Project description:BACKGROUND:To optimize patient education, it is important to understand what healthcare professionals perceive to be ideal oncology medication education for patients to receive, and what they feel is their role and the role of others in its delivery. Education provided to patients is an important component of chemotherapy as it has been shown to benefit and positively impact patients who receive it. Educational interventions are often provided by multidisciplinary teams with the goal of improving patient care. However, few studies have explored the roles of healthcare professionals in delivering oncology medication education. OBJECTIVE:To explore the perspectives of healthcare professionals working in medical, gynaecological or hematological oncology to identify what they perceive to be optimal oncology medication education for patients. METHODS:Healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses and pharmacists) working in medical, gynaecological or hematological oncology at the Nova Scotia Health Authority, Central Zone were invited to participate in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews which were audio-recorded, transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS:Fifteen interviews, including five physicians, four nurses and six pharmacists were conducted from February to April 2018. Four major themes were identified: Delivery of oncology medication education, Facilitating the patient learning process, Multidisciplinary Approach and Understanding barriers to the healthcare professional in providing education. CONCLUSION:The identified themes uncovered novel ideas about how healthcare professionals felt oncology medication education could ideally be delivered to patients, and supported findings in the literature. Although participants discussed barriers to their ability to deliver optimal education, they also identified ways in which they can facilitate patient learning, for example, through the reinforcement of education. Participants recognized the importance of increasing collaboration and communication with the multidisciplinary team. This research will inform the design of any new models for oncology medication education at the Nova Scotia Health Authority, Central Zone and potentially other sites.

Project description:ObjectiveAlthough value-based healthcare (VBHC) views accurate cost information to be crucial in the pursuit of value, little is known about how the costs of care should be measured. The aim of this review is to identify how costs are currently measured in VBHC, and which cost measurement methods can facilitate VBHC or value-based decision making.DesignTwo reviewers systematically search the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, EBSCOhost and Web of Science databases for publications up to 1 January 2022 and follow Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify relevant studies for further analysis.Eligibility criteriaStudies should measure the costs of an intervention, treatment or care path and label the study as 'value based'. An inductive qualitative approach was used to identify studies that adopted management accounting techniques to identify if or how cost information facilitated VBHC by aiding decision-making.ResultsWe identified 1930 studies, of which 215 measured costs in a VBHC setting. Half of these studies measured hospital costs (110, 51.2%) and the rest relied on reimbursement amounts. Sophisticated costing methods that allocate both direct and indirect costs to care paths were seen as able to provide valuable managerial information by facilitating care path adjustments (39), benchmarking (38), the identification of cost drivers (47) and the measurement of total costs or cost savings (26). We found three best practices that were key to success in cost measurement: process mapping (33), expert input (17) and observations (24).ConclusionsCost information can facilitate VBHC. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is viewed as the best method although its ability to inform decision-making depends on how it is implemented. While costing short, or partial, care paths and surgical episodes produces accurate cost information, it provides only limited decision-making information. Practitioners are advised to focus on costing full care cycles and to consider both direct and indirect costs through TDABC.

Project description:BackgroundPatient safety incidents, such as adverse events and medical errors, are often caused by ineffective communication and collaboration. Interprofessional education is an effective method for promoting collaborative competencies and has attracted great attention in the context of patient safety. However, the effectiveness of interprofessional education interventions on patient safety remains unclear. This scoping review aimed to synthesize existing studies that focused on improving patient safety through interprofessional education interventions for healthcare professionals.MethodsSix databases, including Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL (via EBSCO), Scopus and Web of Science, were last searched on 20 December 2023. The search records were independently screened by two researchers. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool for Quasi-Experimental Studies was used for quality appraisal. The data were extracted by two researchers and cross-checked. Finally, a narrative synthesis was performed. The protocol for this scoping review was not registered.ResultsThirteen quasi-experimental studies with moderate methodological quality were included. The results revealed that the characteristics of current interprofessional education interventions were diverse, with a strong interest in simulation-based learning strategies and face-to-face delivery methods. Several studies did not assess the reduction in patient safety incidents involving adverse events or medical errors, relying instead on the improvements in healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitude or practice related to patient safety issues. Less than half of the studies examined team performance, based primarily on the self-evaluation of healthcare professionals and observer-based evaluation. There is a gap in applying newer tools such as peer evaluation and team-based objective structured clinical evaluation.ConclusionAdditional evidence on interprofessional education interventions for improving patient safety is needed by further research, especially randomized controlled trials. Facilitating simulation-based interprofessional education, collecting more objective outcomes of patient safety and selecting suitable tools to evaluate teamwork performance may be the focus of future studies.

Project description:BackgroundIn this study, we sought to assess healthcare professionals' acceptance of and satisfaction with a shared decision making (SDM) educational workshop, its impact on their intention to use SDM, and their perceived facilitators and barriers to the implementation of SDM in clinical settings in Iran.MethodsWe conducted an observational quantitative study that involved measurements before, during, and immediately after the educational intervention at stake. We invited healthcare professionals affiliated with Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, East Azerbaijan, Iran, to attend a half-day workshop on SDM in December 2016. Decisions about prenatal screening and knee replacement surgery was used as clinical vignettes. We provided a patient decision aid on prenatal screening that complied with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards and used illustrate videos. Participants completed a sociodemographic questionnaire and a questionnaire to assess their familiarity with SDM, a questionnaire based on theoretical domains framework to assess their intention to implement SDM, a questionnaire about their perceived facilitators and barriers of implementing SDM in their clinical practice, continuous professional development reaction questionnaire, and workshop evaluation. Quantitative data was analyzed descriptively and with multiple linear regression.ResultsAmong the 60 healthcare professionals invited, 41 participated (68%). Twenty-three were female (57%), 18 were specialized in family and emergency medicine, or community and preventive medicine (43%), nine were surgeons (22%), and 14 (35%) were other types of specialists. Participants' mean age was 37.51 ± 8.64 years with 8.09 ± 7.8 years of clinical experience. Prior to the workshop, their familiarity with SDM was 3.10 ± 2.82 out of 9. After the workshop, their belief that practicing SDM would be beneficial and useful (beliefs about consequences) (beta = 0.67, 95% CI 0.27, 1.06) and beliefs about capability of using SDM (beta = 0.32, 95% CI -0.08, 0.72) had the strongest influence on their intention of practicing SDM. Participants perceived the main facilitator and barrier to perform SDM were training and high patient load, respectively.ConclusionsParticipants thought the workshop was a good way to learn SDM and that they would be able to use what they had learned in their clinical practice. Future studies need to study the level of intention of participants in longer term and evaluate the impact of cultural differences on practicing SDM and its implementation in both western and non-western countries.

Dataset Information

Cost and value in healthcare professionals' education: should we consider a monopsony model?

Publications

Cost and value in healthcare professionals' education: should we consider a monopsony model?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets