Developing a model for primary care quality improvement success: a comparative case study in rural, urban and Kaupapa Māori organisations

Introduction Primary care is under pressure to achieve accessible, equitable, quality health care, while being increasingly under resourced. There is a need to understand factors that influence quality improvement (QI) to support a high-performing primary care system. Literature highlights the impact of context on QI but there is little primary care research on this topic. Aim This qualitative case study research seeks to discover the contextual factors influencing QI in primary care, and how the relationships between contextual factors, the QI initiative, and the implementation process influence outcomes. Methods The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to frame this qualitative study exploring primary care experiences in depth. Six sites were selected to provide a sample of rural, urban and Kaupapa Māori settings. Qualitative data was collected via semi-structured interviews and compared and contrasted with the organisational documents and data provided by participants. Results Cases reported success in achieving improved outcomes for patients, practices, and staff. Strong internal cultures of 'Clan' and 'Adhocracy' typologies supported teamwork, distributed leadership, and a learning climate to facilitate iterative sensemaking activities. To varying degrees, external network relationships provided resources, knowledge, and support. Discussion Organisations were motivated by a combination of patient/community need and organisational culture. Network relationships assisted to varying degrees depending on need. Engaged and distributed leadership based on teamwork was observed, where leadership was shared and emerged at different levels and times as the need arose. A learning climate was supported to enable iterative sensemaking activities to achieve success.

Exploring, Diversifying and Debating Sustainable Health (Care) Approaches

Today’s sustainability challenges have major implications for human health and health care. At the same time, the way health care is organized and conducted has major sustainability implications. Sustainable health and sustainable health care approaches in research, which engage with health and sustainability as intertwined phenomena, feature increasingly prominently in various literatures, i.e. (i) literature based on the premise of ‘(un)healthy environments result in (un)healthy people’ (e.g., planetary health); (ii) literature on the implications of ecological change for the sustainability of healthcare systems; and (iii) literature on healthcare systems’ sustainability in view of a range of socio-economic factors. However, an integrative elaboration of the manifold relationships between health and sustainability challenges in these literatures is currently lacking. This review paper therefore maps how these three literatures represent intertwinements between health and sustainability challenges, as well as their suggestions to address these challenges. In addition, we explore which themes and questions are pertinent, meaning they have remained largely unaddressed. By performing a qualitative mapping review, we find that calls for structural attention to inequality, to in-and exclusion, and to stakeholder needs and perspectives cut across these three literatures. Furthermore, we identify three cross-cutting key questions that require future research attention. First, how do divergent ideas on what is and divergent ideas on how can that be known give rise to different health- and sustainability visions and pathways? Second, what do abstract problem statements and solutions presented in agenda-setting work look like in practice in specific and diverse empirical contexts across the globe? And third, how are diverse health and sustainability dynamics historically and spatially interconnected? Moreover, we observe that some voices have so far remained largely silent in scientific debates on health and sustainability intertwinements, namely non-expert voices such as patients and citizens, voices from a variety of social scientific and humanities disciplines, voices from relevant domains beyond (environmental) health, and voices from the global South (from non-experts, social scientific and humanities researchers and domains beyond health). We conclude that a focus on inclusive and equitable engagement with intertwined health- and sustainability challenges is imperative. This requires moving away from developing universal knowledge to address generic problems, to foregrounding plurality in terms of problem statements, knowledge, solutions, and the values embedded therein.

Large scale healthcare facility redevelopment: A scoping review

Internationally, organisations are undertaking large scale facility redevelopment as a strategy for the transformation of care systems. Redeveloping facilities provides a once in a generation opportunity to transform health service delivery, typically, however, system level changes are poorly understood. To address this gap, our aim was to investigate the empirical knowledge base regarding large scale redevelopment of healthcare facilities. A scoping review was undertaken, guided by the redeveloped health service management (HSM) scoping review framework (HSM-SRF). Across 17 articles, five key concepts were identified, and they form the principles for successful redevelopment. First, establish a strong governance framework integrating diverse expertise and evidence base. Second, engage with internal and external stakeholders to build effectual relationships. Third, consult with end users, including clinicians and patients, to encourage the acceptance of the redevelopment and actively manage stakeholder dynamics, including politics and power undercurrents. Fourth, commit appropriate resources, including time, workforce, technology and finance to ensure redevelopment success. Finally, reimagine workflows through consultation with end users, including staff and consumers, allowing them to conceptualise how the space will be utilised. This scoping review is the first to synthesise the empirical knowledge base of the redevelopment of healthcare facilities.

Capability building for large-scale transformational change: learning from an evaluation of a national programme

BACKGROUND

The Long Term Plan presents an ambitious vision for England's National Health Service which will require a sustained programme of transformational change. The Virtual Academy of Large-Scale Change (VALSC) was developed to build capability in health and care system teams involved in transformation or redesign programmes.

METHODS

To evaluate the VALSC, quantitative and qualitative data were collected and reviewed against the Kirkpatrick model. Quantitative data were collected via end-of-session surveys to assess individual knowledge before and after participating in capability-building interventions. Qualitative data were also collected and included post-intervention surveys and interviews. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using an inductive approach to identify themes that were subsequently assessed against the Kirkpatrick model.

RESULTS

Results suggest that the VALSC programme has helped build capability for large-scale change in terms of learning, behaviour change and impact. Participants' ipsative self-assessment of knowledge demonstrated a significant change (p<0.001) and qualitative data suggested three broad themes in which the VALSC made an impact. First, participants were empowered with transformation and change skills which they applied to local health and care challenges. Second, VALSC helped strengthen connections within and between transformational change teams. Third, VALSC helped transformational change teams to engage more effectively with their stakeholders.

CONCLUSIONS

The VALSC developed knowledge, skills, behavioural change and application impact that built capability in individuals and teams. Therefore, continuing to develop capability-building offers that empower and build agency in front-line staff working on service transformation and equip them with approaches, methods and tools to increase their chances of success, is recommended.

Everyone matters; everyone contributes; everyone grows: a pilot project cultivating psychological safety to promote growth-oriented service culture after the Oakden Report

The development of positive workplace culture is important for health services, with implications for patient experience, staff wellbeing and service outcomes. The Oakden Report identified dysfunctional culture in the South Australian state-wide older persons' mental health service and established an agenda for change through a codesigned culture framework. An innovative culture change project was undertaken at Northgate House, a specialist service commissioned following the Oakden Report. The project built on the culture framework, with emphasis on developing psychological safety and employed principles from the deliberately developmental organisation model. The project resulted in positive outcomes for patients and staff and valuable organisational learning. Insights from the project may inform culture change journeys in a range of healthcare settings.

An overview of healthcare improvement: unpacking the complexity for clinicians and managers in a learning health system

Given the pace of technological advancement and government mandates for healthcare and system transformation, there is an imperative for change. Health systems are highly complex in their design, networks and interacting components, and experience demonstrates that change is very challenging to enact, sustain and scale. Policy-makers, academics and clinicians all need better insight into the nature of this complexity and an understanding of the evidence-base that can support healthcare improvement (HCI), or quality improvement, interventions and make them more effective in driving change. The evidence base demonstrates the vital role of clinical engagement and leadership in HCI, and it is imperative that clinicians engage to improve front-line healthcare. The literature on HCI is vast, applies different and inconsistent terminology and encompasses often loosely defined and overlapping concepts. An increasingly broad range of disciplines has contributed to the available evidence base, but often discipline-specific perspectives frame these contributions. Available literature can also be overly driven by the generation of theoretical concepts and the advancement of academic understanding. It does not necessarily primarily provide focussed and pragmatic insights to guide and inform frontline practice. We aim to address these issues by summarising theories, frameworks, models and success factors for improvement in complex health systems to assist clinicians and others to engage and lead change. We integrate the field of HCI into the learning health system highlighting the key role of the clinician. We seek to inform stakeholders; clinicians and managers to guide the planning, enacting, sustaining and scaling of HCI.

Health service planning and sustainable development: considering what, where and how care is delivered through a pro-environmental lens

The aim of the present paper was to review the opportunities currently available to health service planners to advance sustainable development in their future-facing roles within health service organisation. Critical challenges and enablers to facilitate health services planners in adopting a pro-environmental lens are discussed.

Self-Determination in Health Research: An Alaska Native Example of Tribal Ownership and Research Regulation

Alaska Native (AN) and American Indian (AI) people are underrepresented in health research, yet many decline to participate in studies due to past researcher misconduct. Southcentral Foundation (SCF), an Alaska Native-owned and operated health care organization, is transforming the relationship between researchers and the tribal community by making trust and accountability required features of health research in AN/AI communities. In 1998, SCF assumed ownership from the federal government of health services for AN/AI people in south central Alaska and transformed the health system into a relationship-based model of care. This change reimagines how researchers interact with tribal communities and established community oversight of all health research conducted with AN/AI people in the region. We describe the SCF research review process, which requires tribal approval of the research concept, full proposal, and dissemination products, as well as local institutional review board approval, and a researcher-signed contract. This review evaluates research through the lens of tribal principles, practices, and priorities. The SCF example provides a framework for other tribes and organizations seeking to reshape the future of health research in AN/AI communities.