Development and use of research vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To clarify the definition of vignette-based methodology in qualitative research and to identify key elements underpinning its development and utilisation in qualitative empirical studies involving healthcare professionals. DESIGN: Scoping review according to the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SocINDEX (January 2000-December 2020). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Empirical studies in English or French with a qualitative design including an explicit methodological description of the development and/or use of vignettes to collect qualitative data from healthcare professionals. Titles and abstracts were screened, and full text was reviewed by pairs of researchers according to inclusion/exclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction included study characteristics, definition, development and utilisation of a vignette, as well as strengths, limitations and recommendations from authors of the included articles. Systematic qualitative thematic analysis was performed, followed by data matrices to display the findings according to the scoping review questions. RESULTS: Ten articles were included. An explicit definition of vignettes was provided in only half the studies. Variations of the development process (steps, expert consultation and pretesting), data collection and analysis demonstrate opportunities for improvement in rigour and transparency of the whole research process. Most studies failed to address quality criteria of the wider qualitative design and to discuss study limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Vignette-based studies in qualitative research appear promising to deepen our understanding of sensitive and challenging situations lived by healthcare professionals. However, vignettes require conceptual clarification and robust methodological guidance so that researchers can systematically plan their study. Focusing on quality criteria of qualitative design can produce stronger evidence around measures that may help healthcare professionals reflect on and learn to cope with adversity.

A pre-pandemic COVID-19 assessment of the costs of prevention and control interventions for healthcare associated infections in medical and surgical wards in Québec.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) present a major public health problem that significantly affects patients, health care providers and the entire healthcare system. Infection prevention and control programs limit HCAIs and are an indispensable component of patient and healthcare worker safety. The clinical best practices (CBPs) of handwashing, screening, hygiene and sanitation of surfaces and equipment, and basic and additional precautions (e.g., isolation, and donning and removing personal protective equipment) are keystones of infection prevention and control (IPC). There is a lack of rigorous IPC economic evaluations demonstrating the cost-benefit of IPC programs in general, and a lack of assessment of the value of investing in CBPs more specifically. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess overall costs associated with each of the four CBPs. METHODS: Across two Quebec hospitals, 48 healthcare workers were observed for two hours each shift, for two consecutive weeks. A modified time-driven activity-based costing framework method was used to capture all human resources (time) and materials (e.g. masks, cloths, disinfectants) required for each clinical best practice. Using a hospital perspective with a time horizon of one year, median costs per CBP per hour, as well as the cost per action, were calculated and reported in 2018 Canadian dollars ($). Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1831 actions were recorded. The median cost of hand hygiene (N = 867) was 20 cents per action. For cleaning and disinfection of surfaces (N = 102), the cost was 21 cents per action, while cleaning of small equipment (N = 85) was 25 cents per action. Additional precautions median cost was $4.1 per action. The donning or removing or personal protective equipment (N = 720) cost was 76 cents per action. Finally, the total median costs for the five categories of clinical best practiced assessed were 27 cents per action. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of clinical best practices were low, from 20 cents to $4.1 per action. This study provides evidence based arguments with which to support the allocation of resources to infection prevention and control practices that directly affect the safety of patients, healthcare workers and the public. Further research of costing clinical best care practices is warranted.

Effective online learning strategies for leadership and policy undergraduate courses for nursing students: a rapid review.

OBJECTIVES: Due to the importance of developing leadership competencies during nursing education, it is critical to make evidence-based decisions regarding the transformation from face-to-face to online delivery of leadership and policy courses for nursing students in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. This rapid review aims to identify effective learning strategies for creating online leadership and policy courses for undergraduate nursing students. DATA SOURCES AND REVIEW METHODS: A rapid review methodology was used. Searches in CINAHL and ERIC yielded 4112 records. After screening, seven articles were included. The Criteria for Describing and Evaluating Training Interventions in Healthcare Professions (CRe-DEPTH) tool was used for quality appraisal and data extraction. A narrative synthesis approach was used to summarize the data. RESULTS: The learning activities were heterogeneous in terms of content and format. Articles described the use of discussion forums, case studies, virtual clinical learning experiences, microblogging, and video clips. The methods of evaluation for these learning activities also varied greatly. CONCLUSION: The findings will act as a steppingstone to help develop an online undergraduate leadership and policy nursing course. This review also demonstrated the need for rigorous evaluation of learning activities. The use of a tool such as the CRe-DEPTH can help instructors plan and report on their learning interventions or courses.

Development and validation of a time and motion guide to assess the costs of prevention and control interventions for nosocomial infections: A Delphi method among experts.

BACKGROUND: Nosocomial infections place a heavy burden on patients and healthcare providers and impact health care institutions financially. Reducing nosocomial infections requires an integrated program of prevention and control using key clinical best care practices. No instrument currently exists that measures these practices in terms of personnel time and material costs. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an instrument that would measure nosocomial infection control and prevention best care practice costs, including estimates of human and material resources. METHODS: An evaluation of the literature identified four practices essential for the control of pathogens: hand hygiene, hygiene and sanitation, screening and additional precaution. To reflect time, materials and products used in these practices, our team developed a time and motion guide. Iterations of the guide were assessed in a Delphi technique; content validity was established using the content validity index and reliability was assessed using Kruskall Wallis one-way ANOVA of rank test. RESULTS: Two rounds of Delphi review were required; 88% of invited experts completed the assessment. The final version of the guide contains eight dimensions: Identification [83 items]; Personnel [5 items]; Additional Precautions [1 item]; Hand Hygiene [2 items]; Personal Protective Equipment [14 items]; Screening [4 items]; Cleaning and Disinfection of Patient Care Equipment [33 items]; and Hygiene and Sanitation [24 items]. The content validity index obtained for all dimensions was acceptable (> 80%). Experts statistically agreed on six of the eight dimensions. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: This study developed and validated a new instrument based on expert opinion, the time and motion guide, for the systematic assessment of costs relating to the human and material resources used in nosocomial infection prevention and control. This guide will prove useful to measure the intensity of the application of prevention and control measures taken before, during and after outbreak periods or during pandemics such as COVID-19.