Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf ; 47(11): 711-722, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34538583

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite the proliferation of learning collaborations such as innovation platforms, the factors contributing to their success or failure are rarely documented. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality learning collaboratives taxonomy provides a framework for understanding how such collaborations work in different settings according to four primary elements: innovation, communication, time, and social systems. This study applied the taxonomy to assess an innovation platform and the utility of applying the taxonomy. METHODS: The study focus was a five-year national research collaboration operating as an innovation platform to strengthen primary health care quality improvement efforts for Indigenous Australians. The study team analyzed project records, reports and publications, and interviews that were conducted with 35 stakeholders. Data were mapped retrospectively against the taxonomy domains and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: The taxonomy proved useful in understanding how and why the innovation platform generated innovations. It revealed that time was particularly important, both to see innovations through and to establish a social system that enabled interconnectivity between members. However, the taxonomy did not provide useful guidance on identifying the types of innovations from the collaboration or the importance of a culture of continuous adaptation and learning. The study also found that the primary and secondary elements of the taxonomy were not discrete, which meant that it was difficult to align themes with only one element. CONCLUSION: To improve the utility of the taxonomy, several elaborations are proposed, including reconfiguring it to a more dynamic form that recognizes the interconnections and links between the elements.


Subject(s)
Learning , Quality Improvement , Australia , Humans , Retrospective Studies , United States , United States Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
2.
BMJ Open ; 11(5): e045101, 2021 05 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33958341

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Though multidisciplinary research networks support the practice and effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) programmes, their characteristics and development are poorly understood. In this study, we examine publication outputs from a research network in Australian Indigenous primary healthcare (PHC) to assess to what extent the research network changed over time. SETTING: Australian CQI research network in Indigenous PHC from 2002 to 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Authors from peer-reviewed journal articles and books published by the network. DESIGN: Coauthor networks across four phases of the network (2002-2004; 2005-2009; 2010-2014; 2015-2019) were constructed based on author affiliations and examined using social network analysis methods. Descriptive characteristics included organisation types, Indigenous representation, gender, student authorship and thematic research trends. RESULTS: We identified 128 publications written by 308 individual authors from 79 different organisations. Publications increased in number and diversity over each funding phase. During the final phase, publication outputs accelerated for organisations, students, project officers, Indigenous and female authors. Over time there was also a shift in research themes to encompass new clinical areas and social, environmental or behavioural determinants of health. Average degree (8.1), clustering (0.81) and diameter (3) indicated a well-connected network, with a core-periphery structure in each phase (p≤0.03) rather than a single central organisation (degree centralisation=0.55-0.65). Academic organisations dominated the core structure in all funding phases. CONCLUSION: Collaboration in publications increased with network consolidation and expansion. Increased productivity was associated with increased authorship diversity and a decentralised network, suggesting these may be important factors in enhancing research impact and advancing the knowledge and practice of CQI in PHC. Publication diversity and growth occurred mainly in the fourth phase, suggesting long-term relationship building among diverse partners is required to facilitate participatory research in CQI. Despite improvements, further work is needed to address inequities in female authorship and Indigenous authorship.


Subject(s)
Health Services, Indigenous , Quality Improvement , Australia , Authorship , Female , Humans , Primary Health Care
3.
BMJ Glob Health ; 6(1)2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33441334

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Indigenous communities worldwide are leading calls for all research involving Indigenous people to be underpinned by values and principles articulated by them. Many researchers are explicitly adopting these principles to guide what, where, how and when research is undertaken with Indigenous people. With critical reflection to support the implementation of such principles largely absent from published literature, this paper explores both the implementation of, and the outcomes from a set of guiding principles used in a large-scale Australian research collaboration to improve Indigenous health. METHODS: In this inductive qualitative study, we adopted a principles-focused evaluation approach. Based on interviews with 35 actors in the collaboration and a review of project documents, we generated themes that were then iteratively discussed, refined and categorised into (1) 'strategies'-activities by which implementation of our guiding principles were recognised; (2) 'outcomes'-results seen from implementing the principles and (3) 'conditions'-aspects of the context that facilitated and constrained implementation of the principles. RESULTS: Respondents found it difficult to articulate how the guiding principles were actually implemented, and frequently referred to them as part of the fabric of the collaboration. They viewed the set of principles as mutually reinforcing, and as providing a rudder for navigating complexity and conflict. Implementation of the principles occurred through five strategies-honouring the principles; being dynamic and adaptable; sharing and dispersing leadership; collaborating purposefully and adopting a culture of mutual learning. Outcomes included increased Indigenous leadership and participation; the ability to attract principled and values-driven researchers and stakeholders, and the development of trusting and respectful relationships. The conditions that facilitated the implementation of the principles were collaborating over time; an increasing number of Indigenous researchers and taking an 'innovation platform' approach. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that principles guiding collaborations are valuable in providing a focus, direction and a way of working together when they are collaboratively developed, hold genuine meaning for all members and are implemented within a culture of continuous critical reflection, learning and adaptation, with ongoing reinterpretation of the principles over time.


Subject(s)
Ethics, Research , Primary Health Care , Australia , Humans , Qualitative Research
4.
Health Res Policy Syst ; 18(1): 45, 2020 May 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32398136

ABSTRACT

Effective efforts to strengthen health systems need diverse, multi-stakeholder networks working together on complex or 'wicked' problems such as prevention and control of chronic diseases, solutions to which go beyond the role and capability of one organisation. The contextual complexities inherent in 'wicked' problems mean that solutions warrant a systems approach that encompasses innovation and new ways of thinking about, facilitating and implementing collective decision-making processes and change practices.Innovation platforms are a mechanism for facilitating communication and collaboration among diverse stakeholders, promoting joint action and stimulating innovation. Developmental evaluation is an approach that is increasingly being used to evaluate innovative and emergent programmes and projects, as it enables evaluators to provide real-time feedback so that evaluation findings can be used to guide development and adaptations. Developmental evaluation emphasises learning and adaptation, and aligns well with the implementation of innovation platforms that have continuous reflection, learning and adaptation as a specific design principle.Here, we outline our rationale for applying a developmental evaluation to enhance the formation, functioning and outcomes of an innovation platform aimed at accelerating and strengthening large-scale quality improvement efforts in Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary healthcare. We provide examples to explain how the developmental evaluation findings were used for adaptation of the innovation platform and assess to what extent our application of developmental evaluation was consistent with, and reflective of, its essential principles.Our evaluation aligned strongly with the principles of developmental evaluation, and the approach we took was well suited to situations with a developmental purpose, innovation niche and complexity such as innovation platforms. As a result, along with the increasing interest in multi-stakeholder platforms (e.g. innovation platforms) and the inherent challenges with evaluating these complex networks, we anticipate our use of this approach being of interest globally.


Subject(s)
Health Services Research , Health Services, Indigenous/standards , Quality Improvement , Australia , Chronic Disease , Feedback , Humans , Learning , Longitudinal Studies , Primary Health Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...