Qualitative Analysis of Patient Decisional Needs for Medications to Treat Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: The development of tools to support shared decision-making should be informed by patients' decisional needs and treatment preferences, which are largely unknown for heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) pharmacotherapy decisions. We aimed to identify patients' decisional needs when considering HFrEF medication options. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. We recruited patients with HFrEF from 2 Canadian ambulatory HF clinics and clinicians from Canadian HF guideline panels, HF clinics, and Canadian HF Society membership. We identified themes through inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants included 15 patients and 12 clinicians. Six themes and associated subthemes emerged related to HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision-making: (1) patient decisional needs included lack of awareness of a choice or options, difficult decision timing and stage, information overload, and inadequate motivation, support and resources; (2) patients' decisional conflict varied substantially, driven by unclear trade-offs; (3) treatment attribute preferences-patients focused on both benefits and downsides of treatment, whereas clinicians centered discussion on benefits; (4) quality of life-patients' definition of quality of life depended on pre-HF activity, though most patients demonstrated adaptability in adjusting their daily activities to manage HF; (5) shared decision-making process-clinicians' described a process more akin to informed consent; (6) decision support-multimedia decision aids, virtual appointments, and primary-care comanagement emerged as potential enablers of shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HFrEF have several decisional needs, which are consistent with those that may respond to decision aids. These findings can inform the development of HFrEF pharmacotherapy decision aids to address these decisional needs and facilitate shared decision-making.

Barriers and facilitators to improving the cascade of HIV care in Ontario: a mixed method study.

BACKGROUND: Engagement in care is important for people living with HIV (PLH) to achieve optimal outcomes. Several strategies have been developed to improve client flow through the HIV care cascade, specifically targeting initiation of treatment, adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), retention in care, and engagement in care. We have previously identified effective care cascade strategies in a systematic review. Initiation of ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, and changes in healthcare delivery. Adherence to ART could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, counselling, and psychotherapy. Retention in care could be improved by mobile health interventions, incentives, education, and electronic interventions. The aim of this study was to investigate barriers and facilitators to implementing these effective interventions in HIV clinics in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We conducted a sequential explanatory mixed methods study. In the quantitative strand, we administered a survey to health workers who provide care to PLH to identify barriers and facilitators. In the qualitative strand, we conducted in-depth interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) with health workers and with PLH to explain our quantitative findings. Qualitative and quantitative data were merged to create meta-inferences. RESULTS: Twenty health workers from 8 clinics in 9 cities in Ontario took the survey. Nine PLH and 10 health workers participated in the qualitative interviews. Clinics in Ontario implemented all the effective interventions identified from the literature for initiation of treatment, adherence to ART, and retention in care despite concerns about resources. Barriers to physical and financial access to care, the workload for tailored care, and expertise were identified by both health workers and PLH. Key facilitators were virtual care and client preparedness through education and peer support. CONCLUSION: Clinics in Ontario appear to implement several evidence-based strategies to improve PLH engagement. There is a need for more health workers with skills to address unique PLH needs. Virtual care is beneficial to both health workers and PLH.

Culture Change in Long-Term Care-Post COVID-19: Adapting to a New Reality Using Established Ideas and Systems.

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic in long-term care (LTC) has threatened to undo efforts to transform the culture of care from institutionalized to de-institutionalized models characterized by an orientation towards person- and relationship-centred care. Given the pandemic's persistence, the sustainability of culture-change efforts has come under scrutiny. Drawing on seven culture-change models implemented in Canada, we identify organizational prerequisites, facilitatory mechanisms, and frontline changes relevant to culture change that can strengthen the COVID-19 pandemic response in LTC homes. We contend that a reversal to institutionalized care models to achieve public health goals of limiting COVID-19 and other infectious disease outbreaks is detrimental to LTC residents, their families, and staff. Culture change and infection control need not be antithetical. Both strategies share common goals and approaches that can be integrated as LTC practitioners consider ongoing interventions to improve residents' quality of life, while ensuring the well-being of staff and residents' families.

Developmental evaluation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Practice-based learnings from projects in British Columbia, Canada.

In this article, we explore experiences and learnings from adapting to challenges encountered in implementing three Developmental Evaluations (DE) in British Columbia, Canada within the evolving context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We situate our DE projects within our approach to the DE life cycle and describe challenges encountered and required adaptations in each phase of the life cycle. Regarding foundational aspects of DEs, we experienced challenges with relationship building, assessing and responding to the context, and ensuring continuous learning. These challenges were related to suboptimal embeddedness of the evaluators within the evaluated projects. We adapted by leveraging online channels to maintain communications and securing stakeholder engagement by assuming non-traditional DE roles based on our knowledge of the context to support project goals. Additional challenges experienced with mapping the rationale and goals of the projects, identifying domains for assessment, collecting data, making sense of the data and intervening were adapted to by facilitating online workshops, collecting data online and through proxy evaluators, while sharing methodological insights within the evaluation team. During evolving crises, like the COVID-19 pandemic, evaluators must embrace flexibility, leverage, and apply their knowledge of the evaluation context, lean on their strengths, purposefully reflect and share knowledge to optimise their DEs.

Patient engagement in healthcare planning and evaluation: A call for social justice.

Patient engagement in healthcare planning and evaluation has been promoted as a way to improve healthcare's ability to meet patients' needs. However, populations experiencing oppression and discrimination, such as racism, colonialism, sexism, heterosexism, cisnormativity, ableism, classism, and poverty, are often underrepresented in patient engagement spaces. The context and structure of patient engagement processes may systematically exclude certain populations from participating in meaningful ways or from participating at all. By excluding certain populations from active, meaningful patient engagement, we risk planning and evaluating health services on the basis of the values, needs, and preferences of the dominant population. This, in turn, will further entrench health inequities and preclude the ability to surface ideas that challenge dominant conceptualisations of health and healthcare, thereby reinforcing the status quo rather than promoting healthcare transformation. Recognising that experiences of health, healthcare, and patient engagement processes are mediated through gender, race, ability, sexual orientation, and other dimensions of diversity, it is proposed that processes for engaging patients in healthcare planning and evaluation must by intersectional, attend to systemic and power relations, and truly put patients in the driver's seat of engagement processes. Health services planners and evaluators need to create more inclusive, accessible, and appropriate patient engagement experiences in order to focus on transforming healthcare towards a more socially just system.

Themes for evaluating the quality of initiatives to engage patients and family caregivers in decision-making in healthcare systems: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the key themes for evaluating the quality of initiatives to engage patients and family caregivers in decision-making across the organisation and system domains of healthcare systems. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review. Seven databases of journal articles were searched from their inception to June 2019. Eligible articles were literature reviews published in English and provided useful information for determining aspects of engaging patients and family caregivers in decision-making to evaluate. We extracted text under three predetermined categories: structure, process and outcomes that were adapted from the Donabedian conceptual framework. These excerpts were then independently open-coded among four researchers. The subsequent themes and their corresponding excerpts were summarised to provide a rich description of each theme. RESULTS: Of 7747 unique articles identified, 366 were potentially relevant, from which we selected the 42 literature reviews. 18 unique themes were identified across the three predetermined categories. There were six structure themes: engagement plan, level of engagement, time and timing of engagement, format and composition, commitment to support and environment. There were four process themes: objectives, engagement approach, communication and engagement activities. There were eight outcome themes: decision-making process, stakeholder relationship, capacity development, stakeholder experience, shape policy/service/programme, health status, healthcare quality, and cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The 18 themes and their descriptions provide a foundation for identifying constructs and selecting measures to evaluate the quality of initiatives for engaging patients and family caregivers in healthcare system decision-making within the organisation and system domains. The themes can be used to investigate the mechanisms through which relevant initiatives are effective and investigate their effectiveness.

Building capacity for implementation-the KT Challenge.

BACKGROUND: The KT Challenge program supports health care professionals to effectively implement evidence-based practices. Unlike other knowledge translation (KT) programs, this program is grounded in capacity building, focuses on health care professionals (HCPs), and uses a multi-component intervention. This study presents the evaluation of the KT Challenge program to assess the impact on uptake, KT capacity, and practice change. METHODS: The evaluation used a mixed-methods retrospective pre-post design involving surveys and review of documents such as teams' final reports. Online surveys collecting both quantitative and qualitative data were deployed at four time points (after both workshops, 6 months into implementation, and at the end of the 2-year funded projects) to measure KT capacity (knowledge, skills, and confidence) and impact on practice change. Qualitative data was analyzed using a general inductive approach and quantitative data was analyzed using non-parametric statistics. RESULTS: Participants reported statistically significant increases in knowledge and confidence across both workshops, at the 6-month mark of their projects, and at the end of their projects. In addition, at the 6-month check-in, practitioners reported statistically significant improvements in their ability to implement practice changes. In the first cohort of the program, of the teams who were able to complete their projects, half were able to show demonstrable practice changes. CONCLUSIONS: The KT Challenge was successful in improving the capacity of HCPs to implement evidence-based practice changes and has begun to show demonstrable improvements in a number of practice areas. The program is relevant to a variety of HCPs working in diverse practice settings and is relatively inexpensive to implement. Like all practice improvement programs in health care settings, a number of challenges emerged stemming from the high turnover of staff and the limited capacity of some practitioners to take on anything beyond direct patient care. Efforts to address these challenges have been added to subsequent cohorts of the program and ongoing evaluation will examine if they are successful. The KT Challenge program has continued to garner great interest among practitioners, even in the midst of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, and shows promise for organizations looking for better ways to mobilize knowledge to improve patient care and empower staff. This study contributes to the implementation science literature by providing a description and evaluation of a new model for embedding KT practice skills in health care settings.

Quality of patient, family, caregiver and public engagement in decision-making in healthcare systems: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: To advance person- and family-centred healthcare, government initiatives have supported the engagement of patients and family caregivers in decision-making in healthcare systems. There is, however, no consensus on how to define success for such initiatives. This scoping review aims to identify the key elements for defining the quality of patient and family caregiver engagement in decision-making across the engagement domains (individual, community/organisation, system) of British Columbia's healthcare system. We will use those elements to develop a conceptual evaluation framework. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This scoping review follows Arskey and O'Malley's methodology. (1) The research question was identified through team discussions. (2) Articles for data source will be identified using a librarian-informed search strategy for seven bibliographic databases as well as grey literature sources. (3) Selected articles will be relevant to the evaluation of patient and family caregiver engagement in healthcare systems. (4) Two researchers will independently extract data into predefined and emerging categories. (5) The researchers will reconcile and organise the identified elements. The research team's collective perspective will then refine the elements, and select, interpret and summarise the results. (6) Persons from key stakeholder groups will be consulted to refine the emergent conceptual framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: We will seek ethics approval for the stakeholder consultation. This study follows an integrated knowledge translation approach. The results will inform evaluation of the Patients as Partners Initiative of the British Columbia Ministry of Health, and will be disseminated as a scientific article, a research brief, and presentations at conferences and stakeholder meetings.

Heard and valued: the development of a model to meaningfully engage marginalized populations in health services planning.

BACKGROUND: Recently, patient engagement has been identified as a promising strategy for supporting healthcare planning. However, the context and structure of universalistic, "one-size-fits-all" approaches often used for patient engagement may not enable diverse patients to participate in decision-making about programs intended to meet their needs. Specifically, standard patient engagement approaches are gender-blind and might not facilitate the engagement of those marginalized by, for example, substance use, low income, experiences of violence, homelessness, and/or mental health challenges-highly gendered health and social experiences. The project's purpose was to develop a heuristic model to assist planners to engage patients who are not traditionally included in healthcare planning. METHODS: Using a qualitative research approach, we reviewed literature and conducted interviews with patients and healthcare planners regarding engaging marginalized populations in health services planning. From these inputs, we created a model and planning manual to assist healthcare planners to engage marginalized patients in health services planning, which we piloted in two clinical programs undergoing health services design. The findings from the pilots were used to refine the model. RESULTS: The analysis of the interviews and literature identified power and gender as barriers to participation, and generated suggestions to support diverse populations both to attend patient engagement events and to participate meaningfully. Engaging marginalized populations cannot be reduced to a single defined process, but instead needs to be understood as an iterative process of fitting engagement methods to a particular situation. Underlying this process are principles for meaningfully engaging marginalized people in healthcare planning. CONCLUSION: A one-size-fits-all approach to patient engagement is not appropriate given patients' diverse barriers to meaningful participation in healthcare planning. Instead, planners need a repertoire of skills and strategies to align the purpose of engagement with the capacities and needs of patient participants. Just as services need to meet diverse patients' needs, so too must patient engagement experiences.

Adverse events following immunization: evaluating an enhanced nursing role for PHNs.

Maintaining confidence in vaccine safety is critical to successful public health immunization programs. Surveillance and assessment of adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) are important for maintaining vaccine safety. The authors describe the evaluation of an initiative at Fraser Health Authority designed to enhance the role of a communicable disease nurse coordinator (CDNC) in assessing AEFI reports, in collaboration with a designated medical health officer (MHO) as required, and providing recommendations to clients and immunization providers. Previously, only MHOs performed this role. This evaluation project demonstrates this initiative's feasibility and provides a roadmap for health authorities interested in pursuing a similar model. MHOs, public health nurses and public health management expressed satisfaction with the process and the quality of the CDNC's recommendations. There was no statistically significant difference in median turnaround time for AEFI reporting date and date of recommendation, indicating this work is completed in as timely a manner by the CDNC as by the MHO. This role provides opportunity for professional growth, facilitates nursing practice to full scope, enables acquisition of specialized knowledge and provides a platform to share nursing expertise at a provincial level.