An introduction to the collaborative methodology and its potential use for the management of heart failure

Evaluating the CYP-IAPT transformation of child and adolescent mental health services in Cambridgeshire, UK: a qualitative implementation study

Background

The Children and Young People's Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (CYP-IAPT) programme was introduced to transform Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) across England. The programme comprised a set of principles that local CAMHS partnerships were expected to operationalise and embed with the aim of increasing access to services and improving the quality of care. This study explored how the implementation of the CYP-IAPT programme was executed and experienced by CAMHS professionals in the county of Cambridgeshire (UK), and the extent to which the CYP-IAPT principles were perceived to be successfully embedded into everyday practice.

Methods

We analysed 275 documents relating to the CYP-IAPT programme issued between 2011 and 2015. We also conducted a thematic analysis of 20 qualitative interviews, undertaken at two time points, with professionals from three CAMHS teams in Cambridgeshire. Analysis was informed by implementation science frameworks.

Results

Document analysis suggested that the CYP-IAPT programme was initially not clearly defined and lacked guidance on how to operationalise key programme principles and apply them in everyday practice. There was also a degree of programme evolution over time, which made it difficult for local stakeholders to understand the scope and aims of CYP-IAPT. Interviews with staff showed low coherent understanding of the programme, variable levels of investment among stakeholders and difficulties in collaborative working. Barriers and facilitators to programme implementation were identified at individual, service and strategic levels. These in turn impacted the local implementation efforts and sustainability of the programme in Cambridgeshire.

Conclusions

We identified factors relating to programme design and national and local implementation planning, as well as features of inner and outer context, which impacted on the delivery and sustainability of the programme. These findings can be drawn upon to inform the development and delivery of other local and national quality improvement (QI) initiatives relating to children and young people's mental health.

A systems-based partnership learning model for strengthening primary healthcare

Background

Strengthening primary healthcare systems is vital to improving health outcomes and reducing inequity. However, there are few tools and models available in published literature showing how primary care system strengthening can be achieved on a large scale. Challenges to strengthening primary healthcare (PHC) systems include the dispersion, diversity and relative independence of primary care providers; the scope and complexity of PHC; limited infrastructure available to support population health approaches; and the generally poor and fragmented state of PHC information systems.

Drawing on concepts of comprehensive PHC, integrated quality improvement (IQI) methods, system-based research networks, and system-based participatory action research, we describe a learning model for strengthening PHC that addresses these challenges. We describe the evolution of this model within the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary healthcare context, successes and challenges in its application, and key issues for further research.

Discussion

IQI approaches combined with system-based participatory action research and system-based research networks offer potential to support program implementation and ongoing learning across a wide scope of primary healthcare practice and on a large scale. The Partnership Learning Model (PLM) can be seen as an integrated model for large-scale knowledge translation across the scope of priority aspects of PHC. With appropriate engagement of relevant stakeholders, the model may be applicable to a wide range of settings. In IQI, and in the PLM specifically, there is a clear role for research in contributing to refining and evaluating existing tools and processes, and in developing and trialling innovations. Achieving an appropriate balance between funding IQI activity as part of routine service delivery and funding IQI related research will be vital to developing and sustaining this type of PLM.

Summary

This paper draws together several different previously described concepts and extends the understanding of how PHC systems can be strengthened through systematic and partnership-based approaches. We describe a model developed from these concepts and its application in the Australian Indigenous primary healthcare context, and raise questions about sustainability and wider relevance of the model.

ProvenCare lung cancer: a multi-institutional improvement collaborative

Geisinger's ProvenCare™ Program (for elective coronary artery bypass surgery, total hip replacement, and others) has shown that the principles of reliability science, facilitated by a robust electronic health record and institutional commitment, allow the re-engineering of complicated clinical processes. This eliminates unwarranted variation and promotes the completion of evidence-based elements of care. It has not been established that ProvenCare can be generalized to other institutions. Now, under the auspices of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer, ProvenCare has been adapted to a multi-institutional collaborative for the care of the patient with resectable lung cancer.

iSoBAR--a concept and handover checklist: the National Clinical Handover Initiative

Effective communication at clinical handover is important for improving patient safety and reducing adverse outcomes. In consultation with doctors, nurses and allied health staff in the Western Australian Country Health Service, we developed a clinical handover checklist, adapted from an existing tool for standardising communication. The acronym "iSoBAR" (identify-situation-observations-background-agreed plan-read back) summarises the components of the checklist. We designed a comprehensive iSoBAR handover form to reduce the number of existing clinical handover forms. The new form, with an accompanying toolkit, was initially trialled in the Kimberley region, but is now being adopted more widely. Early adoption of the new form has been attributed to extensive clinician involvement and leadership. There is a need for further research to assess whether the use of handover checklists improves patient outcomes.

Multi-faceted palliative care intervention: aged care nurses' and care assistants' perceptions and experiences

AIM

This paper is a report of a study to describe residential aged care nurses' and care assistants' perceptions of a multi-faceted palliative care intervention to identify potential areas to be addressed during subsequent action research phases.

BACKGROUND

Action research was used to enhance the delivery of a palliative approach in residential aged care. The chronic care model guided the development of a multi-faceted intervention. This involved the: (1) establishment of a 'link nurse' role; (2) learning and development strategies for nurses, care assistants and general practitioners; (3) use of multi-disciplinary team meetings; and (4) access to specialist consultation.

METHOD

A purposive sample (n = 28) of aged care nurses and care assistants participated in a series of four focus groups conducted in July 2005. Thematic content analysis of the transcripts was performed.

FINDINGS

Four themes emerged: (1) targeted education can make a difference; (2) a team approach is valued; (3) clinical assessment tools are helpful; and (4) using the right language is essential. Participants described increased understanding of palliative care concepts, enhanced competencies, greater confidence to deliver palliative care and a desire to adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to care planning.

CONCLUSION

Sustaining a culture that is committed to ongoing learning and development interventions and creating multi-disciplinary teams in the aged care setting is critical to embedding a palliative approach. The chronic care model is a useful framework to guide the development of interventions leading to better palliative care outcomes for residents and their families.

Evidence for the impact of quality improvement collaboratives: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of quality improvement collaboratives in improving the quality of care.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant studies through Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers independently extracted data on topics, participants, setting, study design, and outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 1104 articles identified, 72 were included in the study. Twelve reports representing nine studies (including two randomised controlled trials) used a controlled design to measure the effects of the quality improvement collaborative intervention on care processes or outcomes of care. Systematic review of these nine studies showed moderate positive results. Seven studies (including one randomised controlled trial) reported an effect on some of the selected outcome measures. Two studies (including one randomised controlled trial) did not show any significant effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence underlying quality improvement collaboratives is positive but limited and the effects cannot be predicted with great certainty. Considering that quality improvement collaboratives seem to play a key part in current strategies focused on accelerating improvement, but may have only modest effects on outcomes at best, further knowledge of the basic components effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and success factors is crucial to determine the value of quality improvement collaboratives.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the collaborative method: reflections from a single site

BACKGROUND

A collaborative is an effective method of implementing evidence-based practice across multiple sites through the sharing of experience and knowledge of others in a similar setting, over a short period of time. Collaborative methods were first used in the USA but have been adopted internationally.

AIM

This paper sought to document the facilitators and barriers to the implementation of the collaborative method, based on a single site's experience of participating in a multisite, state-wide heart failure collaborative.

METHOD

Qualitative data was collected using three complementary

METHODS

participant observation, reflective journalling and key informant interviews. Quantitative monitoring of team performance occurred monthly according to prespecified performance indicators.

FINDINGS

Barriers and facilitators that were identified by this study included: organisational factors, team composition, dynamics and networking, changing doctor behaviour, clinical leadership and communication.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study underscore the importance of leadership, communication and team cohesion for the successful implementation of the collaborative method at individual sites. In addition, the importance of a preparatory stage that deals with known barriers and facilitators to the collaborative method before the commencement of the official study period was highlighted. The potential for the collaborative approach to improve clinical outcomes warrants further systematic evaluation of process issues and consideration of the barriers and facilitators to implementation in various settings.