https://www.mdu.se/

PurposeTo gain a deeper understanding of the development of a joint vision for Close Care, its obstacles and opportunities, in the region of Sörmland based on national health and social services reforms.Design/methodology/approachSeven semi-structured interviews were conducted with thirteen stakeholders. Documentation from the process was used to enhance the findings. A qualitative content analysis was performed.FindingsStakeholders described Close Care as entailing “person centeredness, cooperation, and resource sharing” but found it “too abstract”. Participation in developing the vision varied, with experiences of “external pressure” and low “readiness for organisational change”. Views on a regional vision’s “relevance and usability” differed. Participants highlighted several opportunities for the Close Care vision, such as: “a stepping-stone for implementation”, “harmonises with other health care visions” and “forming a cross municipal and regional network”. They also noted obstacles like “symbolic alienation”, “cognitive complexity”, “short-term economic reality” and “uncertainty around implementation”.Practical implicationsOpportunities and obstacles for the vision of Close Care can inform complex healthcare reforms that require stakeholder cooperation.Social implicationsUnderstanding Close Care may enable health system stakeholders to more effectively cooperate around the citizens’ needs.Originality/valueResearch on common ground has mainly focused on national or international policy levels and individual hospitals, professionals or patients. This study offers insights on regional and municipal cooperation in health care driven by a common vision.

Organisational interventions are recommended to address the root causes of ill-health in organisations. Yet, the evidence for their effectiveness is inconclusive, likely because such interventions are complex, and their effectiveness depends on how and in which contexts the interventions are implemented. This makes organisational interventions challenging to evaluate. While multiple factors affecting implementation and intervention outcomes have been uncovered, it remains unclear which of them are necessary and which are sufficient to produce desired outcomes. To move forward, we argue that the field would benefit from using a theory of causation that better reflects that factors can combine in various ways, that there may be multiple paths to the same outcome, and that a factor can be necessary for bringing about an outcome and thus always leads to it, or sufficient, implying that multiple factors can independently lead to the same outcome. We believe that the use of evaluation designs that align with this type of causation, such as the configurational comparative methods in general and coincidence analysis in particular, will be a significant turning point for the field. The proposed paradigm will improve the precision of current frameworks and models for the evaluation and implementation of organisational interventions.

 Background:  The use of low-value care (LVC) is a persistent challenge in health care. Health technology reassessment (HTR) assesses the effects of technologies currently used in the health care system to guide optimal use of these technologies. Consequently, HTR holds promises for identifying and reducing, i.e., de-implementing, the use of LVC. There is limited research on how HTR is executed to support the de-implementation of LVC and whether and how HTR outcomes are translated into practical application. The aim of this study is to investigate how HTR is conducted to facilitate de-implementation of LVC and to investigate how the results of HTR are received and acted on in health care settings.

 Methods:  This study is a qualitative interview study with representatives from health technology assessment agencies (n = 16) that support the regional health care organizations in Sweden and with representatives from the health care organizations (n = 7). Interviews were analysed with qualitative content analysis.

 Results:  We identified three overarching categories for how HTR facilitates de-implementation of LVC and how the results are received and acted on in health care settings: (1) involving key stakeholders to facilitate de-implementation of LVC in identifying potential LVC practices, having criteria for accepting HTR targets, ascertaining high-quality reports and disseminating the reports; (2) actions taken by health care organization to de-implement LVC by priority setting and decision-making, networking between health care organizations and monitoring changes in the use of LVC practices; and (3) sustaining use of LVC by not questioning continued use, continued funding of LVC and by creating opinion against de-implementation.

 Conclusions:  Evidence is not enough to achieve de-implementation of LVC. This has made health technology assessment agencies and health care organizations widen the scope of HTR to encompass strategies to facilitate de-implementation, including involving key stakeholders in the HTR process and taking actions to support de-implementation. Despite these efforts, there can still be resistance to de-implementation of LVC in passive forms, involving continued use of the practice and more active resistance such as continued funding and opinion-making opposing de-implementation. Knowledge from implementation and de-implementation research can offer guidance in how to support the execution phase of HTR.

Background: Evidence-based interventions (EBIs) are frequently modified in practice. It is recommended that decisions to modify EBIs should be made deliberately to ensure fidelity-consistency, yet the relationship between fidelity-consistency and deliberateness is not well understood. This study aims to explore modifications in a sample of practitioners delivering evidence-based parenting programs (i.e., interventions to strengthen parent–child relationships, reduce harmful interactions, and improve child health and well-being). The study investigated three research questions: (1) What kind of modifications are made during the delivery of parenting programs? (2) To what degree are the identified modifications consistent with the core functions of each program? and (3) Is deliberateness associated with the fidelity-consistency of the identified modifications? Methods: In total, 28 group leaders of five widely disseminated parenting programs in Sweden participated in five focus groups, and two participants from each group also participated in individual interviews (n = 10). A content analysis approach was used where the identification of modifications was directed by the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) and then assessed for fidelity-consistency and four levels of deliberateness (universal, situational, conditional, and unintentional). Chi-square tests were performed to compare consistent and inconsistent modifications, and logistic regression was performed to explore whether deliberateness predicted consistency. Results: A total of 137 content modifications were identified, covering most of the content modification categories in FRAME. The most common were tailoring/tweaking/refining, adding elements, shortening/condensing, lengthening/extending, and integrating another treatment. Modifications were mostly fidelity-consistent but consistency varied greatly among categories. Furthermore, modifications made unintentionally or situationally were more likely to be fidelity-inconsistent. Conclusions: These results indicate that explicit consideration of modifications and their impact could be essential for sustaining the fidelity-consistent use of EBIs, even as such interventions are continuously modified.

BackgroundPersons who become life-threateningly ill or injured (due to for example trauma or cardiac arrest) are cared for in hospitals' designated emergency rooms at the emergency department (ED). In these rooms, the life-threatening condition and biomedical focus may reinforce a culture that value the medical-technical care. Meeting patients fundamental care needs (integrating physical, psychosocial and relational care needs) in a person-centred way might hence be challenging in emergency rooms. Little is known about how person-centred fundamental care is experienced and valued by vulnerable and exposed patients in emergency rooms. This study aims to describe fundamental care needs experienced by patients with a life-threating condition in the emergency room.MethodsA descriptive deductive qualitative study with individual interviews were carried out with 15 patients who had been life-threateningly ill or injured and admitted in an emergency room, in Sweden. Data collection was conducted during 2022. Transcribed interviews were analyzed with deductive content analysis, based on the Fundamentals of Care framework.ResultsDespite being life-threateningly ill or injured, patients were still able to describe their unique needs-which were not only related to biomedical care. A relationship was established between healthcare professionals and the patient in the initial stage, but not maintained during their stay at the emergency room. Patients felt their physical needs were met to a greater extent than psychosocial and relational needs, despite their prioritizing the latter. Patients preferred personalized care but described care as task oriented. The physical environment limited patients from having their fundamental care needs met, and they adopted to a "patient role" to avoid adding to staff stress. The emergency room situation evoked existential thoughts.ConclusionsThis paper provides unique insights into patients' experiences of being cared for in an emergency room. From the patient perspective, physical care was not enough. Relationship, timely and personalized information, and existential needs were identified as essential fundamental care needs, which were not, or only partly met. The finding highlights the need to embed and prioritize fundamental care in practice also for patients who are life-threateningly ill or injured, which in turn calls for focus on organizational prerequisites to enable person-centred fundamental care.

Introduction: Guidelines are important for guiding clinical practice and governing registered nurses’ work in an emergency room to enable them to secure quality of care and patient safety in a life-saving situation. However, guidelines are not always systematically prepared, or evidence based. This study aimed to map and describe the content of Swedish guidelines governing the registered nurses’ work in emergency rooms. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional design, together with a thematic synthesis of content of the submitted guidelines. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and a thematic synthesis. Quality of the guidelines was measured using a modified version of the AGREE II instrument. Results: The result is based on 190 included guidelines, collected from 37 participating emergency departments. The registered nurses’ work in emergency rooms was guided by an instrumental and task-oriented approach to care, with a wide variation in how the registered nurses’ work was described in the guidelines. The quality of the guidelines was poor. The registered nurse was reported as target user in 15 % (n = 29) of the guidelines. None of the guidelines described the population to whom they were meant to apply. In 17 % (n = 32) there was an explicit link between recommendations and supporting evidence. Conclusions: There is a need to improve guidelines to support registered nurses in assessing, treating, and providing fundamental care for patients with life-threatening illnesses in an equal, evidence-based, and person-centered way. Registered nurses should play an active role in the development of the guidelines governing their work. 

Working conditions of eldercare are often characterized by a high workload and different organizational approaches have been suggested to reduce the potentially negative health-related effects of such conditions. One of the suggested approaches involves reducing the exposure to such working conditions by reducing the number of working hours. However, the knowledge of the concurrent health-related effects of working fewer hours remains limited. This longitudinal study set out to examine the health-related effects of an intervention involving daily working hours being reduced from >= 7 to 6 h. Data came from an organizational intervention that included 68 women employed in the municipal eldercare. All employees retained full-time salaries and additional personnel were employed by the organization in order to provide full services throughout the intervention period. A broad range of biomarkers and self-ratings in questionnaires were obtained before the intervention, 6 months after the change, and 12 months after the initial change. Measurements among referents (n = 19), matched with respect to type of work, were performed at corresponding time points. Results from repeated measures ANOVAs showed significant interaction effects for diastolic blood pressure and HbA1c with these effects being primarily related to changes among referents. No other significant group differences were found. Time-related effects emerged in both groups but cannot be attributed to the intervention as such. To conclude, this study showed none of the hypothesized health promoting or other consistent effects of reduced working hours.

Evidence-based interventions have the potential to improve health and well-being, but their effectiveness depends, among other things, on the challenging act of balancing between fidelity and adaptation, referred to as the fidelity-adaptation dilemma. After initial implementation, it is primarily professionals delivering evidence-based interventions to end users that face the dilemma, but research about how professionals relate to and perceive it is limited. This study aims to describe professionals’ attitudes towards the dilemma and investigate the associations between professional attitudes and individual and organisational implementation determinants, individual characteristics, and work-life consequences for the professionals. Using a cross-sectional design, 103 professionals working with an evidence-based parental support programme ABC (All Children in Focus) were surveyed on attitudes towards the fidelity-adaptation dilemma, implementation determinants, and work-life consequences. Data were analysed using two-step cluster analysis. Three profile groups summarize professionals’ attitudes: one preferring fidelity (the adherers, n = 31), one preferring adaptations (the adapters, n = 50), and one with a dual view on fidelity and adaptation (the double-minded, n = 18). The adherers, the ones preferring fidelity, reported higher levels of skills, knowledge, openness, work-related self-efficacy, meaning of work, and possibilities for development, and a lower level of role conflict and unreasonable tasks compared to the adapters. Professionals with a positive attitude towards fidelity reports experiencing more job resources and a lower level of job demands compared to professionals who are more positive towards adaptation. The study shows that the fidelity-adaptation dilemma is at play during the sustainment phase of implementation and suggest that it has consequences for professionals working life.

Background Few effective health interventions transition from smaller efficacy or effectiveness studies to real-world implementation at scale, representing a gap between evidence and practice. Recognising this, we have developed Nutrition Now - a tailored digital resource building on four efficacious dietary interventions, aiming to improve nutrition in the important first 1,000 days of life. Nutrition Now targets and guides expectant parents and parents of 0-2 year olds, serves as a reliable source of evidence-based information for midwives and public health nurses at maternal and child healthcare (MCH) centres, and offers pedagogical tools for early childhood education and care (ECEC) staff. The aim of this study is to implement Nutrition Now at scale and evaluate the impact of different sets of multifaceted implementation strategies on implementation outcomes.Methods A quasi-experimental design with three study arms will be used, providing either low, medium or high implementation support, when rolled out in 50 municipalities in 2 counties in Norway. Nutrition Now will be implemented in MCH and ECEC settings and made available to expectant parents and parents of 0-2 year olds through social media and MCH. The implementation support builds on strategies described in the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) implementation framework and is informed by dialogues with stakeholders. Impact of the different degree of implementation support will be assessed by examining reach, adoption, fidelity, and sustainability using usage data generated from the Nutrition Now resource, publicly available municipal data and qualitative interviews with MCH and ECEC staff.Discussion Nutrition Now Phase 2 will break new ground by scaling up successively delivered and complementary dietary interventions in the first 1,000 days of life in a real-life context. The project also seeks to identify what level of implementation support is most effective when implementing digital, scalable, evidence-based early-life nutrition interventions in community settings. The project will inform implementation research and provide knowledge about effective implementation strategies to be used in a national scale-up of Nutrition Now.Trial registration The study is registered prospectively (submitted 14/06/2022, registration date: 19/06/2022) in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry (ISRCTN): reg. Number: ISRCTN10694967

Organizational occupational health interventions (OOHIs) that are perceived by employees as relevant for their workplace are more likely to be implemented successfully, yet little is known about the conditions that produce such perceptions. This study identifies the conditions that create a perception among employees that an intervention fits their organization as well as the conditions that result in low levels of perceived fit. We used two-wave data from 40 Danish preschools that underwent a quasi-experimental OOHI. Perceived fit was assessed through employee ratings at follow-up, while survey responses from implementation team members at five time points were used to assess four context and 14 process factors. The results of a coincidence analysis showed that high levels of perceived fit were achieved through two paths. Each path consisted of a lack of co-occurring changes together with either very high levels of managerial support (path_1) or a combination of implementation team role clarity, staff involvement, and team learning (path_2). In contrast, low levels of perceived fit were brought about by single factors: limited leader support, low degree of role clarity, or concurrent organizational changes. The findings reveal the complexity involved in implementing OOHIs and offer insights into reasons they may fail.