9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access
      research-article
      , PhD , , , PhD , , PhD
      Journal of Patient Safety
      Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references58

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness.

          Qualitative content analysis as described in published literature shows conflicting opinions and unsolved issues regarding meaning and use of concepts, procedures and interpretation. This paper provides an overview of important concepts (manifest and latent content, unit of analysis, meaning unit, condensation, abstraction, content area, code, category and theme) related to qualitative content analysis; illustrates the use of concepts related to the research procedure; and proposes measures to achieve trustworthiness (credibility, dependability and transferability) throughout the steps of the research procedure. Interpretation in qualitative content analysis is discussed in light of Watzlawick et al.'s [Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes. W.W. Norton & Company, New York, London] theory of communication.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) in health care: a scoping review

            Background Integrated knowledge translation (IKT) refers to collaboration between researchers and decision-makers. While advocated as an approach for enhancing the relevance and use of research, IKT is challenging and inconsistently applied. This study sought to inform future IKT practice and research by synthesizing studies that empirically evaluated IKT and identifying knowledge gaps. Methods We performed a scoping review. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2005 to 2014 for English language studies that evaluated IKT interventions involving researchers and organizational or policy-level decision-makers. Data were extracted on study characteristics, IKT intervention (theory, content, mode, duration, frequency, personnel, participants, timing from initiation, initiator, source of funding, decision-maker involvement), and enablers, barriers, and outcomes reported by studies. We performed content analysis and reported summary statistics. Results Thirteen studies were eligible after screening 14,754 titles and reviewing 106 full-text studies. Details about IKT activities were poorly reported, and none were formally based on theory. Studies varied in the number and type of interactions between researchers and decision-makers; meetings were the most common format. All studies reported barriers and facilitators. Studies reported a range of positive and sub-optimal outcomes. Outcomes did not appear to be associated with initiator of the partnership, dedicated funding, partnership maturity, nature of decision-maker involvement, presence or absence of enablers or barriers, or the number of different IKT activities. Conclusions The IKT strategies that achieve beneficial outcomes remain unknown. We generated a summary of IKT approaches, enablers, barriers, conditions, and outcomes that can serve as the basis for a future review or for planning ongoing primary research. Future research can contribute to three identified knowledge gaps by examining (1) how different IKT strategies influence outcomes, (2) the relationship between the logic or theory underlying IKT interventions and beneficial outcomes, and (3) when and how decision-makers should be involved in the research process. Future IKT initiatives should more systematically plan and document their design and implementation, and evaluations should report the findings with sufficient detail to reveal how IKT was associated with outcomes. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0399-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Implementing New Practices: An Empirical Study of Organizational Learning in Hospital Intensive Care Units

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                J Patient Saf
                J Patient Saf
                JPS
                Journal of Patient Safety
                Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
                1549-8417
                1549-8425
                August 2022
                24 January 2022
                : 18
                : 5
                : 396-403
                Affiliations
                From the []Stavanger University Hospital
                []SHARE–Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway
                []Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
                Author notes
                [*]Correspondence: Inger Johanne Bergerød, PhD, SHARE- Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036 Stavanger, Norway (e-mail: inger.j.bergerod@ 123456uis.no ).
                Article
                JPS_210155 00004
                10.1097/PTS.0000000000000958
                9329041
                35067616
                17a4d9a1-976c-469a-805f-2d727339e500
                Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

                History
                Categories
                Tips for Success
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                Comments

                Comment on this article