Suchergebnisse

Despite the growing knowledge base on evidence-based practices in social work and medicine, there is a large gap between what is known and what is consistently done. Implementation research is the study of methods to promote the uptake of research findings into routine practice. In this article, we describe the rationale for implementation research and outline the concepts and effectiveness of its practices. Despite a large number of systematic reviews of implementation interventions, many of the fundamental questions regarding what approaches should be used in which settings for which problems remain unanswered. We go on to argue that future implementation studies should assess the context of practice and key features of interventions to better inform service quality improvement efforts.

PROMOTING PARTNERSHIP FOR HEALTH This book forms part of a series entitled Promoting Partnership for Health publishedin association with the UK Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education (CAIPE). The series explores partnership for health from policy, practice and educational perspectives. Whilst strongly advocating the imperative driving collaboration in healthcare, it adopts a pragmatic approach. Far from accepting established ideas and approaches, the series alerts readers to the pitfalls and ways to avoid them. DESCRIPTION Interprofessional Teamwork for Health and Social Care is an invaluable guide for clinicians, academics, managers and policymakers who need to understand, implement and evaluate interprofessional teamwork. It will give them a fuller understanding of how teams function, of the issues relating to the evaluation of teamwork, and of approaches to creating and implementing interventions (e.g. team training, quality improvement initiatives) within health and social care settings. It will also raise awareness of the wide range of theories that can inform interprofessional teamwork. The book is divided into nine chapters. The first 'sets the scene' by outlining some common issues which underpin interprofessional teamwork, while the second discusses current teamwork developments around the globe. Chapter 3 explores a range of team concepts, and Chapter 4 offers a new framework for understanding interprofessional teamwork. The next three chapters discuss how a range of range of social science theories, interventions and evaluation approaches can be employed to advance this field. Chapter 8 presents a synthesis of research into teams the authors have undertaken in Canada, South Africa and the UK, while the final chapter draws together key threads and offers ideas for future of teamwork. The book also provides a

IntroductionDeveloping decision support tools using data from a health care organization, to support care within that organization, is a promising paradigm to improve care delivery and population health. Descriptive epidemiology may be a valuable supplement to stakeholder input towards selection of potential initiatives and to inform methodological decisions throughout tool development. We additionally propose that to properly characterize complex populations in large-scale descriptive studies, both simple statistical and machine learning techniques can be useful.
ObjectiveTo describe sociodemographic, clinical, and health care use characteristics of primary care clients served by the Alliance for Healthier Communities, which provides team-based primary health care through Community Health Centres (CHCs) across Ontario, Canada.
MethodsWe used electronic health record data from adult ongoing primary care clients served by CHCs in 2009-2019. We performed traditional table-based summaries for each characteristic; and applied three unsupervised learning techniques to explore patterns of common condition co-occurrence, care provider teams, and care frequency.
ResultsThere were 221,047 eligible clients. Sociodemographics: We described 13 characteristics, stratified by CHC type and client multimorbidity status. Clinical characteristics: Eleven-year prevalence of 24 investigated conditions ranged from 1% (Hepatitis C) to 63% (chronic musculoskeletal problem) with non-uniform risk across the care history; multimorbidity was common (81%) with variable co-occurrence patterns. Health care use characteristics: Most care was provided by physician and nursing providers, with heterogeneous combinations of other provider types. A subset of clients had many issues addressed within single-visits and there was within- and between-client variability in care frequency. In addition to substantive findings, we discuss methodological considerations for future decision support initiatives.
ConclusionsWe demonstrated the use of methods from statistics and machine learning, applied with an epidemiological lens, to provide an overview of a complex primary care population and lay a foundation for stakeholder engagement and decision support tool development.

This work was supported by the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) of Scotland grant CZH/4/773, the UK Medical Research Council and the University of Dundee work through the provision of a stipend for KL and from the Health Services Research Unit at the University of Aberdeen, which is core funded by the CSO of the Scottish Government Health Directories. We are grateful to all the participants who assisted in this study: F Althabe, A-W Chan, D Altman, D Bratton, E Brass, M Campbell, G Forbes, B Gaglio, R Glasgow, H Hobbelen, S Hopewell, J Krishnan, D Riddle, J Segal, D Steinfort, P Tugwell, SN Van der Veer, VA. Welch, C Witt. ; Peer reviewed ; Postprint

Abstract Background Internationally, emergency departments are struggling with crowding and its associated morbidity, mortality, and decreased patient and health-care worker satisfaction. The objective was to evaluate the addition of a MDRNSTAT (Physician (MD)-Nurse (RN) Supplementary Team At Triage) on emergency department patient flow and quality of care. Methods Pragmatic cluster randomized trial. From 131 weekday shifts (8:00–14:30) during a 26-week period, we randomized 65 days (3173 visits) to the intervention cluster with a MDRNSTAT presence, and 66 days (3163 visits) to the nurse-only triage control cluster. The primary outcome was emergency department length-of-stay (EDLOS) for patients managed and discharged only by the emergency department. Secondary outcomes included EDLOS for patients initially seen by the emergency department, and subsequently consulted and admitted, patients reaching government-mandated thresholds, time to initial physician assessment, left-without being seen rate, time to investigation, and measurement of harm. Results The intervention's median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted, high acuity patients was 4:05 [95 th% CI: 3:58 to 4:15] versus 4:29 [95 th% CI: 4:19–4:38] during comparator shifts. The intervention's median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted, low acuity patients was 1:55 [95 th% CI: 1:48 to 2:05] versus 2:08 [95 th% CI: 2:02–2:14]. The intervention's median physician initial assessment time was 0:55 [95 th% CI: 0:53 to 0:58] versus 1:21 [95 th% CI: 1:18 to 1:25]. The intervention's left-without-being-seen rate was 1.5% versus 2.2% for the control (p = 0.06). The MDRNSTAT subgroup analysis resulted in significant decreases in median EDLOS for discharged, non-consulted high (4:01 [95 th% CI: 3:43–4:16]) and low acuity patients (1:10 95 th% CI: 0:58–1:19]), as well as physician initial assessment time (0:25 [95 th% CI: 0:23–0:26]). No patients returned to the emergency department after being discharged by the MDRNSTAT at triage. Conclusions The intervention reduced delays and left-without-being-seen rate without increased return visits or jeopardizing urgent care of severely ill patients. Trial registration number NCT00991471 ClinicalTrials.gov

Objective To compare performance and factors predicting failure to reach Ontario and Australian government time targets between a Canadian (Sunnybrook Hospital) and an Australian (Austin Health) academic tertiary-level hospitals in 2012, and to assess for change of factors and performance in 2016 between the same hospitals. Methods This was a retrospective, observational study of patient administrative data in two calendar years. The main outcome measure was reaching Ontario and Australian ED time targets for admissions, high and low urgency discharges. Secondary outcomes were factors predicting failure to reach these targets. Results Between 2012 and 2016, Sunnybrook and Austin experienced increased patient volume of 10.2% and 19.2%, respectively. Bed capacity decreased at Sunnybrook (-10.8%) but increased at the Austin (+30.3%). For both years, Austin failed to achieve the Australian time target, but succeeded for all Ontario targets except for low urgency discharges. Sunnybrook failed all targets irrespective of year. The top factors for failing Ontario ED length-of-stay targets for both hospitals in 2012 and 2016 were bed request greater than 6 h, access block greater than 1 h, use of cross-sectional imaging, consultation and waiting for the emergency physician greater than 2 h. Conclusion Austin outperformed Sunnybrook for Ontario and Australian government time targets. Both hospitals failed the Australian targets. Factors predicting failure to achieve targets were different between hospitals, but were mainly clinical resources. Sunnybrook focussed on increasing human resources. Austin focussed on increasing human resources, observation unit and hospital beds. Intrinsic hospital characteristics and infrastructure influenced target success. ; Peer reviewed

BACKGROUND: A major barrier to accessing free government-provided antiretroviral treatment (ART) in South Africa is the shortage of suitably skilled health professionals. Current South African guidelines recommend that only doctors should prescribe ART, even though most primary care is provided by nurses. We have developed an effective method of educational outreach to primary care nurses in South Africa. Evidence is needed as to whether primary care nurses, with suitable training and managerial support, can initiate and continue to prescribe and monitor ART in the majority of ART-eligible adults.METHODS/DESIGN:This is a protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention based on and supporting nurse-led antiretroviral treatment (ART) for South African patients with HIV/AIDS, compared to current practice in which doctors are responsible for initiating ART and continuing prescribing. We will randomly allocate 31 primary care clinics in the Free State province to nurse-led or doctor-led ART. Two groups of patients aged 16 years and over will be included: a) 7400 registering with the programme with CD4 counts of [less than or equal to] 350 cells/mL (mainly to evaluate treatment initiation) and b) 4900 already receiving ART (to evaluate ongoing treatment and monitoring). The primary outcomes will be time to death (in the first group) and viral suppression (in the second group). Patients' survival, viral load and health status indicators will be measured at least 6-monthly for at least one year and up to 2 years, using an existing province-wide clinical database linked to the national death register.TRIAL REGISTRATION:Controlled Clinical Trials ISRCTN46836853

Abstract Background The evidence base for improving reproductive health continues to grow. However, concerns remain that the translation of this evidence into appropriate policies is partial and slow. Little is known about the factors affecting the use of evidence by policy makers and clinicians, particularly in developing countries. The objective of this study was to examine the factors that might affect the translation of randomised controlled trial (RCT) findings into policies and practice in developing countries. Methods The recent publication of an important RCT on the use of magnesium sulphate to treat pre-eclampsia provided an opportunity to explore how research findings might be translated into policy. A range of research methods, including a survey, group interview and observations with RCT collaborators and a survey of WHO drug information officers, regulatory officials and obstetricians in 12 countries, were undertaken to identify barriers and facilitators to knowledge translation. Results It proved difficult to obtain reliable data regarding the availability and use of commonly used drugs in many countries. The perceived barriers to implementing RCT findings regarding the use of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia include drug licensing and availability; inadequate and poorly implemented clinical guidelines; and lack of political support for policy change. However, there were significant regional and national differences in the importance of specific barriers. Conclusion The policy changes needed to ensure widespread availability and use of magnesium sulphate are variable and complex. Difficulties in obtaining information on availability and use are combined with the wide range of barriers across settings, including a lack of support from policy makers. This makes it difficult to envisage any single intervention strategy that might be used to promote the uptake of research findings on magnesium sulphate into policy across the study settings. The publication of important trials may therefore not have the impacts on health care that researchers hope for.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for improving reproductive health continues to grow. However, concerns remain that the translation of this evidence into appropriate policies is partial and slow. Little is known about the factors affecting the use of evidence by policy makers and clinicians, particularly in developing countries. The objective of this study was to examine the factors that might affect the translation of randomised controlled trial (RCT) findings into policies and practice in developing countries. METHODS: The recent publication of an important RCT on the use of magnesium sulphate to treat pre-eclampsia provided an opportunity to explore how research findings might be translated into policy. A range of research methods, including a survey, group interview and observations with RCT collaborators and a survey of WHO drug information officers, regulatory officials and obstetricians in 12 countries, were undertaken to identify barriers and facilitators to knowledge translation. RESULTS: It proved difficult to obtain reliable data regarding the availability and use of commonly used drugs in many countries. The perceived barriers to implementing RCT findings regarding the use of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia include drug licensing and availability; inadequate and poorly implemented clinical guidelines; and lack of political support for policy change. However, there were significant regional and national differences in the importance of specific barriers. CONCLUSION: The policy changes needed to ensure widespread availability and use of magnesium sulphate are variable and complex. Difficulties in obtaining information on availability and use are combined with the wide range of barriers across settings, including a lack of support from policy makers. This makes it difficult to envisage any single intervention strategy that might be used to promote the uptake of research findings on magnesium sulphate into policy across the study settings. The publication of important trials may therefore not have the impacts on health care that researchers hope for.

Background: The government of Malawi is committed to the broad rollout of antiretroviral treatment in Malawi in the public health sector; however one of the primary challenges has been the shortage of trained health care workers. The Practical Approach to Lung Health Plus HIV/AIDS in Malawi (PALM PLUS) package is an innovative guideline and training intervention that supports primary care middle-cadre health care workers to provide front-line integrated primary care. The purpose of this paper is to describe the lessons learned in implementing the PALM PLUS package. Methods: A clinical tool, based on algorithm- and symptom-based guidelines was adapted to the Malawian context. An accompanying training program based on educational outreach principles was developed and a cascade training approach was used for implementation of the PALM PLUS package in 30 health centres, targeting clinical officers, medical assistants, and nurses. Lessons learned were identified during program implementation through engagement with collaborating partners and program participants and review of program evaluation findings. Results: Key lessons learned for successful program implementation of the PALM PLUS package include the importance of building networks for peer-based support, ensuring adequate training capacity, making linkages with continuing professional development accreditation and providing modest in-service training budgets. The main limiting factors to implementation were turnover of staff and desire for financial training allowances. Conclusions: The PALM PLUS approach is a potential model for supporting mid-level health care workers to provide front-line integrated primary care in low and middle income countries, and may be useful for future task-shifting initiatives.

BACKGROUND: The last decade has seen growing interest in scaling up of innovations to strengthen healthcare systems. However, the lack of appropriate methods for determining their potential for scale-up is an unfortunate global handicap. Thus, we aimed to review tools proposed for assessing the scalability of innovations in health. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review following the COSMIN methodology. We included any empirical research which aimed to investigate the creation, validation or interpretability of a scalability assessment tool in health. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and ERIC from their inception to 20 March 2019. We also searched relevant websites, screened the reference lists of relevant reports and consulted experts in the field. Two reviewers independently selected and extracted eligible reports and assessed the methodological quality of tools. We summarized data using a narrative approach involving thematic syntheses and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We identified 31 reports describing 21 tools. Types of tools included criteria (47.6%), scales (33.3%) and checklists (19.0%). Most tools were published from 2010 onwards (90.5%), in open-access sources (85.7%) and funded by governmental or nongovernmental organizations (76.2%). All tools were in English; four were translated into French or Spanish (19.0%). Tool creation involved single (23.8%) or multiple (19.0%) types of stakeholders, or stakeholder involvement was not reported (57.1%). No studies reported involving patients or the public, or reported the sex of tool creators. Tools were created for use in high-income countries (28.6%), low- or middle-income countries (19.0%), or both (9.5%), or for transferring innovations from low- or middle-income countries to high-income countries (4.8%). Healthcare levels included public or population health (47.6%), primary healthcare (33.3%) and home care (4.8%). Most tools provided limited information on content validity (85.7%), and none reported ...

Background: There is a widely recognized need for more pragmatic trials that evaluate interventions in real-world settings to inform decision-making by patients, providers, and health system leaders. Increasing availability of electronic health records, centralized research ethics review, and novel trial designs, combined with support and resources from governments worldwide for patient-centered research, have created an unprecedented opportunity to advance the conduct of pragmatic trials, which can ultimately improve patient health and health system outcomes. Such trials raise ethical issues that have not yet been fully addressed, with existing literature concentrating on regulations in specific jurisdictions rather than arguments grounded in ethical principles. Proposed solutions (e.g. using different regulations in "learning healthcare systems") are speculative with no guarantee of improvement over existing oversight procedures. Most importantly, the literature does not reflect a broad vision of protecting the core liberty and welfare interests of research participants. Novel ethical guidance is required. We have assembled a team of ethicists, trialists, methodologists, social scientists, knowledge users, and community members with the goal of developing guidance for the ethical design and conduct of pragmatic trials. Methods: Our project will combine empirical and conceptual work and a consensus development process. Empirical work will: (1) identify a comprehensive list of ethical issues through interviews with a small group of key informants (e.g. trialists, ethicists, chairs of research ethics committees); (2) document current practices by reviewing a random sample of pragmatic trials and surveying authors; (3) elicit views of chairs of research ethics committees through surveys in Canada, UK, USA, France, and Australia; and (4) elicit views and experiences of community members and health system leaders through focus groups and surveys. Conceptual work will consist of an ethical analysis of identified ...