Digital Additional Risk Minimization Measures: An Exploratory Study Using Qualitative Feedback from Healthcare Professionals and Patients Across Six Countries

Background. Medical and healthcare professionals report an important gap in their training and knowledge on concussion diagnosis and management. The Concussion Awareness Training Tool (CATT) for medical professionals provides evidenced-based training and resources, representing an important effort to fill this gap. The goal of the current article was to summarize and describe the general uptake of the 2018 relaunch of the CATT for medical professionals and to present results of a quality assurance/quality improvement (QA/QI) assessment including qualitative feedback from medical and healthcare professionals. Methodology. Tracking completions via certificates and Google Analytics were used to measure uptake over the first two years following the 2018 relaunch and promotion of CATT for medical professionals. Medical and healthcare professionals who had completed the CATT from the time of the relaunch on June 11, 2018, to July 31, 2019, were invited via e-mail to participate in the survey-based QA/QI assessment. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Results. Year 1 saw 8,072 pageviews for the CATT for medical professionals landing page, increasing to 9,382 in Year 2. Eighty-nine medical and healthcare professionals who had completed the CATT for medical professionals participated in the QA/QI assessment. Results showed that 85% of respondents reported learning new information about concussion; 73% reported changing the way they diagnose, treat, or manage concussion; and 71% reported recommending the CATT to colleagues. Qualitative data also indicated highly favourable opinions and experiences. Conclusions. The CATT for medical professionals has demonstrated promise as a tool to promote knowledge translation practice and help fill the gap in concussion training and knowledge reported by medical and healthcare professionals.

Download Full-text

Effectiveness Evaluation of Additional Risk Minimization Measures for Adolescent Use of Aripiprazole in the European Union: Results from a Post-Authorization Safety Study

Drug Safety ◽

10.1007/s40264-018-0662-2 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 41 (8) ◽

pp. 797-806 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Wally Landsberg ◽

Imad Al-Dakkak ◽

Antonia Coppin-Renz ◽

Uli Geis ◽

Timothy Peters-Strickland ◽

...

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Effectiveness Evaluation ◽

The European Union ◽

Risk Minimization ◽

Safety Study ◽

Additional Risk

Download Full-text

The nurses' working process: the view of professors from a public university

Acta Paulista de Enfermagem ◽

10.1590/s0103-21002008000300016 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 21 (3) ◽

pp. 481-486

Author(s):

Luiza Hiromi Tanaka ◽

Maria Madalena Januário Leite

Keyword(s):

Content Analysis ◽

Focus Group ◽

Exploratory Study ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Public University ◽

Healthcare Management ◽

Qualitative Approach ◽

Working Process ◽

Undergraduate Nursing ◽

Nursing Course

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to understand the working process of the nurse according to the perspective of professors of the Undergraduate Nursing Course at Universidade Federal de São Paulo. METHODS: Exploratory study with a qualitative approach, having 14 professors as its subjects; the focus group technique was chosen for data collection, and the material was analyzed according to the method of content analysis. RESULTS: The meaning of the nurses' working process comprised three categories: composition of the nurses' working process, differentials of the nurses' work when compared to other healthcare professionals and dichotomies of the nurses' working process in education. CONCLUSION: The meanings of this process were the group of the working processes: caring, managing, teaching and researching, whose working core is the process of caring. However, healthcare management was not evidenced by the focus group. The nurses' working process was considered complex and confusing.

Download Full-text

What Types of Networks Do Professionals Build, and How Are They Affected by the Results of Network Evaluation?

Frontiers in Public Health ◽

10.3389/fpubh.2021.758809 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 ◽

Author(s):

Junji Haruta ◽

Sho Tsugawa

Keyword(s):

Content Analysis ◽

Social Network ◽

Exploratory Study ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Clustering Coefficient ◽

Cognitive Responses ◽

Daily Work ◽

Acute Back Pain ◽

Person With Dementia ◽

The Impact

Background: We aimed to explore what kind of social networks characterizable as “consult/be consulted” are built among healthcare professionals in a community and the impact of providing the professionals with these findings.Methods: We adopted mixed methods exploratory study using social network analysis (SNA) and content analysis. SNA can visualize social network structures such as relationships between individuals. The healthcare professionals were asked about the key persons they consulted and were consulted by concerning these healthcare issues: (1) daily work; (2) a person with acute back pain; (3) a garbage-filled house reported by a neighbor; (4) a person with dementia; and (5) a study meeting. We identified the key roles depending on the issues using SNA. After analysis, the analytical findings were shared with the participants. To explore their cognitive responses, an open-ended questionnaire was delivered and a content analysis was implemented.Results: Of 54 healthcare professional participants, the data of 52 were available for analysis. The findings (in the respective order of the five topics above) were as follows: the number of nodes was 165, 95, 85, 82, and 68; clustering coefficient was 0.19, 0.03, 0.02, 0.11, and 0.23; assortativity was −0.043, −0.11, −0.23, −0.17, and −0.23; reciprocity was 0.35, 0.31, 0.39, 0.29, and 0.48. The top three centralities included nurses. Eighty-seven free comments were received, of which 39 were categorized as descriptive, 10 as analytical, and 38 as critical.Discussion: The structure of “consult/be consulted” networks differed by topic. SNA is available to detect the healthcare resources network and it may have helped them to reflect on their own networks.

Download Full-text

“Opening a Can of Worms”: Public hopes and fears on healthcare data sharing. A qualitative study. (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.22744 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Olivia Lounsbury ◽

Lily Roberts ◽

Jonathan R Goodman ◽

Pip Batey ◽

Lenny Naar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Data Sharing ◽

Public Involvement ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Local Level ◽

Human Centered Design ◽

Patient Centred Care ◽

The Public ◽

Healthcare Data ◽

Qualitative Feedback ◽

The Impact

BACKGROUND Evidence suggests that healthcare data sharing may strengthen care coordination, improve quality and safety, and reduce costs. However, in order to achieve efficient, meaningful adoption of healthcare data sharing initiatives, it is necessary to engage all stakeholders, from healthcare professionals to patients. Although previous work has assessed healthcare professionals’ perceptions of data sharing, the general public perspectives and particularly seldom heard groups, have yet to be fully assessed. OBJECTIVE This study aims to explore public views, particularly their hopes and concerns, around healthcare data sharing. METHODS An original, immersive public engagement interactive experience was developed - “The Can of Worms” installation - in which participants were prompted to reflect about data sharing through listening to individual stories around healthcare data sharing. A multidisciplinary team with expertise in research, public involvement and human-centered design developed the concept. The installation took place in three separate events, between Nov 2018 and Nov 2019. A combination of convenience and snowballing sampling was used. Participants were asked to fill self-administered feedback cards, and to describe their hopes and fears about the meaningful use of data in healthcare. The transcripts were compiled verbatim and systematically reviewed by four independent reviewers using the thematic analysis method to identify emerging themes. RESULTS Our approach exemplifies the potential of using interdisciplinary expertise in research, public involvement and human-centered design, to tell stories, collect perspectives, and spark conversation around complex topics in participatory digital medicine. A total of 352 qualitative feedback cards were collected, each reflecting participants’ ‘hopes’ and ‘fears’ for healthcare data sharing. Thematic analyses identified six themes under ‘hopes’: (1) enablement of personal access and ownership, (2) increased interoperability and collaboration, (3) generation of evidence for better and safer care, (4) improved timeliness and efficiency, (5) delivery of more personalised care, and (6) equality. The five main ‘fears’ identified included (1) inadequate security and exploitation, (2) data inaccuracy, (3) distrust , (4) discrimination and inequality, and (5) less patient-centred care. CONCLUSIONS This work sheds new light on the main hopes and fears from the public in what concerns healthcare data sharing. Importantly, our results highlight novel concerns from the public, in particular in what concerns the impact on health disparities, both at international and local level and on delivering patient-centred care. Incorporating the knowledge generated and focusing on co-designing solutions to tackle these concerns is critical to engage the public as active contributors and to fully leverage the potential of healthcare data use. CLINICALTRIAL Not applicable

Download Full-text