scholarly journals Building Capacity for Implementation – The KT Challenge

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes Black ◽  
Marla Steinberg ◽  
Amanda Chisholm ◽  
Kristi Coldwell ◽  
Alison Hoens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Practice Change ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Improvement Programs ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The KT Challenge program supports health care professionals to effectively implement evidence-based practices. Unlike other knowledge translation (KT) programs, this program is grounded in capacity building, focuses on health care professionals (HCPs), and uses a multi-component intervention. This study presents the evaluation of the KT Challenge program to assess the impact on uptake, KT capacity and practice change. MethodsThe evaluation used a mixed-methods, time-series design involving surveys and review of documents such as teams’ final reports. Online surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were deployed at four time points (after both workshops, six months into implementation, and at the end of the two-year funded projects) to measure KT capacity ( knowledge, skills and confidence), and impact on practice change. Qualitative data was analyzed using a general inductive approach and quantitative data was analysed using non-parametric statistics. ResultsParticipants reported statistically significant increases in knowledge and confidence across both workshops, at the 6-month mark of their projects, and at the end of their projects. In addition, at the 6-month check-in, practitioners reported statistically significant improvements in their ability to implement practice changes. In the first cohort of the program, of the teams who were able to complete their projects, half were able to show demonstrable practice changes. ConclusionsThe KT Challenge was successful in improving the capacity of HCPs to implement evidence-based practice changes and has begun to show demonstrable improvements in a number of practice areas. The program is relevant to a variety of HCPs working in diverse practice settings and is relatively inexpensive to implement. Like all practice improvement programs in health care settings, a number of challenges emerged stemming from the high turnover of staff and the limited capacity of some practitioners to take on anything beyond direct patient care. Efforts to address these challenges have been added to subsequent cohorts of the KT Challenge program and ongoing evaluation will examine if they are successful. The KT Challenge program has continued to garner great interest among practitioners, even in the midst of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows promise for organizations looking for better ways to mobilize knowledge to improve patient care and empower staff. This study contributes to the implementation science literature by providing a description and evaluation of a new model for embedding KT practice skills in health care settings.

scholarly journals Building capacity for implementation—the KT Challenge

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes T. Black ◽  
Marla Steinberg ◽  
Amanda E. Chisholm ◽  
Kristi Coldwell ◽  
Alison M. Hoens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Practice Change ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Improvement Programs ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The KT Challenge program supports health care professionals to effectively implement evidence-based practices. Unlike other knowledge translation (KT) programs, this program is grounded in capacity building, focuses on health care professionals (HCPs), and uses a multi-component intervention. This study presents the evaluation of the KT Challenge program to assess the impact on uptake, KT capacity, and practice change. Methods The evaluation used a mixed-methods retrospective pre-post design involving surveys and review of documents such as teams’ final reports. Online surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were deployed at four time points (after both workshops, 6 months into implementation, and at the end of the 2-year funded projects) to measure KT capacity (knowledge, skills, and confidence) and impact on practice change. Qualitative data was analyzed using a general inductive approach and quantitative data was analyzed using non-parametric statistics. Results Participants reported statistically significant increases in knowledge and confidence across both workshops, at the 6-month mark of their projects, and at the end of their projects. In addition, at the 6-month check-in, practitioners reported statistically significant improvements in their ability to implement practice changes. In the first cohort of the program, of the teams who were able to complete their projects, half were able to show demonstrable practice changes. Conclusions The KT Challenge was successful in improving the capacity of HCPs to implement evidence-based practice changes and has begun to show demonstrable improvements in a number of practice areas. The program is relevant to a variety of HCPs working in diverse practice settings and is relatively inexpensive to implement. Like all practice improvement programs in health care settings, a number of challenges emerged stemming from the high turnover of staff and the limited capacity of some practitioners to take on anything beyond direct patient care. Efforts to address these challenges have been added to subsequent cohorts of the program and ongoing evaluation will examine if they are successful. The KT Challenge program has continued to garner great interest among practitioners, even in the midst of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows promise for organizations looking for better ways to mobilize knowledge to improve patient care and empower staff. This study contributes to the implementation science literature by providing a description and evaluation of a new model for embedding KT practice skills in health care settings.

scholarly journals Building Capacity for Implementation – The KT Challenge

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes Black ◽  
Marla Steinberg ◽  
Amanda Chisholm ◽  
Kristi Coldwell ◽  
Alison Hoens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Practice Change ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Improvement Programs ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The KT Challenge program supports health care professionals to effectively implement evidence-based practices. Unlike other knowledge translation (KT) programs, this program is grounded in capacity building, focuses on health care professionals (HCPs), and uses a multi-component intervention. This study presents the evaluation of the KT Challenge program to assess the impact on uptake, KT capacity and practice change. MethodsThe evaluation used a mixed-methods, time-series design involving surveys and review of documents such as teams’ final reports. Online surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were deployed at four time points (after both workshops, six months into implementation, and at the end of the two-year funded projects) to measure KT capacity ( knowledge, skills and confidence), and impact on practice change. Qualitative data was analyzed using a general inductive approach and quantitative data was analysed using non-parametric statistics. ResultsParticipants reported statistically significant increases in knowledge and confidence across both workshops, at the 6-month mark of their projects, and at the end of their projects. In addition, at the 6-month check-in, practitioners reported statistically significant improvements in their ability to implement practice changes. In the first cohort of the program, of the teams who were able to complete their projects, half were able to show demonstrable practice changes. ConclusionsThe KT Challenge was successful in improving the capacity of HCPs to implement evidence-based practice changes and has begun to show demonstrable improvements in a number of practice areas. The program is relevant to a variety of HCPs working in diverse practice settings and is relatively inexpensive to implement. Like all practice improvement programs in health care settings, a number of challenges emerged stemming from the high turnover of staff and the limited capacity of some practitioners to take on anything beyond direct patient care. Efforts to address these challenges have been added to subsequent cohorts of the program and ongoing evaluation will examine if they are successful. The KT Challenge program has continued to garner great interest among practitioners, even in the midst of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows promise for organizations looking for better ways to mobilize knowledge to improve patient care and empower staff. This study contributes to the implementation science literature by providing a description and evaluation of a new model for embedding KT practice skills in health care settings.

scholarly journals Interdisciplinary Collaboration among Health Professionals: A Panacea for effective and Evidence-based Health Care delivery

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-23
Author(s):  
Joseph D Z ◽  
Aminu B ◽  
Halilu S ◽  
Mark A D ◽  
Kayode O ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Interdisciplinary Collaboration ◽  
Healthcare Delivery ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Search Term ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Interdisciplinary collaboration (IDC) is important in health care settings as the complex nature and demands of the health care work environment requires the expertise and knowledge of different individuals or specialists working together to solve multifaceted and complex patient care problems. Objective: To assess the health professionals' attitude towards the development of an interdisciplinary collaborative approach to patient care in health institutions and to systematically review the impact of IDC as a panacea for effective health outcomes in Nigeria. Methodology: The research is a systematic review that provides various approaches for studying interdisciplinary teams. Fifty articles were selected from different search engines such as Google, google scholar, science direct and research gate with the search term Interdisciplinary collaboration among health care professionals. Articles were arranged based on most relevant, relevant and closely related articles. Result: The study revealed that IDC is pivotal in evidence-based care and contributes immensely to effective and efficient health outcomes. It puts the patient at the centre of the healthcare team's focus and allows all health professionals, with the patient, to collaboratively provide input, be part of the decision making, and improve outcomes. Although there are several obstacles to IDC, adopting this team-based culture of mutual respect and understanding is possible and, in fact, necessary. Conclusion: This study reveals that there are many benefits to IDC. It can improve safety and healthcare delivery, as well as reduce costs. The interprofessional team supports patient and personnel engagement, organizational efficiency and innovation.

scholarly journals COVID-19 Pandemic and the Impact on the Cardiovascular Disease Patient Care

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 173-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashanth Kulkarni ◽  
Manjappa Mahadevappa ◽  
Srinivas Alluri
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Disease Patient ◽  
Hospital Environment ◽  
Cardiovascular Patients ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Care Health ◽  
Global Threat ◽  
The Impact

: The COVID-19 pandemic has emerged as a serious global threat causing a large number of fatalities and putting enormous strain on the health care resources across the world. This has resulted in preferentially triaging the coronavirus infected patients and placing others, especially cardiovascular patients at increased risk for adverse complications. The effective management of cardiac patients in the hospital environment during this COVID-19 pandemic has emerged as a real challenge. We try to address this issue and also highlight the interplay between COVID-19 and cardiovascular diseases. We hereby review the available literature and emerging guidelines about cardiovascular implications related to COVID-19 which will have a bearing on the patient care, health care professionals and cardiac centres.

How May the School Nurse Use Data Effectively?

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Harris Sheetz
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Performance Improvement ◽  
Nursing Practice ◽  
School Nurses ◽  
Data Driven ◽  
School Nursing ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Health Care Settings ◽  
Data Limitations ◽  
Improvement Programs

Consistent with their colleagues in other health care settings, school nurses function in a data-driven society. Collecting, analyzing, and sharing data with stakeholders are critical responsibilities for both improving school nursing practice and interpreting its importance to others. School nurses have unique opportunities to collect and use data in a variety of capacities affecting the health and education of children and adolescents. Moving into data-driven practice offers exciting surprises—and demands abilities to identify questions, understand data limitations, create and implement performance improvement programs, and use findings for evidence-based practice and advocacy.

scholarly journals Evaluating the Impact of the Grading and Assessment of Predictive Tools Framework on Clinicians and Health Care Professionals’ Decisions in Selecting Clinical Predictive Tools: Randomized Controlled Trial

10.2196/15770 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (7) ◽  
pp. e15770
Author(s):  
Mohamed Khalifa ◽  
Farah Magrabi ◽  
Blanca Gallego Luxan
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Completion Time ◽  
Decisional Conflict ◽  
Task Completion ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Task Completion Time ◽  
Predictive Tools ◽  
The Impact

Background While selecting predictive tools for implementation in clinical practice or for recommendation in clinical guidelines, clinicians and health care professionals are challenged with an overwhelming number of tools. Many of these tools have never been implemented or evaluated for comparative effectiveness. To overcome this challenge, the authors developed and validated an evidence-based framework for grading and assessment of predictive tools (the GRASP framework). This framework was based on the critical appraisal of the published evidence on such tools. Objective The aim of the study was to examine the impact of using the GRASP framework on clinicians’ and health care professionals’ decisions in selecting clinical predictive tools. Methods A controlled experiment was conducted through a web-based survey. Participants were randomized to either review the derivation publications, such as studies describing the development of the predictive tools, on common traumatic brain injury predictive tools (control group) or to review an evidence-based summary, where each tool had been graded and assessed using the GRASP framework (intervention group). Participants in both groups were asked to select the best tool based on the greatest validation or implementation. A wide group of international clinicians and health care professionals were invited to participate in the survey. Task completion time, rate of correct decisions, rate of objective versus subjective decisions, and level of decisional conflict were measured. Results We received a total of 194 valid responses. In comparison with not using GRASP, using the framework significantly increased correct decisions by 64%, from 53.7% to 88.1% (88.1/53.7=1.64; t193=8.53; P<.001); increased objective decision making by 32%, from 62% (3.11/5) to 82% (4.10/5; t189=9.24; P<.001); decreased subjective decision making based on guessing by 20%, from 49% (2.48/5) to 39% (1.98/5; t188=−5.47; P<.001); and decreased prior knowledge or experience by 8%, from 71% (3.55/5) to 65% (3.27/5; t187=−2.99; P=.003). Using GRASP significantly decreased decisional conflict and increased the confidence and satisfaction of participants with their decisions by 11%, from 71% (3.55/5) to 79% (3.96/5; t188=4.27; P<.001), and by 13%, from 70% (3.54/5) to 79% (3.99/5; t188=4.89; P<.001), respectively. Using GRASP decreased the task completion time, on the 90th percentile, by 52%, from 12.4 to 6.4 min (t193=−0.87; P=.38). The average System Usability Scale of the GRASP framework was very good: 72.5% and 88% (108/122) of the participants found the GRASP useful. Conclusions Using GRASP has positively supported and significantly improved evidence-based decision making. It has increased the accuracy and efficiency of selecting predictive tools. GRASP is not meant to be prescriptive; it represents a high-level approach and an effective, evidence-based, and comprehensive yet simple and feasible method to evaluate, compare, and select clinical predictive tools.

Compliance or Collaboration? the Meaning for the Patient

1995 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine N. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professional ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Treatment Interventions ◽  
Traitement Médical ◽  
The Impact

Noncompliance exasperates health care professionals, leaves them worrying about the effective outcome of medical care, and results in noncompliant patients being labelled as 'difficult' or 'troublesome'. It is suggested that professionals who label a patient as noncompliant are following convenient paternalistic principles rather than considering the impact of a prescribed regimen on an individual patient. In this paper, the author considers autonomy and respect to be foremost in patient care. Further, compliance does not necessarily indicate that both professional and patient have developed a collaborative understanding relationship. Noncompliance is described as a lack of recognition by the health care professional of the meaning of the regimen to the patient. Treatment interventions will be most successful when the patient participates in the prescription. Without acknowledgement of the patient as an equal partner, and listening to his or her narrative, care will be, at best, paternalistic. Les soignants peuvent devenir exasperes par les malades qui n'acquiescent pas à leur traitement. Cela laisse les soignants souciant des résultats de leurs soins et abouti à ce que les malades sont qualifiés de difficiles ou insoumis. On propose ici que le personnel qui traite les malades d'insoumis suit des principes paternalistes plutôt que de considérer les suites des regimes prescrits pour les particuliers. Dans cet article l'auteur considère l'autonomie et le respet comme primordiaux pour les soins. L'acqiescement ne veut pas toujours dire que malades et infirmiers/ères ont développés des rapports collaborateurs. Le refus d'acquiescer est aperçu comme un manque de reconnaissance par la personne soignante de la significance du traitement médical du malade. Les interventions réussissent le mieux quant les malades participent à leurs soins. Si l'on n'accepte pas les malades comme partenaires en écoutant leurs récits, les soins sont au plus du paternalisme. Die Ablehnung der verordneten Behandlung durch die Patienten kann das Pflege personal zur Verzweiflung bringen und den Ausgang der Behandlung in Frage stellen und führt dazu, die Patienten als schwierig oder problematisch einzustrafen. Hier wird die Ansicht vertreten, dass das Pflegepersonal, das Patienten als unkooperativ oder ablehnend bezeichnet, einem paternalistischen Prinzip folgt und nicht an die Wirkung denkt, die die verschriebene Behandlung auf einzelne Patienten hat. In diesem Artikel bezeichnet die Autorin die Selstbestimmung der Patienten und den Respekt ihnen gegenüber als das Wichtigste in der Krankenpflege. Fügsamkeit deutet nicht unbedingt auf eine Zusammenarbeit zwischen Patienten und Pflegenden hin. Zuwiderhandlung der Patienten wird als Mangel an Verständnis von Seiten des Pflegepersonals gesehen, das die Bedeutung, die die Behandlung für Patienten hat, nicht einzuschatzen weiss. Die Behandlung wird nur dann den grösstmöglichen Erfolg bringen, wenn die Patienten daran teilnehmen. Wenn Patienten nicht als gleichberechtigte Partner angesehen werden, deren Meinungen gehört und respektiert werden, ist die Pflege höchstens patemalistisch.

scholarly journals Non Pharmacological Interventions to Manage Cancer-Related Fatigue (CRF) - An Overview

2021 ◽  
pp. 42-51
Author(s):  
. Shambhavi ◽  
Diana Lobo
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Early Period ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cancer Related Fatigue ◽  
The Impact

Fatigue is almost a common problem often reported by the cancer patients that severely affects all aspects of quality of life. Prevalence of cancer related fatigue ranges from 50% to 90% of cancer patients overall. After addressing treatable contributing factors, such as hypothyroidism, anemia, insomnia, pain, emotional distress, medication adverse effects, metabolic disturbances, or organ dysfunction such as heart failure, myopathy, and pulmonary fibrosis, patients may be screened with a short fatigue assessment tool. There is a pressure for pharmacologic therapy to shift away from reliance on opioids and ineffective procedures toward comprehensive cancer related fatigue (CRF) management that includes evidence-based nonpharmacologic options. This review details the magnitude of the current CRF problem including its impact on quality of life as well as the challenges of CRF management for patients and a healthcare workforce engaging prevalent strategies not entirely based in current evidence. Transforming the current system of CRF care to a responsive comprehensive model necessitates those options for treatment and collaborative care must be evidence-based and include effective nonpharmacologic strategies that have the advantage of reduced risks of adverse events and addiction liability. Patients with cancer related fatigue may benefit from self-administrable nonpharmacological interventions without any side effects. Health care personnel often have insufficient knowledge about fatigue and its treatments or underestimate the impact of fatigue on quality of life. A practical review may be useful to health care professionals in order to identify the cancer related fatigue during the early period of cancer process and treat it effectively to improve the quality of life which contribute to the positive outcomes in cancer clients. Therefore, the main purpose of this review is to analyze the possible nonpharmacological approach to manage cancer related fatigue and recommend future research that will clarify these approaches and facilitate the formulation of new treatment options.

THE UK NHS EXPERIENCE OF BURNOUT: TIME FOR ACTION

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 7-18
Author(s):  
Helen L. Millar
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
National Health ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Work Place ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Impact

Background: Burnout, as a global phenomenon, has probably always existed and been present in all cultures but more recently has been increasingly identified in the public health sector work place. The UK National Health Service (NHS) is the largest employer in Europe with over 1.3 million workers. It therefore reflects many of the challenges common to global health care systems. The escalation of burnout in the UK NHS (National Health Service) is now recognized given the impact on workforce sustainability and the health care delivery. Objectives: This article aims to highlight the current epidemic of burnout in the UK NHS, its causes, and impact on the workforce and quality of care provided. Strategies developed to improve the health of the NHS workforce will be reviewed and appraised in terms of their impact and limitations to date. Methods: The methodology includes a broad overview of selected articles/publications focusing on the concept of burnout and the impact on the workforce and patient care and is not intended to be a systematic review. Publications include peer reviewed articles, governmental strategic documents, recent surveys, and relevant responses by health care professionals and other relevant independent bodies. Results: The current literature highlights that burnout in the NHS is a major concern. It is clear that recognition of the extent of the problem and its impact are crucial for the sustainability of the NHS. The alarming rate of work force attrition is evident and unless immediate drastic steps are taken to address the root causes, the pressure on remaining staff will escalate to breaking point resulting in an inability to sustain services due to further staff losses. Evidence demonstrates that staff burnout adversely affects patient care and increases errors. Conclusion: It is vital that burnout is addressed as a matter of urgency in order to ensure a healthy and productive workforce and to ensure patients are treated safely and effectively. The NHS’s very survival depends on direct and urgent action to remedy this situation.

Quality Assurance to Quality Improvement: The Impact of the Agenda for Changes

1991 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
Joanne Moreland
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Health Care Professionals ◽  
Health Care Organizations ◽  
Health Care Organization ◽  
Care Organization ◽  
Flow Monitoring ◽  
The Impact

Health care professionals are committed to the continual improvement of the quality of patient care. The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) has launched a major research and development project intended to improve its ability to evaluate health care organizations and encourage greater attention to the quality of daily patient care. This chapter describes JCAHO’s challenge to evaluate capability and performance of health care organizations and practitioners. The intent of JCAHO’s agenda for change is to focus on patient outcomes and quality improvement through a more precise and objective evaluation of both clinical and managerial performance. Through the agenda for change, JCAHO and the health care organization will participate in a continuous-flow monitoring system in which clinical and organizational data are transmitted from the field to JCAHO, analyzed, and fed back to the health care organization

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document