Interventions to reduce readmissions: can complex adaptive system theory explain the heterogeneity in effectiveness? A systematic review

Preliminary adaptation of the systems thinking for everyday work cue card set in a US healthcare system: a pragmatic and participatory co-design approach

INTRODUCTION

Healthcare is a highly complex adaptive system, requiring a systems approach to understand its behaviour better. We adapt the Systems Thinking for Everyday Work (STEW) cue cards, initially introduced as a systems approach tool in the UK, in a US healthcare system as part of a study investigating the feasibility of a systems thinking approach for front-line workers.

METHODS

The original STEW cards were adapted using consensus-building methods with front-line staff and safety leaders.

RESULTS

Each card was examined for relevance, applicability, language and aesthetics (colour, style, visual cues and size). Two sets of cards were created due to the recognition that systems thinking was relatively new in healthcare and that the successful use of the principles on the cards would need initial facilitation to ensure their effective application. Six principles were agreed on and are presented in the cards: Your System outlines the need to agree that problems belong to a system and that the system must be defined. Viewpoints ensure that multiple voices are heard within the discussion. Work Condition highlights the resources, constraints and barriers that exist in the system and contribute to the system's functions. Interactions ask participants to understand how parts of the system interact to perform the work. Performance guides users to understand how work can be performed daily. Finally, Understanding seeks to promote a just cultural environment of appreciating that people do what makes sense to them. The two final sets of cards were scored using a content validity survey, with a final score of 1.

CONCLUSIONS

The cards provide an easy-to-use guide to help users understand the system being studied, learn from problems encountered and understand the everyday work involved in providing excellent care. The cards offer a practical 'systems approach' for use within complex healthcare systems.

Exploring settings as social complex adaptive systems in setting-based health research: a scoping review

Since launching health health-promoting settings approach to health by WHO, valuable progress has happened in implementing its holistic concepts in settings such as cities, schools, workplaces, hospitals and healthcare services. However, significant knowledge-intention-success gaps still exist in creating sustainable health-promoting changes in settings. The complexity of the task of bridging this gap has contributed to the call for a complexity-informed paradigm shift to health as well as settings, followed by increasing consultation of relevant complexity theories, frameworks and tools in health research. This paper provides a critical scoping review of the application of complex adaptive system (CAS) theory in settings-based health promotion research. We included 14 papers, mostly qualitative studies, reporting on planning or implementation of change initiatives, less on its evaluation. CAS theory application was often incomplete thereby reducing the potential benefit of using this lens to understand change management. We suggest some recommendations how to comprehensively apply the CAS theory in setting-based health research and to report on all CAS characteristics to enhance the understanding of settings as adaptive health-promoting settings.

Unpacking the Cinderella black box of complex intervention development through the Partners at Care Transitions (PACT) programme of research

INTRODUCTION

Complex intervention development has been described as the 'Cinderella' black box in health services research. Greater transparency in the intervention development process is urgently needed to help reduce research waste.

METHODS

We applied a new consensus-based framework for complex intervention development to our programme of research, in which we developed an intervention to improve the safety and experience of care transitions for older people. Through this process, we aimed to reflect on the framework's utility for intervention development and identify any important gaps within it to support its continued development.

FINDINGS

The framework was a useful tool for transparent reporting of the process of complex intervention development. We identified potential 'action' gaps in the framework including 'consolidation of evidence' and 'development of principles' that could bracket and steer decision-making in the process.

CONCLUSIONS

We consider that the level of transparency demonstrated in this report, aided through use of the framework, is essential in the quest for reducing research waste.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

We have involved our dedicated patient and public involvement group in all work packages of this programme of research. Specifically, they attended and contributed to co-design workshops and contributed to finalizing the intervention for the pilot evaluation. Staff also participated by attending co-design workshops, helping us to prioritize content ideas for the intervention and supporting the development of intervention components outside of the workshops.

Care Transition Interventions to Improve Stroke Outcomes: Evidence Gaps in Underserved and Minority Populations

In many countries hospital length of stay after an acute stroke admission is typically just a few days, therefore, most of a person's recovery from stroke occurs in the community. Care transitions, which occur when there is a change in, or handoff between 2 different care settings or providers, represent an especially vulnerable period for patients and caregivers. For some patients with stroke the return home is associated with substantial practical, psychosocial, and health-related challenges leading to substantial burden for the individual and caregiver. Underserved and minority populations, because of their exposure to poor environmental, social, and economic conditions, as well as structural racism and discrimination, are especially vulnerable to the problems of complicated care transitions which in turn, can negatively impact stroke recovery. Overall, there remain significant unanswered questions about how to promote optimal recovery in the post-acute care period, particularly for those from underserved communities. Evidence is limited on how best to support patients after they have returned home where they are required to navigate the chronic stages of stroke with little direct support from health professionals.

A qualitative formative evaluation of a patient facing intervention to improve care transitions for older people moving from hospital to home

BACKGROUND

The Partners at Care Transitions (PACTs) intervention was developed to support older people's involvement in hospital to improve outcomes at home. A booklet, question card, record sheet, induction leaflet, and patient-friendly discharge letter support patients to be more involved in their health and wellbeing, medications, activities of daily living and post-discharge care. We aimed to assess intervention acceptability, identify implementation tools, and further develop the intervention.

METHODS

This was a qualitative formative evaluation involving three wards from one hospital. We recruited 25 patients aged 75 years and older. Ward staff supported intervention delivery. Data were collected in wards and patients' homes, through semi-structured interviews, observation, and documentary analysis. Data were analysed inductively and iteratively with findings sorted according to the research aims.

RESULTS

Patients and staff felt there was a need for, and understood the purpose of, the PACT intervention. Most patients read the booklet but other components were variably used. Implementation challenges included time, awareness, and balancing intervention benefits against risks. Changes to the intervention and implementation included clarifying the booklet's messages, simplifying the discharge letter to reduce staff burden, and using prompts and handouts to promote awareness.

CONCLUSION

The PACT intervention offers a promising new way to improve care transitions for older people by supporting patient involvement in their care. After further development of the intervention and implementation package, it will undergo further testing.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study regularly consulted a panel representing the local patient community, who supported the development of this intervention and its implementation.

Using systems perspectives in evidence synthesis: A methodological mapping review

Reviewing complex interventions is challenging because they include many elements that can interact dynamically in a nonlinear manner. A systems perspective offers a way of thinking to help understand complex issues, but its application in evidence synthesis is not established. The aim of this project was to understand how and why systems perspectives have been applied in evidence synthesis. A methodological mapping review was conducted to identify papers using a systems perspective in evidence synthesis. A search was conducted in seven bibliographic databases and three search engines. A total of 101 papers (representing 98 reviews) met the eligibility criteria. Two categories of reviews were identified: (1) reviews using a "systems lens" to frame the topic, generate hypotheses, select studies, and guide the analysis and interpretation of findings (n = 76) and (2) reviews using systems methods to develop a systems model (n = 22). Several methods (e.g., systems dynamic modeling, soft systems approach) were identified, and they were used to identify, rank and select elements, analyze interactions, develop models, and forecast needs. The main reasons for using a systems perspective were to address complexity, view the problem as a whole, and understand the interrelationships between the elements. Several challenges for capturing the true nature and complexity of a problem were raised when performing these methods. This review is a useful starting point when designing evidence synthesis of complex interventions. It identifies different opportunities for applying a systems perspective in evidence synthesis, and highlights both commonplace and less familiar methods.

Contextual factors influencing complex intervention research processes in care homes: a systematic review and framework synthesis

Background

Care homes are complex settings to undertake intervention research. Barriers to research implementation processes can threaten studies’ validity, reducing the value to residents, staff, researchers and funders. We aimed to (i) identify and categorise contextual factors that may mediate outcomes of complex intervention studies in care homes and (ii) provide recommendations to minimise the risk of expensive research implementation failures.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review using a framework synthesis approach viewed through a complex adaptive systems lens. We searched: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ASSIA databases and grey literature. We sought process evaluations of care home complex interventions published in English. Narrative data were indexed under 28 context domains. We performed an inductive thematic analysis across the context domains.

Results

We included 33 process evaluations conducted in high-income countries, published between 2005 and 2019. Framework synthesis identified barriers to implementation that were more common at the task and organisational level. Inductive thematic analysis identified (i) avoiding procedural drift and (ii) participatory action and learning as key priorities for research teams. Research team recommendations include advice for protocol design and care home engagement. Care home team recommendations focus on internal resources and team dynamics. Collaborative recommendations apply to care homes’ individual context and the importance of maintaining positive working relationships.

Discussion

Researchers planning and undertaking research with care homes need a sensitive appreciation of the complex care home context. Study implementation is most effective where an intervention is co-produced, with agreed purpose and adequate resources to incorporate within existing routines and care practices.

Patient-Centered Approaches to Transitional Care Research and Implementation: Overview and Insights From Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute's Transitional Care Portfolio

BACKGROUND

This Special Issue, Future Directions in Transitional Care Research, focuses on the approaches used and lessons learned by researchers conducting care transitions studies funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). PCORI's approach to transitional care research augments prior research by encouraging researchers to focus on head-to-head comparisons of interventions, the use of patient-centered outcomes, and the engagement of stakeholders throughout the research process.

OBJECTIVES

This paper introduces the themes and topics addressed by the articles that follow, which are focused on opportunities and challenges involved in conducting patient-centered clinical comparative effectiveness research in transitional care. It provides an overview of the state of the care transitions field, a description of PCORI's programmatic objectives, highlights of the patient and stakeholder engagement activities that have taken place during the course of these studies, and a brief overview of PCORI's Transitional Care Evidence to Action Network, a learning community designed to foster collaboration between investigators and their research teams and enhance the collective impact of this body of work.

CONCLUSIONS

The papers in this Special Issue articulate challenges, lessons learned, and new directions for measurement, stakeholder engagement, implementation, and methodological and design approaches that reflect the complexity of transitional care comparative effectiveness research and seek to move the field toward a more holistic understanding of transitional care that integrates social needs and lifespan development into our approaches to improving care transitions.

Development and application of 'systems thinking' principles for quality improvement

Introduction

‘Systems thinking’ is often recommended in healthcare to support quality and safety activities but a shared understanding of this concept and purposeful guidance on its application are limited. Healthcare systems have been described as complex where human adaptation to localised circumstances is often necessary to achieve success. Principles for managing and improving system safety developed by the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL; a European intergovernmental air navigation organisation) incorporate a ‘Safety-II systems approach’ to promote understanding of how safety may be achieved in complex work systems. We aimed to adapt and contextualise the core principles of this systems approach and demonstrate the application in a healthcare setting.

Methods

The original EUROCONTROL principles were adapted using consensus-building methods with front-line staff and national safety leaders.

Results

Six interrelated principles for healthcare were agreed. The foundation concept acknowledges that ‘most healthcare problems and solutions belong to the system’. Principle 1 outlines the need to seek multiple perspectives to understand system safety. Principle 2 prompts us to consider the influence of prevailing work conditions—demand, capacity, resources and constraints. Principle 3 stresses the importance of analysing interactions and work flow within the system. Principle 4 encourages us to attempt to understand why professional decisions made sense at the time and principle 5 prompts us to explore everyday work including the adjustments made to achieve success in changing system conditions.

A case study is used to demonstrate the application in an analysis of a system and in the subsequent improvement intervention design.

Conclusions

Application of the adapted principles underpins, and is characteristic of, a holistic systems approach and may aid care team and organisational system understanding and improvement.

Applying systems thinking to knowledge mobilisation in public health

CONTEXT

Knowledge mobilisation (KM) is a vital strategy in efforts to improve public health policy and practice. Linear models describing knowledge transfer and translation have moved towards multi-directional and complexity-attuned approaches where knowledge is produced and becomes meaningful through social processes. There are calls for systems approaches to KM but little guidance on how this can be operationalised. This paper describes the contribution that systems thinking can make to KM and provides guidance about how to put it into action.

METHODS

We apply a model of systems thinking (which focuses on leveraging change in complex systems) to eight KM practices empirically identified by others. We describe how these models interact and draw out some key learnings for applying systems thinking practically to KM in public health policy and practice. Examples of empirical studies, tools and targeted strategies are provided.

FINDINGS

Systems thinking can enhance and fundamentally transform KM. It upholds a pluralistic view of knowledge as informed by multiple parts of the system and reconstituted through use. Mobilisation is conceived as a situated, non-prescriptive and potentially destabilising practice, no longer conceptualised as a discrete piece of work within wider efforts to strengthen public health but as integral to and in continual dialogue with those efforts. A systems approach to KM relies on contextual understanding, collaborative practices, addressing power imbalances and adaptive learning that responds to changing interactions between mobilisation activities and context.

CONCLUSION

Systems thinking offers valuable perspectives, tools and strategies to better understand complex problems in their settings and for strengthening KM practice. We make four suggestions for further developing empirical evidence and debate about how systems thinking can enhance our capacity to mobilise knowledge for solving complex problems - (1) be specific about what is meant by 'systems thinking', (2) describe counterfactual KM scenarios so the added value of systems thinking is clearer, (3) widen conceptualisations of impact when evaluating KM, and (4) use methods that can track how and where knowledge is mobilised in complex systems.

Facilitators of and barriers to reducing thirty-day readmissions and improving patient-reported outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement: a process evaluation of the AVRre trial

BACKGROUND

The Aortic Valve Replacement Readmission (AVRre) randomized control trial tested whether a telephone intervention would reduce hospital readmissions following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). The telephone support provided 30 days of continuous phone-support (hotline) and two scheduled phone-calls from the hospital after discharge. The intervention had no effect on reducing 30-day all-cause readmission rate (30-DACR) but did reduce participants' anxiety compared to a control group receiving usual care. Depression and participant-reported health state were unaffected by the intervention. To better understand these outcomes, we conducted a process evaluation of the AVRre trial to gain insight into the (1) the dose and fidelity of the intervention, (2) mechanism of impacts, and (3) contextual factors that may have influenced the outcomes.

METHODS

The process evaluation was informed by the Medical Research Council framework, a widely used set of guidelines for evaluating complex interventions. A mix of quantitative (questionnaire and journal records) and qualitative data (field notes, memos, registration forms, questionnaire) was prospectively collected, and retrospective interviews were conducted. We performed descriptive analyses of the quantitative data. Content analyses, assisted by NVivo, were performed to evaluate qualitative data.

RESULTS

The nurses who were serving the 24/7 hotline intervention desired to receive more preparation before intervention implementation. SAVR patient participants were highly satisfied with the telephone intervention (58%), felt safe (86%), and trusted having the option of calling in for support (91%). The support for the telephone hotline staff was perceived as a facilitator of the intervention implementation. Content analyses revealed themes: "gap in the care continuum," "need for individualized care," and "need for easy access to health information" after SAVR. Differences in local hospital discharge management practices influenced the 30-DACR incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The prospective follow-up of the hotline service during the trial facilitated implementation of the intervention, contributing to high participant satisfaction and likely reduced their anxiety after SAVR. Perceived less-than-optimal preparations for the hotline could be a barrier to AVRre trial implementation. Integrating user experiences into a mixed-methods evaluation of clinical trials is important for broadening understanding of trial outcomes, the mechanism of impact, and contextual factors that influence clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02522663. Registered on 11 August 2015.

Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: Rehabilitation, Recovery, and Community Participation following Stroke. Part Two: Transitions and Community Participation Following Stroke

The sixth update of the Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations for Transitions and Community Participation following Stroke is a comprehensive set of evidence-based guidelines addressing issues faced by people following an acute stroke event. Establishing a coordinated and seamless system of care that supports progress achieved during the initial recovery stages throughout the transition to the community is more essential than ever as the medical complexity of people with stroke is also on the rise. All members of the health-care team engaged with people with stroke, their families, and caregivers are responsible for partnerships and collaborations to ensure successful transitions and return to the community following stroke. These guidelines reinforce the growing and changing body of research evidence available to guide ongoing screening, assessment, and management of individuals following stroke as they move from one phase and stage of care to the next without “falling through the cracks.” It also recognizes the growing role of family and informal caregivers in providing significant hours of support that disrupt their own lives and responsibilities and addresses their support and educational needs. According to Statistics Canada, in 2012, eight million Canadians provided care to family members or friends with a long-term health condition, disability, or problems associated with aging. These recommendations incorporate aspects that were previously in the rehabilitation module for the purposes of streamlining, and both modules should be reviewed in order to provide comprehensive care addressing recovery and community reintegration and participation. These recommendations cover topics related to support and education of people with stroke, families, and caregivers during transitions and community reintegration. They include interprofessional planning and communication, return to driving, vocational roles, leisure activities and relationships and sexuality, and transition to long-term care.