoping review on existing tools and evaluation of exemplars of LHS implementation. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed studies within Scopus, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE in-process that described (1) the evaluation of the implementation of an operating LHS or (2) the development of a framework or tool to facilitate this evaluation. Anima, basic research, abstracts, non-English language articles, and publications before 2018 were excluded. All study designs were considered. FINDINGS: From 1300 studies initially identified, 4 were eligible, revealing three tools with nine implementation evaluation examples. The identified tools shared constructs which were evaluated, including: Stakeholders, Data, Research Evidence, Implementation, and Sociotechnical Infrastructure. However, there was divergence in evaluation methodology. Tools ranged from a five-point numerical rating system for process maturity with a radar chart called the Network Maturity Grid (NMG); the Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) LHS Logic Model, which provides a broad list of constructs and sample measures relevant to LHS operations; and finally LADDERS, a simple tool or form-based template designed for consistent evaluation over time. The NMG tool was the most mature in terms of adaptation and adoption. Notably, two (NMG and the KPWA LHS Logic Model) out of three tools conceptualized the LHS as a suite of processes and devised tools were processes that linked these constructs. IMPLICATIONS FOR TOOLKIT DEVELOPMENT: The evaluation of LHS implementation remains an under explored area of investigation, as this scoping review found only three tools for LHS implementation evaluation. Our findings indicate a need for further empirical research in this area and suggest early consensus in constructs that need to be considered during evaluation.

Implementation frameworks, strategies and outcomes in optimizing central venous access device practice in paediatrics: A scoping review.

Paediatric patients with complex or acute conditions may require a central venous access device, however, almost one-third of these devices have associated complications (e.g. infections). Implementation of evidence-based practices regarding central venous access devices can reduce and potentially prevent complications. AIMS: This scoping review aimed to explore recent interventional research in CVAD management through an implementation lens. DESIGN: This scoping review used the Arksey and O'Malley framework. Studies were included if they were written in English, published in 2012 to July 2023, involved children and were relevant to the study aims. Risk of bias was appraised by the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken in EMBASE, CINAHL (Ebsco), PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library (CENTRAL). RESULTS: Of the 1769 studies identified in a systematic search, 46 studies were included. Studies mostly focused on health professionals and central venous access device maintenance and had quantitative pre-post study designs. Adherence to implementation frameworks was lacking, with many studies employing quality improvement approaches. Implementation strategies were typically multipronged, using health-professional education, bundles and working groups. Bundle compliance and reductions in central line-associated bloodstream infections were the most featured outcomes, with most studies primarily focusing on effectiveness outcomes. CONCLUSION: Translation of evidence-based practices to the clinical setting is difficult and current adoption of implementation frameworks (apart from 'quality improvement') is limited. Implementation strategies are diverse and dependent on the local context, and study outcomes typically focus on the effectiveness of the physical intervention, rather than measuring the implementation effort itself. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENTS: Future intervention research requires a more uniform and deliberate application of implementation frameworks and strategies. IMPACT: Greater exploration of relationships between frameworks and strategies and implementation and service outcomes is required to increase understanding of their role in maximizing resources to improve health care. Adhered to best reporting guidelines as per PRISMA-ScR (Tricco et al., 2018). PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Assessing current handover practices in surgery: A survey of non-consultant hospital doctors in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Handovers of care are potentially hazardous moments in the patient journey and can lead to harm if conducted poorly. Through a national survey of surgical doctors in Ireland, this paper assesses contemporary surgical handover practices and evaluates barriers and facilitators of effective handover. METHODS: After ethical approval and pre-testing with a representative sample, a cross-sectional, online survey was distributed to non-consultant hospital doctors (NCHDs) working in the Republic of Ireland. A mixed-methods approach was used, combining data using triangulation design. MAIN FINDINGS: A total of 201 responses were received (18.5%). Most participants were senior house officers or senior registrars (49.7% and 37.3%). Most people (85.1%) reported that information received during handover was missing or incorrect at least some of the time. One-third of respondents reported that a near-miss had occurred as a result of handover within the past three months, and handover-related errors resulted in minor (16.9%), moderate (4.9%), or major (1.5%) harm. Only 11.4% had received any formal training. Reported barriers to handover included negative attitudes, a lack of institutional support, and competing clinical activities. Facilitators included process standardisation, improved access to resources, and staff engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical NCHDs working in Irish hospitals reported poor compliance with international best practice for handover and identified potential harms. Process standardisation, appropriate staff training, and the provision of necessary handover-related resources is required at a national level to address this significant patient safety concern.

Chinese critical care certified course in intensive care unit: a nationwide-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: A training program for intensive care unit (ICU) physicians entitled "Chinese Critical Care Certified Course" (5 C) started in China in 2009, intending to improve the quality of intensive care provision. This study aimed to explore the associations between the 5 C certification of physicians and the quality of intensive care provision in China. METHODS: This nationwide analysis collected data regarding 5 C-certified physicians between 2009 and 2019. Fifteen ICU quality control indicators (three structural, four procedural, and eight outcome-based) were collected from the Chinese National Report on the Services, Quality, and Safety in Medical Care System. Provinces were stratified into three groups based on the cumulative number of 5 C certified physicians per million population. RESULTS: A total of 20,985 (80.41%) physicians from 3,425 public hospitals in 30 Chinese provinces were 5 C certified. The deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis rate in the high 5 C physician-number provinces was significantly higher than in the intermediate 5 C physician-number provinces (67.6% vs. 55.1%, p = 0.043), while ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) rate in the low 5 C physician-number provinces was significantly higher than in the high 5 C physician-number provinces (14.9% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: The higher number of 5 C-certified physicians per million population seemed to be associated with higher DVT prophylaxis rates and lower VAP rates in China, suggesting that the 5 C program might have a beneficial impact on the quality of intensive care provision.

Implementation frameworks, strategies and outcomes used in peripheral intravenous catheter studies: A systematic review.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to critically evaluate implementation frameworks, strategies and/or outcomes used to optimise peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) care and/or promote guideline adherence. BACKGROUND: Although a considerable volume of research has investigated the effectiveness of PIVC interventions and treatments to promote performance and prevent harm, how to best implement this evidence into dynamic clinical settings and populations is not well understood. Implementation science is central to translating evidence-based knowledge to the bedside; however, there is a gap in identifying the best implementation framework, strategies and/or outcomes to optimise PIVC care and/or guideline adherence. DESIGN: A systematic review. METHOD: The review was conducted using innovative automation tools. Five databases and clinical trial registries were searched on 14 October 2021. Qualitative and quantitative PIVC intervention studies reporting implementation strategies were included in the review. Data were extracted independently by experienced researchers in pairs. The Mixed Method Appraisal tool was used to assess the quality of individual studies. Narrative synthesis was used to present the findings. The systematic review was reported following the PRISMA checklist. RESULTS: Of 2189 references identified, 27 studies were included in the review. Implementation frameworks were used in 30% (n = 8) of studies, with most used during the preparation (n = 7, 26%) and delivery phase (n = 7, 26%) and then evaluation phase (n = 4, 15%). Multifaceted strategies were commonly adopted (n = 24, 89%) to promote PIVC care or study interventions which were clinician (n = 25, 93%) and patient-targeted (n = 15, 56%). The most commonly reported implementation outcomes were fidelity (n = 13, 48%) and adoption (n = 6, 22%). Most studies were scored as low quality (n = 18, 67%). CONCLUSION: We call for researchers and clinicians to work together and use implementation science frameworks to guide study design, implementation and evaluation in future PIVC studies, to improve evidence translation and thereby improve patient outcomes.

Co-designing health services for people living with HIV who have multimorbidity: a feasibility study.

This study explored the feasibility of using an experience-based co-design service improvement methodology to develop a new approach to managing multimorbidity in people living with HIV. Patients with HIV and multimorbidity and staff were recruited from five hospital departments and general practice. Staff and patient experiences were gathered through semi-structured interviews, filmed patient interviews, non-participant observation and patient diaries. A composite film developed from interviews illustrated the touchpoints in the patient journey, and priorities for service improvement were identified by staff and patients in focus groups. Twenty-two people living with HIV and 14 staff took part. Four patients completed a diary and 10 a filmed interview. Analysis identified eight touchpoints, and group work pinpointed three improvement priorities: medical records and information sharing; appointment management; and care co-ordination and streamlining. This study demonstrates that experience-based co-design is feasible in the context of HIV and can inform healthcare improvement for people with multimorbidity.

Development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based paediatric early warning system improvement programme: the PUMA mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric mortality rates in the United Kingdom are amongst the highest in Europe. Clinically missed deterioration is a contributory factor. Evidence to support any single intervention to address this problem is limited, but a cumulative body of research highlights the need for a systems approach. METHODS: An evidence-based, theoretically informed, paediatric early warning system improvement programme (PUMA Programme) was developed and implemented in two general hospitals (no onsite Paediatric Intensive Care Unit) and two tertiary hospitals (with onsite Paediatric Intensive Care Unit) in the United Kingdom. Designed to harness local expertise to implement contextually appropriate improvement initiatives, the PUMA Programme includes a propositional model of a paediatric early warning system, system assessment tools, guidance to support improvement initiatives and structured facilitation and support. Each hospital was evaluated using interrupted time series and qualitative case studies. The primary quantitative outcome was a composite metric (adverse events), representing the number of children monthly that experienced one of the following: mortality, cardiac arrest, respiratory arrest, unplanned admission to Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, or unplanned admission to Higher Dependency Unit. System changes were assessed qualitatively through observations of clinical practice and interviews with staff and parents. A qualitative evaluation of implementation processes was undertaken. RESULTS: All sites assessed their paediatric early warning systems and identified areas for improvement. All made contextually appropriate system changes, despite implementation challenges. There was a decline in the adverse event rate trend in three sites; in one site where system wide changes were organisationally supported, the decline was significant (ß = -0.09 (95% CI: - 0.15, - 0.05); p = < 0.001). Changes in trends coincided with implementation of site-specific changes. CONCLUSIONS: System level change to improve paediatric early warning systems can bring about positive impacts on clinical outcomes, but in paediatric practice, where the patient population is smaller and clinical outcomes event rates are low, alternative outcome measures are required to support research and quality improvement beyond large specialist centres, and methodological work on rare events is indicated. With investment in the development of alternative outcome measures and methodologies, programmes like PUMA could improve mortality and morbidity in paediatrics and other patient populations.

The feasibility and acceptability of implementing video reflexive ethnography (VRE) as an improvement tool in acute maternity services.

BACKGROUND: Video-reflexive ethnography (VRE) has been argued to be an alternative approach to collaborative learning in healthcare teams, more able to capture the complexities of the healthcare environment than simulation. This study aims to explore the feasibility and acceptability of employing VRE as an improvement tool in acute maternity services. METHOD: Focused ethnography and semi-structured interviews (n = 17) explored the feasibility of employing VRE from the perspective of the researcher-facilitator, and that of the healthcare staff participants. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to generate key themes. RESULTS: We identified four themes related to feasibility of employing VRE as an improvement approach: laying the groundwork; challenges of capturing in-situ video footage; effective facilitation of reflexive feedback; and, power to change. Of note was the central role of the facilitator in building and maintaining staff trust in the process, particularly in being able to guide collaborative, non-punitive discussion during reflexive feedback sessions. Interestingly, when considering implementation of change, structural hierarchies were evident with more senior staff better able to develop and effect ideas. Two themes related to acceptability of VRE among healthcare staff were identified: staff response to the role of VRE in improvement; and the power of a different perspective. Staff were overwhelmingly positive about their experience of VRE, particularly appreciating the time, space and autonomy it afforded them to navigate and articulate ideas for change and improvement. CONCLUSION: VRE is both feasible and acceptable as an improvement tool with acute, multi-disciplinary maternity staff teams. It is an important healthcare improvement tool that could prompt the development and maintenance of team resilience factors in the face of increasing stress and burn-out of healthcare staff in maternity services.

Improving care for immigrant women before, during, and after childbirth - what can we learn from regional interventions within a national program in Sweden?

BACKGROUND: Migration has increased the number of immigrant women in western countries, which has led to a need to adapt sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care to a larger variety of experiences. Examples of problems are poor access/utilization of SRH services among migrants and a comparatively higher rate of mortality and morbidity in relation to pregnancy, especially among those from low- and middle-income settings. Attempts to improve SHR care must consider the complexity of both the problem and the system. A national program to improve women's health in Sweden provided opportunities to study interventions aimed at immigrant women, using a complexity theory lens. The purpose was to explore the characteristics and complexity of regional interventions aiming to improve care and health of immigrant women before, during and after childbirth, and provide knowledge on how regional healthcare actors perceive and address problems in these areas. METHODS: This archival research study is based on qualitative data from detailed yearly reports of all regional program interventions (n = 21 regions) performed between January 2017 and January 2019. The archival data consists of the regional actors' answers to an extensive questionnaire-like template, where the same questions were to be filled in for each reported intervention. Data analyses were performed in several steps, combining classic and directive content analysis. RESULTS: Six problem categories were addressed by 54 regional interventions, 26 directed at immigrant women and their families, 11 at healthcare staff, and 17 at the organizational system. The simple level interventions (n = 23) were more unilateral and contained information campaigns, information material and translation, education, mapping e.g., of genital mutilation, and providing staff and/or financial resources. The complicated interventions (n = 10) concerned increasing communication diversity e.g., by adding iPads and out-reach visits. The complex interventions (n = 21), e.g., health schools, integration of care, contained development, adaptions, and flexibility with regards to the immigrant women's situation, and more interaction among a diversity of actors, also from the wider welfare system. CONCLUSIONS: It is important that complex problems, such as ensuring equal care and health among a diverse population, are addressed with a mix of simple, complicated, and complex interventions. To enhance intended change, we suggest that pre-requisites e.g., communication channels and knowledge on behalf of immigrant women and staff, are ensured before the launch of complex interventions. Alternatively, that simple level interventions are embedded in complex interventions.

Ethnographic research as an evolving method for supporting healthcare improvement skills: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between ethnography and healthcare improvement has been the subject of methodological concern. We conducted a scoping review of ethnographic literature on healthcare improvement topics, with two aims: (1) to describe current ethnographic methods and practices in healthcare improvement research and (2) to consider how these may affect habit and skill formation in the service of healthcare improvement. METHODS: We used a scoping review methodology drawing on Arksey and O'Malley's methods and more recent guidance. We systematically searched electronic databases including Medline, PsychINFO, EMBASE and CINAHL for papers published between April 2013 - April 2018, with an update in September 2019. Information about study aims, methodology and recommendations for improvement were extracted. We used a theoretical framework outlining the habits and skills required for healthcare improvement to consider how ethnographic research may foster improvement skills. RESULTS: We included 283 studies covering a wide range of healthcare topics and methods. Ethnography was commonly used for healthcare improvement research about vulnerable populations, e.g. elderly, psychiatry. Focussed ethnography was a prominent method, using a rapid feedback loop into improvement through focus and insider status. Ethnographic approaches such as the use of theory and focus on every day practices can foster improvement skills and habits such as creativity, learning and systems thinking. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified that a variety of ethnographic approaches can be relevant to improvement. The skills and habits we identified may help ethnographers reflect on their approaches in planning healthcare improvement studies and guide peer-review in this field. An important area of future research will be to understand how ethnographic findings are received by decision-makers.

Made to Measure: The Ethics of Routine Measurement for Healthcare Improvement.

This paper analyses the ethics of routine measurement for healthcare improvement. Routine measurement is an increasingly central part of healthcare system design and is taken to be necessary for successful healthcare improvement efforts. It is widely recognised that the effectiveness of routine measurement in bringing about improvement is limited-it often produces only modest effects or fails to generate anticipated improvements at all. We seek to show that these concerns do not exhaust the ethics of routine measurement. Even if routine measurement does lead to healthcare improvements, it has associated ethical costs which are not necessarily justified by its benefits. We argue that the practice of routine measurement changes the function of the healthcare system, resulting in an unintended and ethically significant transformation of the sector. It is difficult to determine whether such changes are justified or offset by the benefits of routine measurement because there may be no shared understanding of what is 'good' in healthcare by which to compare the benefits of routine measurement with the goods that are precluded by it. We counsel that the practice of routine measurement should proceed with caution and should be recognised to be an ethically significant choice, rather than an inevitability.

What does 'quality' add? Towards an ethics of healthcare improvement.

In this paper, we argue that there are important ethical questions about healthcare improvement which are underexplored. We start by drawing on two existing literatures: first, the prevailing, primarily governance-oriented, application of ethics to healthcare 'quality improvement' (QI), and second, the application of QI to healthcare ethics. We show that these are insufficient for ethical analysis of healthcare improvement. In pursuit of a broader agenda for an ethics of healthcare improvement, we note that QI and ethics can, in some respects, be treated as closely related concerns and not simply as externally related agendas. To support our argument, we explore the gap between 'quality' and 'ethics' discourses and ask about the possible differences between 'good quality healthcare' and 'good healthcare'. We suggest that the word 'quality' both adds to and subtracts from the idea of 'good healthcare', and in particular that the technicist inflection of quality discourses needs to be set in the context of broader conceptualisations of healthcare improvement. We introduce the distinction between quality as a measurable property and quality as an evaluative judgement, suggesting that a core, but neglected, question for an ethics of healthcare improvement is striking the balance between these two conceptions of quality.

Leaders' perspectives on learning health systems: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Integrated utilisation of digital health data has the power to transform healthcare to deliver more efficient and effective services, and the learning health system (LHS) is emerging as a model to achieve this. The LHS uses routine data from service delivery and patient care to generate knowledge to continuously improve healthcare. The aim of this project was to explore key features of a successful and sustainable LHS to inform implementation in an Academic Health Science Centre context. METHODS: We purposively identified and conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with leaders, experienced in supporting or developing data driven innovations in healthcare. A thematic analysis using NVivo was undertaken. RESULTS: Analysis of 26 interviews revealed five themes thought to be integral in an effective, sustainable LHS: (1) Systematic approaches and iterative, continuous learning with implementation into healthcare contributing to new best-practice care; (2) Broad stakeholder, clinician and academic engagement, with collective vision, leadership, governance and a culture of trust, transparency and co-design; (3) Skilled workforce, capability and capacity building; (4) Resources with sustained investment over time and; (5) Data access, systems and processes being integral to a sustainable LHS. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative study provides insights into the elements of a sustainable LHS across a range of leaders in data-driven healthcare improvement. Fundamentally, an LHS requires continuous learning with implementation of new evidence back into frontline care to improve outcomes. Structure, governance, trust, culture, vision and leadership were all seen as important along with a skilled workforce and sustained investment. Processes and systems to optimise access to quality data were also seen as vital in an effective, sustainable LHS. These findings will inform a co-designed framework for implementing a sustainable LHS within the Australian healthcare and Academic Health Science Centre context. It is anticipated that application of these findings will assist to embed and accelerate the use of routine health data to continuously generate new knowledge and ongoing improvement in healthcare delivery and health outcomes.

Quality Outcomes Database Spine Care Project 2012-2020: milestones achieved in a collaborative North American outcomes registry to advance value-based spine care and evolution to the American Spine Registry.

The Quality Outcomes Database (QOD), formerly known as the National Neurosurgery Quality Outcomes Database (N2QOD), was established by the NeuroPoint Alliance (NPA) in collaboration with relevant national stakeholders and experts. The overarching goal of this project was to develop a centralized, nationally coordinated effort to allow individual surgeons and practice groups to collect, measure, and analyze practice patterns and neurosurgical outcomes. Specific objectives of this registry program were as follows: "1) to establish risk-adjusted national benchmarks for both the safety and effectiveness of neurosurgical procedures, 2) to allow practice groups and hospitals to analyze their individual morbidity and clinical outcomes in real time, 3) to generate both quality and efficiency data to support claims made to public and private payers and objectively demonstrate the value of care to other stakeholders, 4) to demonstrate the comparative effectiveness of neurosurgical and spine procedures, 5) to develop sophisticated 'risk models' to determine which subpopulations of patients are most likely to benefit from specific surgical interventions, and 6) to facilitate essential multicenter trials and other cooperative clinical studies." The NPA has launched several neurosurgical specialty modules in the QOD program in the 7 years since its inception including lumbar spine, cervical spine, and spinal deformity and cerebrovascular and intracranial tumor. The QOD Spine modules, which are the primary subject of this paper, have evolved into the largest North American spine registries yet created and have resulted in unprecedented cooperative activities within our specialty and among affiliated spine care practitioners. Herein, the authors discuss the experience of QOD Spine programs to date, with a brief description of their inception, some of the key achievements and milestones, as well as the recent transition of the spine modules to the American Spine Registry (ASR), a collaboration between the American Association of Neurological Surgeons and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS).

Making change last? Exploring the value of sustainability approaches in healthcare: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Numerous models, tools and frameworks have been produced to improve the sustainability of evidence-based interventions. Due to the vast number available, choosing the most appropriate one is increasingly difficult for researchers and practitioners. To understand the value of such approaches, evidence warranting their use is needed. However, there is limited understanding of how sustainability approaches have been used and how they have impacted research or practice. This review aims to consolidate evidence on the application and impact of sustainability approaches in healthcare settings. METHODS: A systematic scoping review was designed to search for peer-reviewed publications detailing the use of sustainability approaches in practice. A 5-stage framework for scoping reviews directed the search strategy, and quality assessment was performed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. Searches were performed through electronic citation tracking and snowballing of references. Articles were obtained through Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar. Six outcome variables for sustainability were explored to ascertain impact of approaches. RESULTS: This review includes 68 articles demonstrating the application of sustainability approaches in practice. Results show an increase in the use of sustainability approaches in peer-reviewed studies. Approaches have been applied across a range of healthcare settings, including primary, secondary, tertiary and community healthcare. Approaches are used for five main purposes, namely analysis, evaluation, guidance, assessment and planning. Results outline benefits (e.g. improved conceptualisation of sustainability constructs and improved ability to interpret sustainability data) and challenges (e.g. issues with approach constructs and difficulty in application) associated with using a sustainability approach in practice. Few articles (14/68) reported the sustainability outcome variables explored; therefore, the impact of approaches on sustainability remains unclear. Additional sustainability outcome variables reported in retrieved articles are discussed. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides practitioners and researchers with a consolidated evidence base on sustainability approaches. Findings highlight the remaining gaps in the literature and emphasise the need for improved rigour and reporting of sustainability approaches in research studies. To guide future assessment and study of sustainability in healthcare settings an updated list of sustainability outcome variables is proposed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This review was registered on the PROSPERO database CRD 42016040081 in June 2016.

PARENTS 2 study: consensus report for parental engagement in the perinatal mortality review process.

OBJECTIVE: The PARENTS 1 study (Parents' Active Role and ENgagement in The review of their Stillbirth/perinatal death) found that parents would endorse the opportunity to give feedback into the perinatal mortality review (PNMR) process. In subsequent focus groups, healthcare professionals were positive about parental engagement, although they considered that there may be significant challenges. The objective of this study was to develop core principles and recommendations for parental engagement in PNMR in the UK. METHODS: A two-round Delphi technique was followed to reach consensus on core principles for parental engagement in the PNMR process; Round 1 included a national consensus workshop and Round 2 an online questionnaire. The consensus meeting was attended by a national panel of stakeholders (clinical and academic experts, parent advocates, managers and commissioners) in stillbirth and neonatal and bereavement care. To develop recommendations for parental engagement, participants discussed four key areas comprising: communication with parents, including receiving feedback; the format of the PNMR meeting; the parental engagement pathway; and challenging aspects of engaging with parents in reviews. Content analysis was conducted to generate recommendations from the meeting for a subsequent anonymous web-based survey. Attendees of the consensus workshop and members of the PARENTS 2 Project Advisory Board were asked to rank recommendations using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (not important) to 9 (critically important). It had been agreed a priori, in compliance with established Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, that 'consensus' would be achieved if over 70% of participants scored the principle as 'critical' (score of 7-9) and fewer than 15% scored the principle as 'not important' (score of 1-3). Principles for which consensus was achieved were included in the core recommendations. RESULTS: Of the 29 invited stakeholders, 22 participated in the consensus meeting and 25 (86% response rate) in the subsequent online questionnaire in June 2017. Consensus was agreed on 12 core principles. Of the 25 participants, 96% agreed that a face-to-face explanation of the PNMR process was of critical importance, 72% considered that parents should be offered the opportunity to nominate a suitable advocate, 92% believed that responses to parents' comments should be formally documented, 96% indicated that it was vital for action plans to be translated into lessons learnt and that this process should be monitored, and 100% of stakeholders voted that a plain-English summary should be produced for the parents following the meeting. There was good agreement on a further seven principles. CONCLUSIONS: Key national stakeholders were unanimously supportive of parental engagement in the PNMR process and agreed on core principles to make this process feasible, meaningful and robust. A 6-month pilot of parental engagement in the PNMR process (PARENTS 2 study) in two UK units took place after the consensus on core principles. In collaboration with the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, the findings will inform the national standardized PNMR tool. © 2018 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Age and Ageing to introduce a new category of paper: healthcare improvement science.

Age and Ageing is now inviting papers on healthcare improvement for older people. In this article we outline the nature and scope of healthcare improvement and reference improvement models and the tools and methods of improvement science. We emphasise the issues of sustainability, including scale and spread; evaluation - including associated ethical consideration and the involvement of patients and the public in healthcare improvement and associated research. Throughout we refer to resources the authors have found useful in their own work, and provide a bibliography of sources and web-links which will provide essential guidance and support for potential contributors to this new category of submission to Age and Ageing.

Making health care responsive to the needs of older people.

This commentary highlights the importance of health system responsiveness to older people living with complex health needs. Age-related changes and associated morbidity can present barriers to identifying an individual's health needs, expectations, values and preferences, and so sufficient time, skill and resource is required to inform the development of a tailored plan for each individual. A focus on responsiveness moves thinking beyond the responsibilities of the individual clinician in the single encounter, and allows us to identify elements of the wider system that may constrain how well the clinician is able to respond. Setting the goal of responsive health care requires us to assess the suitability of wider health system features and processes for meeting the diverse needs of individual people throughout their journey, and the extent to which the system can adapt dynamically as needs change. Standardised approaches to care prescribed across organisations (such as time-based targets or routinised approaches to inpatient nursing care) are likely to result in low responsiveness as individual complexity grows, disadvantaging patients with needs that do not fit the prescribed approach. Responsiveness is high when individual practitioners and clinical teams have the resources, decentralised authority, flexibility and autonomy to provide the care required. Building a more responsive health system requires a greater understanding of how these conditions can be achieved.