The clinical microsystems approach: Does it really work? A systematic review of organizational theories of health care practices

Quality improvement work in general practice; a Norwegian focus group study

BACKGROUND

Quality improvement work is an essential feature of healthcare services, including general practice. In this study, we aimed to gain more knowledge regarding general practitioners' (GPs) motivation for such work in their practices, as well as what kind of measures were considered motivating and feasible.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted five focus group interviews among Norwegian GPs between November 2021 and November 2022. We included 21 GPs of varying age, gender, experience, and geographic situation. The data were transcribed verbatim and analysed by Systematic Text Condensation, a thematic cross-case analysis.

RESULTS

Many GPs had a diverse and imprecise understanding of the term quality improvement, and sound routines in everyday practice were often given as examples of quality improvement measures. There was a universal attitude that quality improvement initiatives should be close to practice, professionally relevant, and sufficiently small to be manageable. The availability of professional communities, either in the GP practices or in continuous medical education groups, was important for motivation. The role of nurses and health secretaries was highlighted as essential to achieve change. Participants commonly described negative reactions to programs that were imposed by external actors without regard for the GPs' perceived needs.

CONCLUSION

GPs were motivated for quality improvement measures provided feasibility within the framework of general practice. Well-functioning professional communities, including involvement of nurses and health-secretaries, were emphasised as requisite for quality improvement. Small scale quality improvement programs suited for the needs of general practice were well received and should be further developed.

Motivational drivers for health professionals in a large quality improvement collaborative project in Brazil: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The success of collaborative quality improvement (QI) projects in healthcare depends on the context and engagement of health teams; however, the factors that modulate teams' motivation to participate in these projects are still unclear. The objective of the current study was to explore the barriers to and facilitators of motivation; the perspective was health professionals in a large project aiming to implement evidence-based infection prevention practices in intensive care units of Brazilian hospitals.

METHODS

This qualitative study was based on content analysis of semistructured in-depth interviews held with health professionals who participated in a collaborative QI project named "Improving patient safety on a large scale in Brazil". In accordance with the principle of saturation, we selected a final sample of 12 hospitals located throughout the five regions of Brazil that have implemented QI; then, we conducted videoconference interviews with 28 health professionals from those hospitals. We encoded the interview data with NVivo software, and the interrelations among the data were assessed with the COM-B model.

RESULTS

The key barriers identified were belief that improvement increases workload, lack of knowledge about quality improvement, resistance to change, minimal involvement of physicians, lack of supplies, lack support from senior managers and work overload. The primary driver of motivation was tangible outcomes, as evidenced by a decrease in infections. Additionally, factors such as the active participation of senior managers, teamwork, learning in practice and understanding the reason for changes played significant roles in fostering motivation.

CONCLUSION

The motivation of health professionals to participate in collaborative QI projects is driven by a variety of barriers and facilitators. The interactions between the senior manager, quality improvement teams, and healthcare professionals generate attitudes that modulate motivation. Thus, these aspects should be considered during the implementation of such projects. Future research could explore the cost-effectiveness of motivational approaches.

Evaluation of clinical trials of ethnomedicine used for the treatment of diabetes: A systematic review

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a widespread metabolic disorder with a yearly 6.7 million deaths worldwide. Several treatment options are available but with common side effects like weight gain, cardiovascular diseases, neurotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and nephrotoxicity. Therefore, ethnomedicine is gaining the interest of researchers in the treatment of DM. Ethnomedicine works by preventing intestinal absorption and hepatic production of glucose as well as enhancing glucose uptake in muscles and fatty tissues and increasing insulin secretion. A variety of plants have entered clinical trials but very few have gained approval for use. This current study provides an evaluation of such clinical trials. For this purpose, an extensive literature review was performed from a database using keywords like "ethnomedicine diabetes clinical trial", "clinical trials", "clinical trial in diabetes", "diabetes", "natural products in diabetes", "ethno-pharmacological relevance of natural products in diabetes", etc. Clinical trials of 20 plants and natural products were evaluated based on eligibility criteria. Major limitations associated with these clinical trials were a lack of patient compliance, dose-response relationship, and an evaluation of biomarkers with a small sample size and treatment duration. Measures in terms of strict regulations can be considered to achieve quality clinical trials. A specific goal of this systematic review is to discuss DM treatment through ethnomedicine based on recent clinical trials of the past 7 years.

Impact of the Enhanced Universal Support Offer to Care Homes during COVID-19 in the UK: Evaluation using appreciative inquiry

There are over 2,300 care homes in the North East and Yorkshire Region, with rising rates of COVID-19 infection in April 2020. The Enhanced Universal Support Offer (EUSO) planned to improve support to care homes, working collaboratively with local integrated community services. Implementation was organised at 'place', through clinical commissioning and it was focused on leadership, prevention, additional clinical support, and workforce planning. The aim of the evaluation research was to understand the impact of the EUSO. The evaluation was co-produced by a group of senior leaders with additional academic involvement. An appreciative inquiry approach informed the interviews and focus groups with representative stakeholders. A thematic analysis using NVivo enabled a validation process and the data were charted into a systems framework. Data analysis resulted in five high level themes: Communication, Working Relationships, Systemic Perceptions, COVID-19 Implementation, and Organisational Support. Best practices were associated with joint working between health, local authority and care homes including medication optimisation and technology use. Care homes valued access to a named General Practitioner and community nursing working as a part of a wider multidisciplinary team. Conversely an overly reactive response to care homes combined with 'command and control' limited the benefits that were achieved. The EUSO was delivered at pace and resulted in an increased appreciation of the policy and principles of care home residents and workforce. The evaluation reflected a need to appreciate the care homes' knowledge and experience of resident wellbeing, and more fully involve them in the design of the support.

Empowering Patients Through Virtual Care Delivery: Qualitative Study With Micropractice Clinic Patients and Health Care Providers

BACKGROUND

Prior to the wider adoption of digital health technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic, applications of virtual care were largely limited to specialist visits and remote care using telehealth (phone or video) applications. Data sharing approaches using tethered patient portals were mostly built around hospitals and larger care systems. These portals offer opportunities for improved communication, but despite a belief that care has improved, they have so far shown few outcome improvements beyond medication adherence. Less is known about use of virtual care and related tools in the outpatient context and particularly in rural community contexts.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to reflect on the opportunities and barriers for sustainable virtual care through an example of a digitally enabled rural micropractice, which has provided 10%-15% virtual care since 2016 and 70% virtual care since March 2020.

METHODS

Three focus groups, 1 with providers (physician and medical office manager) and 2 with a total of 8 patients from a rural micropractice in British Columbia, were conducted in November 2020 and December 2020. Virtual care delivery was explored through the topics of communication approach, mixing virtual and in-person care, the practice team's journey in developing these approaches, and provider and patient satisfaction with the care model. Interviews were transcribed, checked for accuracy against recordings, and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Both patients and providers reported ease of communication and high satisfaction. Either could initiate communication, and patients found the ability to share health information asynchronously through the portal allowed time to reflect and prepare their thoughts. Patients were highly engaged and reported feeling empowered and true partners in their health care, although they noted limited care coordination with specialists. The mix of virtual and in-person visits was highly regarded by patients and providers, and patients reported feeling safe and cared for 24/7, although both expressed concern about work spilling into the provider's home life. The physician worried about missed diagnoses with virtual care. With respect to establishing the micropractice, solutions took about 5 years to optimize, with providers noting a learning curve requiring technical support for both themselves and their patients and a willingness to respond to patient feedback to identify the best solutions. Despite a mature virtual practice, patients reported deferred care due to COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The micropractice's hybrid care model encouraged patients to be true partners in their care and resulted in high patient engagement and satisfaction; yet, success may rely on the patient population being willing to engage and being comfortable with technology. Barriers lie in gaps in care coordination and provider fear that signs or symptoms more evident with an in-person exam could be missed. Even in this setting, deferral of care in light of COVID-19 was present, and opportunities to address care gaps should be sought.