Dataset Information

Resilient performance in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic (ResCOV): study protocol for a multilevel grounded theory study on adaptations, working conditions, ethics and patient safety.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Since early 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has challenged societies and revealed the built-in fragility and dependencies in complex adaptive systems, such as healthcare. The pandemic has placed healthcare providers and systems under unprecedented amounts of strain with potential consequences that have not yet been fully elucidated. This multilevel project aims to explore resilient performance with the purpose of improving the understanding of how healthcare has adapted during the pandemic's rampage, the processes involved and the consequences on working conditions, ethics and patient safety.

Methods

An emerging explorative multilevel design based on grounded theory methodology is applied. Open and theoretical sampling is performed. Empirical data are gathered over time from written narratives and qualitative interviews with staff with different positions in healthcare organisations in two Swedish regions. The participants' first-person stories are complemented with data from the healthcare organisations' internal documents and national and international official documents.

Analysis

Experiences and expressions of resilient performance at different system levels and times, existing influencing risk and success factors at the microlevels, mesolevels and macrolevels and inter-relationships and consequences in different healthcare contexts, are explored using constant comparative analysis. Finally, the data are complemented with the current literature to develop a substantive theory of resilient performance during the pandemic.

Ethics and dissemination

This project is ethically approved and recognises the ongoing strain on the healthcare system when gathering data. The ongoing pandemic provides unique possibilities to study system-wide adaptive capacity across different system levels and times, which can create an important basis for designing interventions focusing on preparedness to manage current and future challenges in healthcare. Feedback is provided to the settings to enable pressing improvements. The findings will also be disseminated through scientific journals and conferences.

SUBMITTER: Bjurling-Sjoberg P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8655346 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionResilient healthcare (RHC) is an emerging area of theory and applied research to understand how healthcare organisations cope with the dynamic, variable and demanding environments in which they operate, based on insights from complexity and systems theory. Understanding adaptive capacity has been a focus of RHC studies. Previous studies clearly show why adaptations are necessary and document the successful adaptive actions taken by clinicians. To our knowledge, however, no studies have thus far compared RHC across different teams and countries. There are gaps in the research knowledge related to the multilevel nature of resilience across healthcare systems and the team-based nature of adaptive capacity.This cross-country comparative study therefore aims to add knowledge of how resilience is enabled in diverse healthcare systems by examining adaptive capacity in hospital teams in six countries. The study will identify how team, organisational and national healthcare system factors support or hinder the ability of teams to adapt to variability and change. Findings from this study are anticipated to provide insights to inform the design of RHC systems by considering how macro-level and meso-level structures support adaptive capacity at the micro-level, and to develop guidance for organisations and policymakers.Methods and analysisThe study will employ a multiple comparative case study design of teams nested within hospitals, in turn embedded within six countries: Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and the UK. The design will be based on the Adaptive Teams Framework placing adaptive teams at the centre of the healthcare system with layers of environmental, organisational and system level factors shaping adaptive capacity. In each of the six countries, a focused mapping of the macro-level features of the healthcare system will be undertaken by using documentary sources and interviews with key informants operating at the macro-level.A sampling framework will be developed to select two hospitals in each country to ensure variability based on size, location and teaching status. Four teams will be selected in each hospital-one each of a structural, hybrid, responsive and coordinating team. A total of eight teams will be studied in each country, creating a total sample of 48 teams. Data collection methods will be observations, interviews and document analysis. Within-case analysis will be conducted according to a standardised template using a combination of deductive and inductive qualitative coding, and cross-case analysis will be conducted drawing on the Qualitative Comparative Analysis framework.Ethics and disseminationThe overall Resilience in Healthcare research programme of which this study is a part has been granted ethical approval by the Norwegian Centre for Research Data (Ref. No. 8643334 and Ref. No. 478838). Ethical approval will also be sought in each country involved in the study according to their respective regulatory procedures. Country-specific reports of study outcomes will be produced for dissemination online. A collection of case study summaries will be made freely available, translated into multiple languages. Brief policy communications will be produced to inform policymakers and regulators about the study results and to facilitate translation into practice. Academic dissemination will occur through publication in journals specialising in health services research. Findings will be presented at academic, policy and practitioner conferences, including the annual RHC Network meeting and other healthcare quality and safety conferences. Presentations at practitioner and academic conferences will include workshops to translate the findings into practice and influence quality and safety programmes internationally.

Project description:Introduction: Consistent with the aspirations of First Nations Australians for community control of healthcare services, 123/196 (63%) of Australia's First Nations-specific primary health care services are community-controlled. Yet despite policy commitment over 30 years, the transition of government-run First Nations' primary healthcare services to First Nations community control has been slow. This paper identifies the barriers and enablers to transitioning the delivery of primary healthcare services from Queensland Health to Gurriny Yealamucka community-controlled health service in Yarrabah. Methods: Grounded theory methods were used to select 14 Gurriny and Queensland Health (QH) personnel involved in the transition for interview and to analyse these interview transcripts and 88 Gurriny organisational documents. Results: Barriers and enablers to transition were identified at three levels: those internal factors within Gurriny, external factors directly related to the government handover, and broader structural and policy factors outside the control of either Gurriny or QH. Barriers at the Gurriny organisational level were an internal lack of experience and capacity, and varying levels of community confidence; enablers were leadership stability and capacity, community mandate, relationships with partner organisations, and ability to provide service continuity. Barriers in Gurriny's relationship with QH were a lack of certainty, transparency and prioritisation of the transition process; systemic racism; difficulties obtaining and maintaining the necessary workforce; limited resources including insufficient, unstable and inappropriate funding support; and problems with information sharing; enablers were performance frameworks to keep transition progress on track. Barriers in broad policy environment were an unsupportive Queensland government policy environment; government bureaucracy; and delays, conflicts and divisions; enablers were high-level government support and commitment. Conclusions: The evaluation of Yarrabah's transition process suggests that future such transitions will require planning and commitment to a long-term, multi-faceted and complex process, encompassing the required level of authorisation and resourcing. This case example of a transition from government to community control of PHC highlighted the ongoing power issues that are faced every day by community-controlled organisations that co-exist with mainstream health systems within a colonial power structure.