Reflexive Spaces: Leveraging Resilience Into Healthcare Regulation and Management

Designing an Intervention to Improve Medication Safety for Nursing Home Residents Based on Experiential Knowledge Related to Patient Safety Culture at the Nursing Home Front Line: Cocreative Process Study

BACKGROUND

Despite years of attention, avoiding medication-related harm remains a global challenge. Nursing homes provide essential health care for frail older individuals, who often experience multiple chronic diseases and polypharmacy, increasing their risk of medication errors. Evidence of effective interventions to improve medication safety in these settings is inconclusive. Focusing on patient safety culture is a potential key to intervention development as it forms the foundation for overall patient safety and is associated with medication errors.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop an intervention to improve medication safety for nursing home residents through a cocreative process guided by integrated knowledge translation and experience-based codesign.

METHODS

This study used a cocreative process guided by integrated knowledge translation and experience-based co-design principles. Evidence on patient safety culture was used as an inspirational source for exploration of medication safety. Data collection involved semistructured focus groups to generate experiential knowledge (stage 1) to inform intervention design in a multidisciplinary workshop (stage 2). Research validation engaging different types of research expertise and municipal managerial representatives in finalizing the intervention design was essential. Acceptance of the final intervention for evaluation was aimed for through contextualization focused on partnership with a municipal advisory board. An abductive, rapid qualitative analytical approach to data analysis was chosen using elements from analyzing in the present, addressing the time-dependent, context-bound aspects of the cocreative process.

RESULTS

Experiential knowledge was represented by three main themes: (1) closed systems and gaps between functions, (2) resource interpretation and untapped potential, and (3) community of medication safety and surveillance. The main themes informed the design of preliminary intervention components in a multidisciplinary workshop. An intervention design process focused on research validation in addition to contextualization resulted in the Safe Medication in Nursing Home Residents (SAME) intervention covering (1) campaign material visualizing key roles and responsibilities regarding medication for nursing home residents and (2) "Medication safety reflexive spaces" focused on social and health care assistants.

CONCLUSIONS

The cocreative process successfully resulted in the multifaceted SAME intervention, grounded in lived experiences shared by some of the most important (but often underrepresented in research) stakeholders: frontline health care professionals and representatives of nursing home residents. This study brought attention toward closed systems related to functions in medication management and surveillance, not only informing the SAME intervention design but as opportunities for further exploration in future research. Evaluation of the intervention is an important next step. Overall, this study represents an important contribution to the complex field of medication safety.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/43538.

Effect of the Green Cross method on patient safety culture in a postanaesthesia care unit: a longitudinal quasi-experimental study

BACKGROUND

Hospitals should adopt multiple methods to monitor incidents for a comprehensive review of the types of incidents that occur. Contrary to traditional incident reporting systems, the Green Cross (GC) method is a simple visual method to recognise incidents based on teamwork and safety briefings. Its longitudinal effect on patient safety culture has not been previously assessed. This study aimed to explore whether the implementation of the GC method in a postanaesthesia care unit changed nurses' perceptions of different factors associated with patient safety culture over 4 years.

METHODS

A longitudinal quasi-experimental pre-post intervention design with a comparison group was used. The intervention unit and the comparison group, which consisted of nurses, were recruited from the surgical department of a Norwegian university hospital. The intervention unit implemented the GC method in February 2019. Both groups responded to the staff survey before and then annually between 2019 and 2022 on the factors 'work engagement', 'teamwork climate' and 'safety climate'. The data were analysed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Within the intervention unit, relative to the changes in the comparison group, the results indicated significant large positive changes in all factor scores in 2019, no changes in 2020, significant large positive changes in 'work engagement' and 'safety climate' scores in 2021 and a significant medium positive change in 'work engagement' in 2022. At baseline, the comparison group had a significantly lower score in 'safety climate' than the intervention unit, but no significant baseline differences were found between the groups regarding 'work engagement' and 'teamwork climate'.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the GC method had a positive effect on the nurses' perception of factors associated with patient safety culture over a period of 4 years. The positive effect was completely sustained in 'work engagement' but was somewhat less persistent in 'teamwork climate' and 'safety climate'.

Designing a learning tool for translating resilience in healthcare into practice: A qualitative mixed methods study

There is currently a lack of tools that focus on strengthening resilient performance of healthcare systems through learning from positive healthcare events. Such tools are needed to operationalize and translate resilience in healthcare and, thus, advance the field of patient safety by learning from both positive and negative events and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to describe the developmental process of one such tool to enable operationalization of resilient healthcare and aid future tool development. The development process featured a complex, multi-step, design through involvement of a range of different stakeholders. A combination of publicly available platforms, cross-sectional knowledge, step-by step instructions and a learning tool that engages participants in collaborative practice to facilitate discussions across stakeholders and system levels is proposed as a means to create awareness of when and what contributes to resilient performance is fundamental to understanding and improving healthcare system resilience.

Sailing Too Close to the Wind? How Harnessing Patient Voice Can Identify Drift towards Boundaries of Acceptable Performance

This opinion paper investigates how healthcare organizations identify and act upon different types of risk signals. These signals may generally be acknowledged, but we also often see with hindsight that they might not be because they have become a part of normal practice. Here, we detail how risk signals from patients and families should be acknowledged as system-level safety critical information and as a way of understanding and changing safety culture in healthcare. We discuss how healthcare organizations could work more proactively with patient experience data in identifying risks and improving system safety.

Resilience of hospitals in an age of disruptions: a systematic literature review on resources and capabilities

Hospitals play a critical role in ensuring continuous and effective healthcare delivery, especially during crises. However, the COVID-19 pandemic exposed vulnerabilities in hospital systems, prompting a need to enhance resilience-the ability to withstand, absorb, respond to, recover from, and learn from disasters. A systematic literature review, grounded in the resource-based view, identified organizational characteristics, in terms of resources and capabilities, and their synergistic effects that bolster hospital resilience. The results demonstrate that digital technologies impact on anticipation and adaptation abilities, organizational capabilities to reorganize roles, tasks, and spaces enhance adaptability, and Inter-organizational collaborations increase the responsiveness of the hospitals. The study provides substantial theoretical and practical contributions. It expands knowledge of hospital resilience in light of recent disruptive events and promotes integration capabilities as determinants for the majority of resilience dimensions. All organisational and inter-organisational collaboration, cooperation, and coordination are deemed crucial for hospital resilience.

Exploring the influence of health system factors on adaptive capacity in diverse hospital teams in Norway: a multiple case study approach

OBJECTIVES

Understanding flexibility and adaptive capacities in complex healthcare systems is a cornerstone of resilient healthcare. Health systems provide structures in the form of standards, rules and regulation to healthcare providers in defined settings such as hospitals. There is little knowledge of how hospital teams are affected by the rules and regulations imposed by multiple governmental bodies, and how health system factors influence adaptive capacity in hospital teams. The aim of this study is to explore the extent to which health system factors enable or constrain adaptive capacity in hospital teams.

DESIGN

A qualitative multiple case study using observation and semistructured interviews was conducted between November 2020 and June 2021. Data were analysed through qualitative content analysis with a combined inductive and deductive approach.

SETTING

Two hospitals situated in the same health region in Norway.

PARTICIPANTS

Members from 8 different hospital teams were observed during their workday (115 hours) and were subsequently interviewed about their work (n=30). The teams were categorised as structural, hybrid, coordinating and responsive teams.

RESULTS

Two main health system factors were found to enable adaptive capacity in the teams: (1) organisation according to regulatory requirements to ensure adaptive capacity, and (2) negotiation of various resources provided by the governing authorities to ensure adaptive capacity. Our results show that aligning to local context of these health system factors affected the team's adaptive capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

Health system factors should create conditions for careful and safe care to emerge and provide conditions that allow for teams to develop both their professional expertise and systems and guidelines that are robust yet sufficiently flexible to fit their everyday work context.

How Stories Can Contribute Toward Quality Improvement in Long-Term Care

It is important to evaluate how residents, their significant others, and professional caregivers experience life in a nursing home to improve quality of care based on their needs and wishes. Narratives are a promising method to assess this experienced quality of care as they enable a rich understanding, reflection, and learning. In the Netherlands, narratives are becoming a more substantial element within the quality improvement cycle of nursing homes. The added value of using narrative methods is that they provide space to share experiences, identify dilemmas in care provision, and provide rich information for quality improvements. The use of narratives in practice, however, can also be challenging as this requires effective guidance on how to learn from this data, incorporation of the narrative method in the organizational structure, and national recognition that narrative data can also be used for accountability. In this article, 5 Dutch research institutes reflect on the importance, value, and challenges of using narratives in nursing homes.

Identifying, categorising, and mapping actors involved in resilience in healthcare: a qualitative stakeholder analysis

BACKGROUND

Resilience in healthcare is the capacity to adapt to challenges and changes to maintain high-quality care across system levels. While healthcare system stakeholders such as patients, informal carers, healthcare professionals and service managers have all come to be acknowledged as important co-creators of resilient healthcare, our knowledge and understanding of who, how, and in which contexts different stakeholders come to facilitate and support resilience is still lacking. This study addresses gaps in the research by conducting a stakeholder analysis to identify and categorise the stakeholders that are key to facilitating and sustaining resilience in healthcare, and to investigate stakeholder relationships relevant for the enactment of resilient healthcare systems.

METHODS

The stakeholder analysis was conducted using a sample of 19 empirical research projects. A narrative summary was written for 14 of the projects, based on publicly available material. In addition, 16 individual interviews were undertaken with researchers from the same sample of 19 projects. The 16 interview transcripts and 14 narratives made up the data material of the study. Application of stakeholder analysis methods was done in three steps: a) identification of stakeholders; b) differentiation and categorisation of stakeholders using an interest/influence grid; and c) investigation and mapping of stakeholder relationships using an actor-linkage matrix.

RESULTS

Identified stakeholders were Patients, Family Carers, Healthcare Professionals, Ward/Unit Managers, Service or Case Managers, Regulatory Investigators, Policy Makers, and Other Service Providers. All identified stakeholders were categorised as either 'Subjects', 'Players', or 'Context Setters' according to their level of interest in and influence on resilient healthcare. Stakeholder relationships were mapped according to the degree and type of contact between the various groups of stakeholders involved in facilitating resilient healthcare, ranging from 'Not linked' to 'Fully linked'.

CONCLUSION

Family carers and healthcare professionals were found to be the most active groups of stakeholders in the enactment of healthcare system resilience. Patients, managers, and policy makers also contribute to resilience to various degrees. Relationships between stakeholder groups are largely characterised by communication and coordination, in addition to formal collaborations where diverse actors work together to achieve common goals.

A resilience perspective on healthcare personnels' experiences of managing the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study in Norwegian nursing homes and come care services

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led to new and unfamiliar changes in healthcare services globally. Most COVID-19 patients were cared for in primary healthcare services, demanding major adjustments and adaptations in care delivery. Research addressing how rural primary healthcare services coped during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the possible learning potential originating from the pandemic is limited. The aim of this study was to assess how primary healthcare personnel (PHCP) working in rural areas experienced the work situation during the COVID-19 outbreak, and how adaptations to changes induced by the pandemic were handled in nursing homes and home care services.

METHOD

This study was conducted as an explorative qualitative study. Four municipalities with affiliated nursing homes and homecare services were included in the study. We conducted focus group interviews with primary healthcare personnel working in rural nursing homes and homecare services in western Norway. The included PHCP were 16 nurses, 7 assistant nurses and 2 assistants. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The analysis resulted in three main themes and 16 subthemes describing PHCP experience of the work situation during the COVID-19 pandemic, and how they adapted to the changes and challenges induced by the pandemic. The main themes were: "PHCP demonstrated high adaptive capacity while being put to the test", "Adapting to organizational measures, with varying degree of success" and "Safeguarding the patient's safety and quality of care, but at certain costs".

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated PHCPs major adaptive capacity in response to the challenges and changes induced by the covid-19 pandemic, while working under varying organizational conditions. Many adaptations where long-term solutions improving healthcare delivery, others where short-term solutions forced by inadequate management, governance, or a lack of leadership. Overall, the findings demonstrated the need for all parts of the system to engage in building resilient healthcare services. More research investigating this learning potential, particularly in primary healthcare services, is needed.

Room for resilience: a qualitative study about accountability mechanisms in the relation between work-as-done (WAD) and work-as-imagined (WAI) in hospitals

BACKGROUND

Central to Safety-II is promoting resilience of healthcare practices. In the "Room for Resilience" research project we focus on the role of horizontal and vertical accountability in healthcare teams and aim to discover how the relation between the two impacts team reflections and discussions. In this article, we report on an explorative study at the start of the project which aimed to assess the structures and dynamics of horizontal and vertical accountability.

METHODS

A qualitative study in six teams in three hospitals in the Netherlands. For the project, each team selected a specific clinical process to work on (e.g. pain assessment). We interviewed healthcare professionals, managers, and quality advisors about these processes, how they are discussed in practice and how teams need to account for them. Additionally, we observed the processes and how teams discuss them in practice. In total, we conducted 35 interviews and 67.5 h of observation. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Professionals at times varied in what they considered the right approach in the clinical process, with differing views on the importance of certain actions. When processes were discussed, this mostly was done during clinical work, and it often concerned reflections about the care for a specific patient instead of reflecting on the team's general approach of the clinical process. Organized reflections on the processes were sparse. How processes were conducted in practice deviated from guidelines, mainly due to staff shortages, a perceived lack of value of a guideline, equipment issues, and collaboration issues. For most processes, accountability to hierarchical layers consisted of quality indicator scores. Professionals were tasked with registering indicator data but did not find this meaningful for their work.

CONCLUSIONS

The observed different perspectives within teams on what good quality care is show the importance of having team reflections about these processes. How vertical accountability was organized at times impacted the conditions for teams to discuss resilient performance. Following these findings, we recommend that reflection on resilient practice and the role of accountability processes is organized on all levels in (and outside) the organization.

Learning tools used to translate resilience in healthcare into practice: a rapid scoping review

BACKGROUND

Historically, efforts to improved healthcare provisions have focussed on learning from and understanding what went wrong during adverse events. More recently, however, there has been a growing interest in seeking to improve healthcare quality through promoting and strengthening resilience in healthcare, in light of the range of changes and challenges to which healthcare providers are subjected. So far, several approaches for strengthening resilience performance have been suggested, such as reflection and simulation. However, there is a lack of studies that appraise the range of existing learning tools, the purposes for which they are designed, and the types of learning activities they comprise. The aim of this rapid scoping review is to identify the characteristics of currently available learning tools designed to translate organizational resilience into healthcare practice.

METHODS

A rapid scoping review approach was used to identify, collect, and synthesise information describing the characteristics of currently available learning tools designed to translate organizational resilience into healthcare practice. EMBASE and Medline Ovid were searched in May 2022 for articles published between 2012 and 2022.

RESULTS

The review identified six different learning tools such as serious games and checklists to guide reflection, targeting different stakeholders, in various healthcare settings. The tools, typically, promoted self-reflection either individually or collaboratively in groups. Evaluations of these tools found them to be useful and supportive of resilience; however, what constitutes resilience was often difficult to discern, particularly the organizational aspect. It became evident from these studies that careful planning and support were needed for their successful implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

The tools that are available for review are based on guidelines, checklists, or serious games, all of which offer to prompt either self-reflection or group reflections related to different forms of adaptations that are being performed. In this paper, we propose that more guided reflections mirroring the complexity of resilience in healthcare, along with an interprofessional collaborative and guided approach, are needed for these tools to be enacted effectively to realise change in practice. Future studies also need to explore how tools are perceived, used, and understood in multi-site, multi-level studies with a range of different participants.

Making tacit knowledge explicit through objects: a qualitative study of the translation of resilience into practice

Introduction

It is common practice to use objects to bridge disciplines and develop shared understanding across knowledge boundaries. Objects for knowledge mediation provide a point of reference which allows for the translation of abstract concepts into more externalized representations. This study reports from an intervention that introduced an unfamiliar resilience perspective in healthcare, through the use of a resilience in healthcare (RiH) learning tool. The aim of this paper is to explore how a RiH learning tool may be used as an object for introduction and translation of a new perspective across different healthcare settings.

Methods

This study is based on empirical observational data, collected throughout an intervention to test a RiH learning tool, developed as part of the Resilience in Healthcare (RiH) program. The intervention took place between September 2022 and January 2023. The intervention was tested in 20 different healthcare units, including hospitals, nursing homes and home care services. A total of 15 workshops were carried out, including 39-41 participants in each workshop round. Throughout the intervention, data was gathered in all 15 workshops at the different organizational sites. Observation notes from each workshop make up the data set for this study. The data was analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

Results and conclusion

The RiH learning tool served as different forms of objects during the introduction of the unfamiliar resilience perspective for healthcare professionals. It provided a means to develop shared reflection, understanding, focus, and language for the different disciplines and settings involved. The resilience tool acted as a boundary object for the development of shared understanding and language, as an epistemic object for the development of shared focus and as an activity object within the shared reflection sessions. Enabling factors for the internalization of the unfamiliar resilience perspective were to provide active facilitation of the workshops, repeated explanation of unfamiliar concepts, provide relatedness to own context, and promote psychological safety in the workshops. Overall, observations from the testing of the RiH learning tool showed how these different objects were crucial in making tacit knowledge explicit, which is key to improve service quality and promote learning processes in healthcare.

Learning does not just happen: establishing learning principles for tools to translate resilience into practice, based on a participatory approach

BACKGROUND

Theories of learning are of clear importance to resilience in healthcare since the ability to successfully adapt and improve patient care is closely linked to the ability to understand what happens and why. Learning from both positive and negative events is crucial. While several tools and approaches for learning from adverse events have been developed, tools for learning from successful events are scarce. Theoretical anchoring, understanding of learning mechanisms, and establishing foundational principles for learning in resilience are pivotal strategies when designing interventions to develop or strengthen resilient performance. The resilient healthcare literature has called for resilience interventions, and new tools to translate resilience into practice have emerged but without necessarily stipulating foundational learning principles. Unless learning principles are anchored in the literature and based on research evidence, successful innovation in the field is unlikely to occur. The aim of this paper is to explore: What are key learning principles for developing learning tools to help translate resilience into practice?

METHODS

This paper reports on a two-phased mixed methods study which took place over a 3-year period. A range of data collection and development activities were conducted including a participatory approach which involved iterative workshops with multiple stakeholders in the Norwegian healthcare system.

RESULTS

In total, eight learning principles were generated which can be used to help develop learning tools to translate resilience into practice. The principles are grounded in stakeholder needs and experiences and in the literature. The principles are divided into three groups: collaborative, practical, and content elements.

CONCLUSIONS

The establishment of eight learning principles that aim to help develop tools to translate resilience into practice. In turn, this may support the adoption of collaborative learning approaches and the establishment of reflexive spaces which acknowledge system complexity across contexts. They demonstrate easy usability and relevance to practice.

Framing the pandemic: Multiplying "crises" in Dutch healthcare governance during the emerging COVID-19 pandemic

In this paper we explore the impact of the emerging COVID-19 pandemic on the governance of healthcare in the Netherlands. In doing so, we re-examine the idea that a crisis necessarily leads to processes of transition and change by focusing on crisis as a specific language of organizing collective action instead. Framing a situation as a crisis of a particular kind allows for specific problem definitions, concurrent solutions and the inclusion and exclusion of stakeholders. Using this perspective, we examine the dynamics and institutional tensions involved in governing healthcare during the pandemic. We make use of multi-sited ethnographic research into the Dutch healthcare crisis organization as it responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on decision-making at the regional level. We tracked our participants through successive waves of the pandemic between March 2020 and August 2021 and identified three dominant framings of the pandemic-as-crisis: a crisis of scarcity, a crisis of postponed care and a crisis of acute care coordination. In this paper, we discuss the implications of these framings in terms of the institutional tensions that arose in governing healthcare during the pandemic: between centralized, top-down crisis management and local, bottom-up work; between informal and formal work; and between existing institutional logics.

Learning as a way of achieving quality improvement in long-term care: A qualitative evaluation of The Story as a Quality Instrument

AIM/OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the use of the narrative quality instrument 'The Story as a Quality Instrument' (or SQI) for learning as a way of achieving quality improvement.

BACKGROUND

Learning is a widespread aim in long-term care. If professionals share detailed information about their views on the quality of care, they can see it from each other's perspective and create a new joint perspective that may generate a broader meaning in total. One useful source for learning and improvement is the narratives of older adults. These narratives enable reflection and learning, which encourages action. In care organizations, there is a drive to find methods that can be used to facilitate learning and encourage quality improvement.

DESIGN

A qualitative evaluation design.

METHODS

Data collection was performed in 2021-2022 at six field sites of four large care organizations providing long-term care to older adults in the Netherlands. At each field site, SQI was applied: an action plan was formulated in a quality meeting and, 8-12 weeks later, the progress was evaluated in a follow-up meeting. The data collected was participants' responses during focus groups: the verbatim transcripts of both meetings and the observation reports of the researchers. 46 participants took part in the quality meetings and 34 participants were present at the follow-up meetings. The data was analyzed using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The results are mechanisms that help learning, participant responses, and practical challenges and conditions. Four mechanisms became visible that encourage learning among participants for achieving quality improvements: in-depth discussions, exchange of perspectives, abstraction, and concretization. The participants listed several outcomes regarding individual learning such as change of attitude, viewing older adults more holistically and the realization that possibilities for working on quality improvement could be just a small and part of everyday work. Participants learned from each other as they came to understand each other's perspectives. The added value lay in getting insights into the individual perceptions of clients, the concrete areas for improvement as an outcome, and getting a picture of the perspectives of diverse people and functions represented. Time was found to be the main challenge when applying SQI.

CONCLUSIONS

SQI is deemed promising for practice, as it allows care professionals to learn in their workplace in a structured way from narratives of older adults in order to improve the quality of care.

Mediating scarcity in pandemic times: an ethnographic study on the prevention and control of SARS-CoV-2 infections during the emergence of the corona crisis in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

In this paper we explore how staff involved with infection prevention managed the emerging COVID-19 crisis in the context of scarcity of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), focussing specifically on the (re)writing of guidelines. We conceptualize guidelines as 'mediating devices' as they translate between evidence and clinical practice, between management and the workplace, as well as the different values embedded in these domains. It is this mediation, we argue, that adds to the resilience of healthcare organizations. The setting for this research is an elite academic hospital in the Netherlands during the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We conducted non-participative observations, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis during the emerging pandemic (March-July 2020). We observed meetings from the crisis team and the unit for infection prevention (210 hours), interviewed members of these teams (21 interviews) and analysed guidelines and flowcharts concerning infection prevention, as such collecting a unique and rich qualitative dataset. Analysis was done through thematic coding.

RESULTS

Our results show the writing and rewriting of guidelines as a fundamental characteristic of dealing with scarcity and adding to resilience. We found three main practices our research participants engage in while trying to manage the uncertain situations emerging from the scarcity of personal protection equipment. The first practice we observe is defining safety; dealing with different perspectives and experiences of what 'working safely' means. The second entails the anticipation of scarcity by which our participants aim to control the situation through monitoring, research and creating scenarios. The third practice we observe is finding new ways to use PPE that is available, by experimenting and tinkering with the material.

CONCLUSION

Infection prevention guidelines are crucial in managing the emerging crisis. We discuss how the writing of guidelines mediates between different settings, timeframes, and different worlds of quality. Through (re)writing there is a constant negotiation and discussion with the various actors about what works, and there is a continuous adaptive attitude. At the cost of a lot of work and struggle, this creates a resilient and inclusive work environment useful in a long-lasting crisis.

The role of collaborative learning in resilience in healthcare-a thematic qualitative meta-synthesis of resilience narratives

Background

To provide high quality services in increasingly complex, constantly changing circumstances, healthcare organizations worldwide need a high level of resilience, to adapt and respond to challenges and changes at all system levels. For healthcare organizations to strengthen their resilience, a significant level of continuous learning is required. Given the interdependence required amongst healthcare professionals and stakeholders when providing healthcare, this learning needs to be collaborative, as a prerequisite to operationalizing resilience in healthcare. As particular elements of collaborative working, and learning are likely to promote resilience, there is a need to explore the underlying collaborative learning mechanisms and how and why collaborations occur during adaptations and responses. The aim of this study is to describe collaborative learning processes in relation to resilient healthcare based on an investigation of narratives developed from studies representing diverse healthcare contexts and levels.

Methods

The method used to develop understanding of collaborative learning across diverse healthcare contexts and levels was to first conduct a narrative inquiry of a comprehensive dataset of published health services research studies. This resulted in 14 narratives (70 pages), synthesised from a total of 40 published articles and 6 PhD synopses. The narratives where then analysed using a thematic meta-synthesis approach.

Results

The results show that, across levels and contexts, healthcare professionals collaborate to respond and adapt to change, maintain processes and functions, and improve quality and safety. This collaboration comprises activities and interactions such as exchanging information, coordinating, negotiating, and aligning needs and developing buffers. The learning activities embedded in these collaborations are both activities of daily work, such as discussions, prioritizing and delegation of tasks, and intentional educational activities such as seminars or simulation activities.

Conclusions

Based on these findings, we propose that the enactment of resilience in healthcare is dependent on these collaborations and learning processes, across different levels and contexts. A systems perspective of resilience demands collaboration and learning within and across all system levels. Creating space for reflection and awareness through activities of everyday work, could support individual, team and organizational learning.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08451-y.

Developing Methods to Support Collaborative Learning and Co-creation of Resilient Healthcare-Tips for Success and Lessons Learned From a Norwegian Hospital Cancer Care Study

BACKGROUND

There is a growing attention on the role of patients and stakeholders in resilience, but there is lack of knowledge and methods on how to support collaborative learning between stakeholders and co-creation of resilient healthcare. The aim of this article was to demonstrate how the methodological process of a consensus process for exploring aspects of next of kin involvement in hospital cancer care can be replicated as an effort to promote resilient healthcare through co-creation with multiple stakeholders in hospitals.

METHODS

The study applied a modified nominal group technique process developed by synthesizing research findings across 4 phases of a research project with a mixed-methods approach. The process culminated in a 1-day meeting with 20 stakeholder participants (5 next of kin representatives, 10 oncology nurses, and 5 physicians) from 2 Norwegian university hospitals.

RESULTS

The consensus method established reflexive spaces with collective sharing of experiences between the 2 hospitals and between the next of kin and healthcare professionals. The method promoted collaborative learning processes including identification and reflection upon new ideas for involvement, and reduction of the gap between healthcare professionals' and next of kin experiences and expectations for involvement. Next of kin were considered as important resources for resilient performance, if involved with a proactive approach. The consensus process identified both successful and unsuccessful collaborative practices and resulted in a co-designed guide for healthcare professionals to support next of kin involvement in hospital cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

This study expands the body of knowledge on methods development that is relevant for collaborative learning and co-creation of resilient healthcare. This study demonstrated that the consensus methods process can be used for creating reflexive spaces to support collaborative learning and co-creation of resilience in cancer care. Future research within the field of collaborative learning should explore interventions that include a larger number of stakeholders.

Role of the regulator in enabling a just culture: a qualitative study in mental health and hospital care

OBJECTIVES

A just culture is considered a promising way to improve patient safety and working conditions in the healthcare sector, and as such is also of relevance to healthcare regulators who are tasked with monitoring and overseeing quality and safety of care. The objective of the current study is to explore the experiences in healthcare organisations regarding the role of the healthcare inspectorate in enabling a just culture.

DESIGN

Qualitative study using interviews and focus groups that were transcribed verbatim, and observations of which written reports were made. Transcripts and observation reports were thematically analysed.

SETTING

Three mental healthcare providers, two hospitals and the healthcare inspectorate in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

We conducted 61 interviews and 7 focus groups with healthcare professionals, managers and other staff in healthcare organisations and with inspectors. Additionally, 27 observations were conducted in healthcare organisations.

RESULTS

We identified three themes in our data. First, professionals and managers in healthcare organisations perceive the inspectorate as a potential catalyst for learning processes, for example, as an instigator of investigating incidents thoroughly, yet also as a potential barrier as its presence and procedures limit how open employees feel they can be. Second, a just culture is considered relational and layered, meaning that relationships between different layers within or outside the organisation might hinder or promote a just culture. Finally, for inspectors to enable a just culture requires finding a balance between allowing organisations the time to take responsibility for quality and safety issues, and timely regulatory intervention when healthcare providers are unwilling or unable to act.

CONCLUSIONS

If regulators intend to enable the development of a just culture within healthcare organisations, they must adopt regulatory procedures that support reflection and learning within the organisations they regulate and consider mutual trust as a vital regulatory tool.

Exploring the role of leaders in enabling adaptive capacity in hospital teams - a multiple case study

BACKGROUND

Resilient healthcare research studies how healthcare systems and stakeholders adapt and cope with challenges and changes to enable high quality care. Team leaders are seen as central in coordinating clinical care, but research detailing their contributions in supporting adaptive capacity has been limited. This study aims to explore and describe how leaders enable adaptive capacity in hospital teams.

METHODS

This article reports from a multiple embedded case study in two Norwegian hospitals. A case was defined as one hospital containing four different types of teams in a hospital setting. Data collection used triangulation of observation and interviews with leaders, followed by a qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Leaders contribute in several ways to enhance their teams' adaptive capacity. This study identified four key enablers; (1) building sufficient competence in the teams; (2) balancing workload, risk, and staff needs; (3) relational leadership; and (4) emphasising situational understanding and awareness through timely and relevant information.

CONCLUSION

Team leaders are key actors in everyday healthcare systems and facilitate organisational resilience by supporting adaptive capacity in hospital teams. We have developed a new framework of key leadership enablers that need to be integrated into leadership activities and approaches along with a strong relational and contextual understanding.

Evaluating a system-wide, safety investigation in healthcare course in Norway: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE AND SETTING

National, system-wide safety investigation represents a new approach to safety improvement in healthcare. In 2019, a new master's level course in Safety Investigation in Healthcare was established to support the training and development of a new team of investigators from an independent investigatory body. The course was established at one Norwegian university and a total of 19 students were enrolled and completed the course. The aim of this study was to qualitatively evaluate the course, and the objectives were to explore the students' needs and expectations prior to the course conduct, and their experiences and suggestions for improvements after course completion.

DESIGN

The study design was a qualitative explorative study with individual and focus group interviews. Data collection included five individual interviews prior to course participation and two focus group interviews, after course participation, with a total sample size of 13 participants. Data were analysed according to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The results showed a need for a common conceptual foundation for the multidisciplinary team of safety investigators who were all employed in the same investigatory body. Course participation contributed to create reflexive spaces for the participants and generated new knowledge about the need for a broad range of investigatory tools and approaches. This contrasted with the initial aspiration among the participants to have a recipe for how to conduct safety investigations.

CONCLUSIONS

Course participation contributed to a common language among a highly multidisciplinary group of safety investigators and supported building a culture of collaborative learning. The need for additional activities to further develop a safety investigation curriculum in healthcare was identified. It is recommended that such a curriculum be co-created with independent investigators, safety scientists, patients and users, and healthcare professionals to ensure a strong methods repertoire and a sound theoretical backdrop for investigatory practice.

Linking resilience and regulation across system levels in healthcare – a multilevel study

Background

The Quality Improvement Regulation was introduced to the Norwegian healthcare system in 2017 as a new national regulatory framework to support local quality and safety efforts in hospitals. A research-based response to this, was to develop a study with the overall research question: How does a new healthcare regulation implemented across three system levels contribute to adaptive capacity in hospital management of quality and safety? Based on development and implementation of the Quality Improvement Regulation, this study aims to synthesize findings across macro, meso, and micro-levels in the Norwegian healthcare system.

Methods

The multilevel embedded case study collected data by documents and interviews. A synthesizing approach to findings across subunits was applied in legal dogmatic and qualitative content analysis. Setting: three governmental macro-level bodies, three meso-level County Governors and three micro-level hospitals. Participants: seven macro-level regulators, 12 meso-level chief county medical officers/inspectors and 20 micro-level hospital managers/quality advisers.

Results

Based on a multilevel investigation, three themes were discovered. All system levels considered the Quality Improvement Regulation to facilitate adaptive capacity and recognized contextual flexibility as an important regulatory feature. Participants agreed on uncertainty and variation to hamper the ability to plan and anticipate risk. However, findings identified conflicting views amongst inspectors and hospital managers about their collaboration, with different perceptions of the impact of external inspection. The study found no changes in management- or clinical practices, nor substantial change in the external inspection approach due to the new regulatory framework.

Conclusions

The Quality Improvement Regulation facilitates adaptive capacity, contradicting the assumption that regulation and resilience are “hopeless opposites”. However, governmental expectations to implementation and external inspection were not fully linked with changes in hospital management. Thus, the study identified a missing link in the current regime. We suggest that macro, meso and micro-levels should be considered collaborative partners in obtaining system-wide adaptive capacity, to ensure efficient risk regulation in quality improvement and patient safety processes. Further studies on regulatory processes could explore how hospital management and implementation are influenced by regulators’, inspectors’, and managers’ professional backgrounds, positions, and daily trade-offs to adapt to changes and maintain high quality care.

Capacities for resilience in healthcare; a qualitative study across different healthcare contexts

Background

Despite an emerging consensus on the importance of resilience as a framework for understanding the healthcare system, the operationalization of resilience in healthcare has become an area of continuous discussion, and especially so when seeking operationalization across different healthcare contexts and healthcare levels. Different indicators for resilience in healthcare have been proposed by different researchers, where some indicators are coincident, some complementary, and some diverging. The overall aim of this article is to contribute to this discussion by synthesizing knowledge and experiences from studies in different healthcare contexts and levels to provide holistic understanding of capacities for resilience in healthcare.

Methods

This study is a part of the first exploratory phase of the Resilience in Healthcare programme. The exploratory phase has focused on screening, synthesising, and validating results from existing empirical projects covering a variety of healthcare settings. We selected the sample from several former and ongoing research projects across different contexts and levels, involving researchers from SHARE, the Centre for Resilience in Healthcare in Norway. From the included projects, 16 researchers participated in semi-structured interviews. The dataset was analysed in accordance with grounded theory.

Results

Ten different capacities for resilience in healthcare emerged from the dataset, presented here according to those with the most identified instances to those with the least: Structure, Learning, Alignment, Coordination, Leadership, Risk awareness, Involvement, Competence, Facilitators and Communication. All resilience capacities are interdependent, so effort should not be directed at achieving success according to improving just a single capacity but rather at being equally aware of the importance and interrelatedness of all the resilience in healthcare capacities.

Conclusions

A conceptual framework where the 10 different resilience capacities are presented in terms of contextualisation and collaboration was developed. The framework provides the understanding that all resilience capacities are associated with contextualization, or collaboration, or both, and thereby contributes to theorization and guidance for tailoring, making operationalization efforts for the identified resilience capacities in knowledge translation. This study therefore contributes with key insight for intervention development which is currently lacking in the literature.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07887-6.

Developing a collaborative learning framework for resilience in healthcare: a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Resilience in healthcare (RiH) can be conceptualised as the adaptive capacities of a healthcare system that allow it to maintain the delivery of high-quality care during and after events that challenge, change or disrupt its activities. These adaptive capacities require collaborative learning and working, as the complexities of changes and challenges can rarely be addressed by individuals alone or single healthcare disciplinary knowledge. So, there is a need to understand how collaborative learning practices can be developed and supported both intra and inter disciplinary in healthcare. The aim of the study is to explore the relationship between collaborative learning, and resilience to establish a framework that supports the development and application of adaptive capacities across diverse healthcare contexts and levels. Collaborative learning is premised on learning as something that occurs continuously through everyday work in the healthcare systems as professionals engaging in clinical work, and interacting with other coworkers, patients and stakeholders making local adaptations in respond to needs.

METHOD AND ANALYSIS

The study applies a mixed methods design in a two-phased approach to explore and develop the relationship between collaborative learning and resilience. Phase One is exploratory using literature review, meta-synthesis, interviews and focus groups as data collection methods in empirical studies in different healthcare contexts. Phase Two uses participatory approach to develop and test a collaborative learning framework followed by an evaluation to appraise its utility using observation and focus groups as data collection procedures.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Phase One of the study is approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (reference no. 864334). The findings will be disseminated through scientific articles, presentations at international conferences and through social media and popular press. This includes establishing a set of learning tools for adaptive use, that is made publicly available in Open Access repositories.

Managers' role in supporting resilience in healthcare: a proposed model of how managers contribute to a healthcare system's overall resilience

Purpose

To discuss how managers contribute in promoting resilience in healthcare, and to suggest a model of managers' role in supporting resilience and elaborate on how future research and implementation studies can use this to further operationalize the concept and promote healthcare resilience.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors first provide an overview of and discuss the main approaches to healthcare resilience and research on management and resilience. Second, the authors provide examples on how managers work to promote healthcare resilience during a one-year Norwegian longitudinal intervention study following managers in nursing homes and homecare services in their daily quality and safety work. They use this material to propose a model of management and resilience.

Findings

The authors consider managerial strategies to support healthcare resilience as the strategies managers use to engage people in collaborative and coordinated processes that adapt, enhance or reorganize system functioning, promoting possibilities of learning, growth, development and recovery of the healthcare system to maintain high quality care. The authors’ model illustrates how managers influence the healthcare systems ability to adapt, enhance and reorganize, with high quality care as the key outcome.

Originality/value

In this study, the authors argue that managerial strategies should be considered and operationalized as part of a healthcare system's overall resilience. They propose a new model of managers' role in supporting resilience to be used in practice, interventions and future research projects.

Multilevel influences on resilient healthcare in six countries: an international comparative study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Resilient healthcare (RHC) is an emerging area of theory and applied research to understand how healthcare organisations cope with the dynamic, variable and demanding environments in which they operate, based on insights from complexity and systems theory. Understanding adaptive capacity has been a focus of RHC studies. Previous studies clearly show why adaptations are necessary and document the successful adaptive actions taken by clinicians. To our knowledge, however, no studies have thus far compared RHC across different teams and countries. There are gaps in the research knowledge related to the multilevel nature of resilience across healthcare systems and the team-based nature of adaptive capacity.This cross-country comparative study therefore aims to add knowledge of how resilience is enabled in diverse healthcare systems by examining adaptive capacity in hospital teams in six countries. The study will identify how team, organisational and national healthcare system factors support or hinder the ability of teams to adapt to variability and change. Findings from this study are anticipated to provide insights to inform the design of RHC systems by considering how macro-level and meso-level structures support adaptive capacity at the micro-level, and to develop guidance for organisations and policymakers.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study will employ a multiple comparative case study design of teams nested within hospitals, in turn embedded within six countries: Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and the UK. The design will be based on the Adaptive Teams Framework placing adaptive teams at the centre of the healthcare system with layers of environmental, organisational and system level factors shaping adaptive capacity. In each of the six countries, a focused mapping of the macro-level features of the healthcare system will be undertaken by using documentary sources and interviews with key informants operating at the macro-level.A sampling framework will be developed to select two hospitals in each country to ensure variability based on size, location and teaching status. Four teams will be selected in each hospital-one each of a structural, hybrid, responsive and coordinating team. A total of eight teams will be studied in each country, creating a total sample of 48 teams. Data collection methods will be observations, interviews and document analysis. Within-case analysis will be conducted according to a standardised template using a combination of deductive and inductive qualitative coding, and cross-case analysis will be conducted drawing on the Qualitative Comparative Analysis framework.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The overall Resilience in Healthcare research programme of which this study is a part has been granted ethical approval by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (Ref. No. 8643334 and Ref. No. 478838). Ethical approval will also be sought in each country involved in the study according to their respective regulatory procedures. Country-specific reports of study outcomes will be produced for dissemination online. A collection of case study summaries will be made freely available, translated into multiple languages. Brief policy communications will be produced to inform policymakers and regulators about the study results and to facilitate translation into practice. Academic dissemination will occur through publication in journals specialising in health services research. Findings will be presented at academic, policy and practitioner conferences, including the annual RHC Network meeting and other healthcare quality and safety conferences. Presentations at practitioner and academic conferences will include workshops to translate the findings into practice and influence quality and safety programmes internationally.

What is the role of transformational leadership, work environment and patient safety culture for person-centred care? A cross-sectional study in Norwegian nursing homes and home care services

Aim

To examine how transformational leadership, job demands, job resources and patient safety culture contribute in explaining person-centred care in nursing homes and home care services.

Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Healthcare professionals in four Norwegian nursing homes (N = 165) and four home care services (N = 139) participated in 2018. Multiple regression analyses were used to examine to what degree transformational leadership, job demands, job resources and patient safety culture dimensions predicted person-centred care.

Results

Transformational leadership, job demands and job resources explained 41% of the variance in person-centred care, with work pace as the strongest predictor (β = 0.39 p < .001). The patient safety culture dimensions explained 57.5% of the variance in person-centred care, with staffing being the strongest predictor (β = 0.31 p < .001). There were small differences between nursing homes and home care. In total, transformational leadership, pace of work, staffing and factors related to communication were the strongest predictors for person-centred care.

Defining adaptive capacity in healthcare: A new framework for researching resilient performance

Resilience principles show promise for improving the quality of healthcare, but there is a need for further theoretical development to include all levels and scales of activity across the whole healthcare system. Many existing models based on engineering concepts do not adequately address the prominence of social, cultural and organisational factors in healthcare work. Promising theoretical developments include the four resilience potentials, the CARE model and the Moments of Resilience Model, but they are all under specified and in need of further elaboration. This paper presents the Integrated Resilience Attributes Framework in which these three theoretical perspectives are integrated to provide examples of anticipating, responding, monitoring and learning at different scales of time and space. The framework is intended to guide researchers in researching resilience, especially the linkages between resilience at different scales of time and space across the whole healthcare system.

Exploring links between resilience and the macro-level development of healthcare regulation- a Norwegian case study

Background

The relationship between quality and safety regulation and resilience in healthcare has received little systematic scrutiny. Accordingly, this study examines the introduction of a new regulatory framework (the Quality Improvement Regulation) in Norway that aimed to focus on developing the capacity of hospitals to continually improve quality and safety. The overall aim of the study was to explore the governmental rationale and expectations in relation to the Quality Improvement Regulation, and how it could potentially influence the management of resilience in hospitals. The study applies resilience in healthcare and risk regulation as theoretical perspectives.

Methods

The design is a single embedded case study, investigating the Norwegian regulatory healthcare regime. Data was collected by approaching three regulatory bodies through formal letters, asking them to provide internal and public documents, and by searching through open Internet-sources. Based on this, we conducted a document analysis, supplemented by interviews with seven strategic informants in the regulatory bodies.

Results

The rationale for introducing the Quality Improvement Regulation focused on challenges associated with implementation, lack of management competencies; need to promote quality improvement as a managerial responsibility. Some informants worried that the generic regulatory design made it less helpful for managers and clinicians, others claimed a non-detailed regulation was key to make it fit all hospital-contexts. The Government expected hospital managers to obtain an overview of risks and to adapt risk management and quality improvement measures to their specific context and activities.

Conclusions

Based on the rationale of making the Quality Improvement Regulation flexible to hospital context, encouraging the ability to anticipate local risks, along with expectations about the generic design as challenging for managers and clinicians, we found that the regulators did consider work as done as important when designing the Quality Improvement Regulation. These perspectives are in line with ideas of resilience. However, the Quality Improvement Regulation might be open for adaptation by the regulatees, but this may not necessarily mean that it promotes or encourages adaptive behavior in actual practice. Limited involvement of clinicians in the regulatory development process and a lack of reflexive spaces might hamper quality improvement efforts.

Developing a Next-of-Kin Involvement Guide in Cancer Care-Results From a Consensus Process

Background

In hospital cancer care, there is no set standard for next-of-kin involvement in improving the quality of care and patient safety. There is therefore a growing need for tools and methods that can guide this complex area.

Objective

The aim of this study was to present the results from a consensus-based participatory process of designing a guide for next-of-kin involvement in hospital cancer care.

Method

A consensus process based on a modified Nominal group technique was applied with 20 stakeholder participants from 2 Norwegian university hospitals.

Result

The participants agreed on the 5 most important priorities for hospital cancer care services when involving next-of-kin. The results showed that next-of-kin stakeholders, when proactively involved, are important resources for the patient and healthcare professionals in terms of contribution to quality and safety in hospitals. Suggested means of involving next-of-kin were closer interaction with external support bodies, integration in clinical pathways, adjusted information, and training healthcare professionals.

Conclusion

In this study, we identified topics and elements to include in a next-of-kin involvement guide to support quality and safety in hospital cancer care. The study raises awareness of the complex area of next-of-kin involvement and contributes with theory development and knowledge translation in an involvement guide tailored for use by healthcare professionals and managers in everyday clinical practice.

Implications for Practice

Service providers can use the guide to formulate intentions and make decisions with suggestions and priorities or as a reflexive tool for organizational improvement.

Certification as support for resilience? Behind the curtains of a certification body - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Certification in healthcare often involves independent private sector bodies performing legally required or voluntary external assurance activities. These certification practices are embedded in international standards founded in traditional beliefs about rational and predictable processes for quality and safety improvement. Certification can affect organizational and cultural changes, support collaboration and encourage improvement that may be conducive to resilient performance. This study explores whether ISO 9001 quality management system certification can support resilience in healthcare, by looking at characteristics in the objectives, methods, and practice of certification from a certification body's perspective.

METHODS

One of Norway's four certification bodies in healthcare was studied, using an explorative embedded single-case design. The study relies on document analysis of the international standards and associated guidances for the performance of certification bodies and thematic analyses of data from 60 h of observations of auditors in three certification processes and nine qualitative interviews with managers and personnel from the certification body. Results from the analyses were compared to identify discrepancies between the written and perceived certification approach and practice.

RESULTS

Standards and guidances for certification embed an elasticity between formal and consistent assessments of nonconformities in organizations and emphasize holistic approaches that brings added value. Auditors were then left with the latitude to navigate their auditing strategy during interaction with the auditees. Members of the certification body perceived and practiced a holistic and flexible auditing approach using opportunities to share knowledge, empower and make guidance for improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

ISO certification expects structures and systems to ensure consistent and objective certification processes. At the same time, it embodies a latitude to adopt flexible and context-specific certification approaches, as demonstrated by a certification body in this study, to give added value to the certified organizations. Such an ISO 9001 certification approach may support resilient performance in healthcare by nurturing the potential to respond and learn. These results are important for further development of methods that certification bodies use in the auditing encounter.

The patient died: What about involvement in the investigation process?

Patient and family involvement is high on the international quality and safety agenda. In this paper, we consider possible ways of involving families in investigations of fatal adverse events and how their greater participation might improve the quality of investigations. The aim is to increase awareness among healthcare professionals, accident investigators, policymakers and researchers and examine how research and practice can develop in this emerging field. In contrast to relying mainly on documentation and staff recollections, family involvement can result in the investigation having access to richer information, a more holistic picture of the event and new perspectives on who was involved and can positively contribute to the family’s emotional satisfaction and perception of justice being done. There is limited guidance and research on how to constitute effective involvement. There is a need for co-designing the investigation process, explicitly agreeing the family’s level of involvement, supporting and preparing the family, providing easily accessible user-friendly language and using different methods of involvement (e.g. individual interviews, focus group interviews and questionnaires), depending on the family’s needs.