Translating Person-Centered Care Policy Into Practice: A Pre-Post Study of a Work-Based Learning Intervention for Nurses.

BACKGROUND: Person-centered care is critical to quality health care, but difficult to implement. This challenge is attributed to cultural factors derived from group values about work practices. Work-based educational interventions allow nurses to develop shared meanings of practice, in this case, promoting the value of person-centered care. METHOD: A 30-minute, work-based educational intervention incorporating reflection on videorecorded practice scenarios was evaluated with a quasi-experimental pre-post design. Nurses (N = 119) completed a survey, including a subset of 16 items from the Person-Centred Practice Inventory-Staff, before and immediately after the intervention. RESULTS: Nurses' awareness of what patients value about their care, the importance of connecting with the patient, and the value of integrating human elements into actions increased after the intervention. Nurses' perceptions of how they would include patients and their preferences in care decisions did not significantly change. CONCLUSION: Educational techniques that allow nursing teams to reflect on practice may help with implementation of person-centered care. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2024;55(6):303-308.].

Developing a simulation safety policy for translational simulation programs in healthcare.

Healthcare simulation may present risks to safety, especially when delivered 'in situ'-in real clinical environments-when lines between simulated and real practice may be blurred. We felt compelled to develop a simulation safety policy (SSP) after reading reports of adverse events in the healthcare simulation literature, editorials highlighting these safety risks, and reflecting on our own experience as a busy translational simulation service in a large healthcare institution.The process for development of a comprehensive SSP for translational simulation programs is unclear. Personal correspondence with leaders of simulation programs like our own revealed a piecemeal approach in most institutions. In this article, we describe the process we used to develop the simulation safety policy at our health service, and crystalize principles that may provide guidance to simulation programs with similar challenges.

Supporting Australian clinical learners in a collaborative clusters education model: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Nursing student numbers have risen in response to projected registered nurse shortfalls, increasing numbers of new graduates requiring transitional support and pressure on clinical placements. A Collaborative Clusters Education Model, in which Entry to Practice facilitators coach ward-based registered nurses to support students' and new graduates' learning, may address placement capacity. The research aim was to evaluate the acceptability of the Collaborative Clusters Education Model to stakeholders by examining their perceptions of the facilitators and barriers to the model in its implementation. METHODS: A convergent mixed methods evaluation approach was adopted. The study took place in a large Australian health service in south-east Queensland. Participants included Bachelor of Nursing students, Entry to Practice facilitators, ward-based registered nurses, academics and new graduates. A mixed methods design was used. Elements included an online survey of nursing students, and interviews with new graduates, Entry to Practice facilitators, ward-based registered nurses, and academics. Descriptive statistics were calculated on quantitative data. Thematic analysis was conducted on qualitative data. RESULTS: Participants included 134 (of 990) nursing students (response rate 13.5%), five new graduates, seven Entry to Practice facilitators, four registered nurses, and three nurse academics. Students rated facilitators' effectiveness highly (4.43/5 ± 0.75), although this finding is tempered by a low response rate (13.5%). For learners, the model provided access to learning experiences, although preferences for sources of support differed between students and new graduates, and further clarification of responsibilities was required. For other stakeholders, three themes emerged: students' and new graduates' integration into the workplace can promote learning; tensions arise in new ways to approach performance assessment; and aligning expectations requires high levels of communication. CONCLUSIONS: This evaluation found that acceptability was good but at risk from limited clarity around roles and responsibilities. Further research into this model is recommended.

Translational simulation for rapid transformation of health services, using the example of the COVID-19 pandemic preparation.

Healthcare simulation has significant potential for helping health services to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid changes to care pathways and processes needed for protection of staff and patients may be facilitated by a translational simulation approach-diagnosing changes needed, developing and testing new processes and then embedding new systems and teamwork through training. However, there are also practical constraints on running in situ simulations during a pandemic-the need for physical distancing, rigorous infection control for manikins and training equipment and awareness of heightened anxiety among simulation participants. We describe our institution's simulation strategy for COVID-19 preparation and reflect on the lessons learned-for simulation programs and for health services seeking to utilise translational simulation during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. We offer practical suggestions for a translational simulation strategy and simulation delivery within pandemic constraints. We also suggest simulation programs develop robust strategies, governance and relationships for managing change within institutions-balancing clinician engagement, systems engineering expertise and the power of translational simulation for diagnosing, testing and embedding changes.

How can end of life care excellence be normalized in hospitals? Lessons from a qualitative framework study.

BACKGROUND: There is a pressing need to improve end-of-life care in acute settings. This requires meeting the learning needs of all acute care healthcare professionals to develop broader clinical expertise and bring about positive change. The UK experience with the Liverpool Care of the Dying Pathway (LCP), also demonstrates a greater focus on implementation processes and daily working practices is necessary. METHODS: This qualitative study, informed by Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), investigates how a tool for end-of-life care was embedded in a large Australian teaching hospital. The study identified contextual barriers and facilitators captured in real time, as the 'Clinical Guidelines for Dying Patients' (CgDp) were implemented. A purposive sample of 28 acute ward (allied health 7 [including occupational therapist, pharmacists, physiotherapist, psychologist, speech pathologist], nursing 10, medical 8) and palliative care (medical 2, nursing 1) staff participated. Interviews (n = 18) and focus groups (n = 2), were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using an a priori framework of NPT constructs; coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. RESULTS: The CgDp afforded staff support, but the reality of the clinical process was invariably perceived as more complex than the guidelines suggested. The CgDp 'made sense' to nursing and medical staff, but, because allied health staff were not ward-based, they were not as engaged (coherence). Implementation was challenged by competing concerns in the acute setting where most patients required a different care approach (cognitive participation). The CgDp is designed to start when a patient is dying, yet staff found it difficult to diagnose dying. Staff were concerned that they lacked ready access to experts (collective action) to support this. Participants believed using CgDp improved patient care, but there was an absence of participation in real time monitoring or quality improvement activity. CONCLUSIONS: We propose a model, which addresses the risks and barriers identified, to guide implementation of end-of-life care tools in acute settings. The model promotes interprofessional and interdisciplinary working and learning strategies to develop capabilities for embedding end of life (EOL) care excellence whilst guided by experienced palliative care teams. Further research is needed to determine if this model can be prospectively applied to positively influence EOL practices.