Communication partner training for student health and social care professionals engaging with people with stroke acquired communication difficulties: A protocol for a realist review.

Background: Stroke acquired communication impairments impede effective communication. Consequently, in stroke care, communicative interactions can be challenging for both patients and staff and can predispose patients to increased risk of preventable adverse events. Communication partner training (CPT) can mitigate such negative outcomes by optimising communicative interactions. Providing CPT to student health and social care professionals (SH&SCPs) has the potential to enhance their clinical expertise and experiences and enhance the future clinical care of patients with stroke acquired communication impairments. This research aims to expand our understanding of how CPT is operationalised for SH&SCPs in higher education institutions and determine: what works; for whom; in what contexts; how and why? Methods: This review is Phase 1 of a research project employing a realist approach with public and patient involvement (PPI). It incorporates five iterative steps: 1.) Clarifying the scope; 2.) Searching for evidence; 3.) Selecting and appraising evidence; 4.) Data extraction; 5.) Synthesising data and developing a middle range theory explaining how CPT is expected to work for SH&SCPs. An advisory panel, including PPI advisors, content advisors, student advisors, realist advisors and educationalist advisor has been set up to consult throughout the review and collaboratively agree the middle range theory. Discussion: While there is an evolving evidence base for CPT, including stroke specific CPT for SH&SCPs, it is acknowledged that there are challenges to its implementation in complex real-world settings. In combining empirical evidence with theoretical understanding, realist review permits synthesis of data from diverse sources and goes beyond determining efficacy to explore generative causation and solutions for real world practice. A middle range realist programme theory that coherently explains how CPT is expected to work when teaching SH&SCPs to communicate with people with stroke acquired communication impairments will provide educators with new insights into CPT development and implementation in their higher education institutions.

A Realist Evaluation of Team Interventions in Acute Hospital Contexts-Use of Two Case Studies to Test Initial Programme Theories.

BACKGROUND: Designing and implementing team interventions to improve quality and safety of care in acute hospital contexts is challenging. There is little emphasis in the literature on how contextual conditions impact interventions or how specific active ingredients of interventions impact on team members' reasoning and enact change. This realist evaluation helps to deepen the understanding of the enablers and barriers for effective team interventions in these contexts. METHODS: Five previously developed initial programme theories were tested using case studies from two diverse hospital contexts. Data were collected from theory driven interviews (n = 19) in an Irish context and from previously conducted evaluative interviews (n = 16) in a US context. Data were explored to unpack the underlying social and psychological drivers that drove both intended and unintended outcomes. Patterns of regularity were identified and synthesised to develop middle-range theories (MRTs). RESULTS: Eleven MRTs demonstrate how and why intervention resources introduced in specific contextual conditions enact reasoning mechanisms and generate intended and unintended outcomes for patients, team members, the team and organisational leaders. The triggered mechanisms relate to shared mental models; openness, inclusivity and connectedness; leadership and engagement; social identity and intrinsic motivational factors. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide valuable information for architects and facilitators of team interventions in acute hospital contexts, as well as help identify avenues for future research. Dataset: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to their sensitive nature and potential identification of participants.

Team interventions in acute hospital contexts: protocol for the evaluation of an initial programme theory using realist methods.

Introduction: Literature on multi-disciplinary healthcare team interventions to improve quality and safety of care in acute hospital contexts tends to focus on evaluating the success of the intervention by assessing patient outcomes. In contrast, there is little focus on the team who delivered the intervention, how the team worked to deliver the intervention or the context in which it was delivered. In practice, there is therefore a poor understanding of why some interventions work and are sustained and why others fail. There is little emphasis in the literature on how the team delivering the intervention might impact success or failure. Given that team is the vehicle through which these interventions are introduced, it is important to understand interventions from their perspectives. This research seeks to deepen understanding of enablers and barriers for effective team interventions. Using two case studies, we will evaluate previously developed initial programme theories to understand, what worked for whom, in what conditions, why, to what extent and how? Methods and analysis: A realist evaluation approach will be employed to test the previously formed set of initial programme theories. Two multi-disciplinary acute hospital team interventions in two different geographical and organisational contexts will be identified. In case study 1, a theory based approach to interviewing will be used. In case study 2, interview transcripts obtained using a semi- structured approach for primary research purposes will undergo secondary analysis. This will enable a more sensitive look at patterns and variations in patterns of multi-disciplinary team interventions. Researchers will first iteratively interrogate each respective dataset to identify the characteristics or resources present within the specific context that influenced how the team intervention worked to produce particular outcomes. Data will then be synthesised across contexts in order to produce middle range theories and thereby more generalisable insights.

The Collective Leadership for Safety Culture (Co-Lead) Team Intervention to Promote Teamwork and Patient Safety.

Traditional hierarchical leadership has been implicated in patient safety failings internationally. Given that healthcare is almost wholly delivered by multidisciplinary teams, there have been calls for a more collective and team-based approach to the sharing of leadership and responsibility for patient safety. Although encouraging a collective approach to accountability can improve the provision of high quality and safe care, there is a lack of knowledge of how to train teams to adopt collective leadership. The Collective Leadership for Safety Cultures (Co-Lead) programme is a co-designed intervention for multidisciplinary healthcare teams. It is an open-source resource that offers teams a systematic approach to the development of collective leadership behaviours to promote effective teamworking and enhance patient safety cultures. This paper provides an overview of the co-design, pilot testing, and refining of this novel intervention prior to its implementation and discusses key early findings from the evaluation. The Co-Lead intervention is grounded in the real-world experiences and identified needs and priorities of frontline healthcare staff and management and was co-designed based on the evidence for collective leadership and teamwork in healthcare. It has proven feasible to implement and effective in supporting teams to lead collectively to enhance safety culture. This intervention overview will be of value to healthcare teams and practitioners seeking to promote safety culture and effective teamworking by supporting teams to lead collectively.

Exploring the Opportunities and Challenges of the Digital World for Early Childhood Services with Vulnerable Children.

Potentially addictive behaviours supported by the internet and mobile phones raise concerns in education services for early childhood. Although there is evidence that screen media can distract the attention of young children, there was a massive uptake of digital devices by early childhood centres (ECCs). We investigated practices of families (n = 85) and of six ECCs serving vulnerable children in New Zealand, many of whom are emergent bilinguals. Descriptions of the limited and exemplary choice of screen media of the ECCs include digital portfolios containing children's learning stories in multiple languages illustrated with digital photos. This was facilitated by increasing partnership with the families and the inclusion of their languages in the physical and digital landscapes of the ECCs. However, these families and the ECCs are seeking additional guidance to face the complex challenges of the digital world. These early findings from our national research programme, A Better Start, E Tipu E Rea, already informed significant changes in the ECCs; we also identified the potential for young children to act as agents of change.

Using Co-Design to Develop a Collective Leadership Intervention for Healthcare Teams to Improve Safety Culture.

While co-design methods are becoming more popular in healthcare; there is a gap within the peer-reviewed literature on how to do co-design in practice. This paper addresses this gap by delineating the approach taken in the co-design of a collective leadership intervention to improve healthcare team performance and patient safety culture. Over the course of six workshops healthcare staff, patient representatives and advocates, and health systems researchers collaboratively co-designed the intervention. The inputs to the process, exercises and activities that took place during the workshops and the outputs of the workshops are described. The co-design method, while challenging at times, had many benefits including grounding the intervention in the real-world experiences of healthcare teams. Implications of the method for health systems research are discussed.

Collective leadership and safety cultures (Co-Lead): protocol for a mixed-methods pilot evaluation of the impact of a co-designed collective leadership intervention on team performance and safety culture in a hospital group in Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: There is accumulating evidence implicating the role of leadership in system failures that have resulted in a range of errors in healthcare, from misdiagnoses to failures to recognise and respond to patient deterioration. This has led to concerns about traditional hierarchical leadership structures and created an interest in the development of collective ways of working that distribute leadership roles and responsibilities across team members. Such collective leadership approaches have been associated with improved team performance and staff engagement. This research seeks to improve our understanding of collective leadership by addressing two specific issues: (1) Does collective leadership emerge organically (and in what forms) in a newly networked structure? and (2) Is it possible to design and implement collective leadership interventions that enable teams to collectively improve team performance and patient safety? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The first phase will include a social network analysis, using an online survey and semistructured interviews at three time points over 12 months, to document the frequency of contact and collaboration between senior hospital management staff in a recently configured hospital group. This study will explore how the network of 11 hospitals is operating and will assess whether collective leadership emerges organically. Second, collective leadership interventions will be co-designed during a series of workshops with healthcare staff, researchers and patient representatives, and then implemented and evaluated with four healthcare teams within the hospital network. A mixed-methods evaluation will explore the impact of the intervention on team effectiveness and team performance indicators to assess whether the intervention is suitable for wider roll-out and evaluation across the hospital group. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Favourable ethical opinion has been received from the University College Dublin Research Ethics Committee (HREC-LS-16-116397/LS-16-20). Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals, national and international conferences, and to relevant stakeholders and interest groups.

Imbuing medical professionalism in relation to safety: a study protocol for a mixed-methods intervention focused on trialling an embedded learning approach that centres on the use of a custom designed board game.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare organisations have a responsibility for ensuring that the governance of workplace settings creates a culture that supports good professional practice. Encouraging such a culture needs to start from an understanding of the factors that make it difficult for health professionals to raise issues of concern in relation to patient safety. The focus of this study is to determine whether a customised education intervention, developed as part of the study, with interns and senior house officers (SHOs) can imbue a culture of medical professionalism in relation to patient safety and support junior doctors to raise issues of concern, while shaping a culture of responsiveness and learning. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use quantitative and qualitative methods to collect data. The sample size will be approximately 200 interns and SHOs across the two hospital sites. Two surveys will be included with one measuring leadership inclusiveness and psychological safety and a second capturing information on safety concerns that participants may have witnessed in their places of work. The PlayDecide embedded learning intervention will be developed with key stakeholders. This will be trialled in the middle stage of data collection for both interns and SHOs. A detailed content analysis will be conducted on the surveys to assess any changes in reporting following the PlayDecide intervention. This will be compared with the incident reporting levels and the results of the preintervention and postintervention leadership inclusiveness and psychological safety survey. Statistical analysis will be conducted using SPSS. Differences will be considered statistically significant at p<0.05. Semistructured interviews using a critical incident technique will be used for the ongoing analysis and evaluation of the project. These will be transcribed, de-identified and coded into themes. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been granted ethics approval from University College Dublin (Ref. LS-15-19-Ward-McAuliffe: Imbuing Medical Professionalism in Relation to Safety). The study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.