Search

Objectives: During the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare professionals were faced with prioritisation dilemmas due to limited surgical capacity. While the views of healthcare professionals on fair allocation have been given considerable attention, the views of patients have been overlooked. To address this imbalance, our study aimed to identify which ethical principles are most supported by patients regarding the fair allocation of surgical resources., Design: A Q-methodology study was conducted. Participants ranked ordered 20 statements covering different viewpoints on fair allocation according to their point of view, followed by an interview. Principal component analysis followed by varimax rotation was used to identify subgroups who broadly agreed in terms of their rankings., Setting: The setting of this study was in the Netherlands., Participants: 16 patient representatives were purposively sampled., Results: Two perspectives were identified, both of which supported utilitarianism. In perspective 1, labelled as 'clinical needs and outcomes', resource allocation should aim to maximise the health gains based on individual patient characteristics. In perspective 2, labelled as 'population outcomes and contribution to society', allocation should maximise health gains as with perspective 1, but this should also consider societal gains., Conclusions: There was a broad agreement among patient representatives that utilitarianism should be the guiding ethical principle for fair allocation of scarce surgical resources. The insights gained from this study should be integrated into policymaking and prioritisation strategies in future healthcare crises., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: This study investigated changes in the length of stay (LoS) at a level III/IV neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and level II neonatology departments until discharge home for very preterm infants and identified factors influencing these trends., Design: Retrospective cohort study based on data recorded in the Netherlands Perinatal Registry between 2008 and 2021., Setting: A single level III/IV NICU and multiple level II neonatology departments in the Netherlands., Participants: NICU-admitted infants (n=2646) with a gestational age (GA) <32 weeks., Main Outcome Measures: LoS at the NICU and overall LoS until discharge home., Results: The results showed an increase of 5.1 days (95% CI 2.2 to 8, p<0.001) in overall LoS in period 3 after accounting for confounding variables. This increase was primarily driven by extended LoS at level II hospitals, while LoS at the NICU remained stable. The study also indicated a strong association between severe complications of preterm birth and LoS. Treatment of infants with a lower GA and more (severe) complications (such as severe retinopathy of prematurity) during the more recent periods may have increased LoS., Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the increasing overall LoS for very preterm infants. LoS of very preterm infants is presumably influenced by the occurrence of complications of preterm birth, which are more frequent in infants at a lower gestational age., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Value-based healthcare suggests that care outcomes should be evaluated in relation to the costs of delivering that care from the perspective of the provider. However, few providers achieve this because measuring cost is considered complex and elaborate and, further, studies routinely omit cost estimates from 'value' assessments due to lacking data. Consequently, providers are currently unable to steer towards increased value despite financial and performance pressures. This protocol describes the design, methodology and data collection process of a value measurement and process improvement study in fertility care featuring complex care paths with both long and non-linear patient journeys., Methods and Analysis: We employ a sequential study design to calculate total costs of care for patients undergoing non-surgical fertility care treatments. In doing so, we identify process improvement opportunities and cost predictors and will reflect on the benefits of the information generated for medical leaders. Time-to-pregnancy will be viewed in relation to total costs to determine value. By combining time-driven, activity-based costing with observations and process mining, we trial a method for measuring care costs for large cohorts using electronic health record data. To support this method, we create activity and process maps for all relevant treatments: ovulation induction, intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilisation (IVF), IVF with intracytoplasmic sperm injection and frozen embryo transfer after IVF. Our study design, by showing how different sources of data can be combined to enable cost and outcome measurements, can be of value to researchers and practitioners looking to measure costs for care paths or entire patient journeys in complex care settings., Ethics and Dissemination: This study was approved by the ESHPM Research Ethics Review Committee (ETH122-0355) and the Reinier de Graaf Hospital (2022-032). Results will be disseminated through seminars, conferences and peer-reviewed publications., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Although previous studies largely emphasize the positive effects of patient participation in patient safety, negative effects have also been observed. This study focuses on bringing together the separate negative effects that have been previously reported in the literature. This study set out to uncover how these negative effects manifest themselves in practice within an obstetrics department., Design: An exploratory qualitative interview study with 16 in-depth semistructured interviews. The information contained in the interviews was deductively analysed., Setting: The study was conducted in one tertiary academic healthcare centre in the Netherlands., Participants: Patients (N=8) and professionals (N=8) from an obstetrics department., Results: The results of this study indicate that patient participation in patient safety comes in five different forms. Linked to these different forms, four negative effects of patient participation in patient safety were identified. These can be summarised as follows: patients' confidence decreases, the patient-professional relationship can be negatively affected, more responsibility can be demanded of the patient than they wish to accept and the professional has to spend additional time on a patient., Conclusion: This study identifies and brings together four negative effects of patient participation in patient safety that have previously been individually identified elsewhere. In our interviews, there was a consensus among patients and professionals on five different forms of participation that would allow patients to positively participate in patient safety. Further studies should investigate ways to prevent and to mitigate the potential negative effects of patient participation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Although 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., Design: Two 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 Criteria: Studies 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., Results: We 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)., Conclusions: Cost 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., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The third author, KA, was a speaker at the 2022 TDABC conference and was reimbursed for his stay in Lisbon by the TDABC consortium., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Ageing in place, supported by formal home and community services and informal caregivers, is the most used long-term care option for people with dementia (PwD). Informal caregivers are inundated by their caregiving responsibilities and resultantly suffer consequences. Despite the multitude of clinical effectiveness studies on interventions that support informal caregivers, there is a paucity of information regarding their implementation process. This scoping review aims to identify the implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, and barriers and facilitators that impede or support the dissemination and uptake of interventions that support informal caregivers of PwD at home., Methods and Analysis: This protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Protocols, and the scoping review will follow the systematic steps of the PRISMA-Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. The search strategy will include publications produced from inception to 8 March 2021 and will be conducted in the search engines Embase, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), followed by a three-stage approach. First, title and abstracts will be screened by two independent reviewers. Second, full-text articles will also be screened by both reviewers and, in case of disagreement, by a third reviewer. The first two stages are based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Reference lists of the final included studies will also be checked for relevant articles. Data from the final included studies will be extracted and synthesised using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation and Proctor's implementation outcomes to ensure homogenous and standardised reporting of implementation information., Ethics and Dissemination: The review findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at geriatric and implementation conferences to inform researchers, health service planners and practice professionals with an overview of the existing literature to guide them in the effective implementation of caregiver-focused interventions in dementia support., Competing Interests: Competing interests: NS is the director of the London Safety and Training Solutions Ltd, which offers training in patient safety, implementation solutions and human factors to healthcare organisations and the pharmaceutical industry. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Various forms of videoconferenced collaborations exist in oncology care. In regional oncology networks, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) are essential in coordinating care in their region. There is no recent overview of the benefits and drawbacks of videoconferenced collaborations in oncology care networks. This scoping review presents an overview of videoconferencing (VC) in oncology care and summarises its benefits and drawbacks regarding decision-making and care coordination., Design: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (nursing and allied health) and the Cochrane Library from inception to October 2020 for studies that included VC use in discussing treatment plans and coordinating care in oncology networks between teams at different sites. Two reviewers performed data extraction and thematic analyses., Results: Fifty studies were included. Six types of collaboration between teams using VC in oncology care were distinguished, ranging from MDTs collaborating with similar teams or with national or international experts to interactions between palliative care nurses and experts in that field. Patient benefits were less travel for diagnosis, better coordination of care, better access to scarce facilities and treatment in their own community. Benefits for healthcare professionals were optimised treatment plans through multidisciplinary discussion of complex cases, an ability to inform all healthcare professionals simultaneously, enhanced care coordination, less travel and continued medical education. VC added to the regular workload in preparing for discussions and increased administrative preparation., Discussion: Benefits and drawbacks for collaborating teams were tied to general VC use. VC enabled better use of staff time and reduced the time spent travelling. VC equipment costs and lack of reimbursement were implementation barriers., Conclusion: VC is highly useful for various types of collaboration in oncology networks and improves decision-making over treatment plans and care coordination, with substantial benefits for patients and specialists. Drawbacks are additional time related to administrative preparation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: While the uptake of value-based health care (VBHC) is remarkable, uncertainty prevails regarding the most important actions and practices in establishing a value-based healthcare system. In this paper, we generate expert consensus on the most important aspects of VBHC., Design: The Delphi technique was used to reach consensus on the most important practices in moving towards a value-based healthcare system., Setting and Participants: A Dutch expert panel consisting of nine members participated in a two-round survey., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: We developed 39 initial items based on the pioneering literature on VBHC and recent health policies in the Netherlands. Experts rated the importance of each item on a 4-point Likert scale. Experts could change items or add new ones as they saw fit. We retained items that were rated (very) important by ≥80% of the panel., Results: After two survey rounds, 32 items (72%) were included through expert consensus. Experts unanimously agree on the importance of shared decision-making, with this item uniquely obtaining the maximum score. Experts also reached consensus on the importance of outcome measurements, a focus on medical conditions, and full cycles of care. No consensus was reached on the importance of benchmarking., Conclusion: This paper provides new insight into the most important actions and practices for establishing a value-based healthcare system in the Netherlands. Interestingly, several of our findings contrast with the pioneering literature on VBHC. This raises the question whether VBHC's widespread international uptake indicates its actual implementation, or rather that the original concept primarily serves as an inspiring idea., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The fourth author, DD, is professor at the Erasmus University Rotterdam while also employed at Zorginstituut Nederland (National Health Care Institute), which partially funds this research., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: Given the difficulties in diagnosing and treating head-and-neck cancer, care is centralised in the Netherlands in eight head-and-neck cancer centres and six satellite regional hospitals as preferred partners. A requirement is that all patients of the partner should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team meeting (MDT) with the head-and-neck centre as part of a Dutch health policy rule. In this mixed-method study, we evaluate the value that the video-conferenced MDT adds to the MDTs in the care pathway, quantitative regarding recommendations given and qualitative in terms of benefits for the teams and the patient., Design: A sequential mixed-method study., Setting: One oncology centre and its partner in the Northern part of the Netherlands., Participants: Head-and-neck cancer specialists presenting patient cases during video-conferenced MDT over a period of 6 months. Semistructured interviews held with six medical specialists, three from the centre and three from the partner., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Percentage of cases in which recommendations were given on diagnostic and/or therapeutic plans during video-conferenced MDT., Results: In eight of the 336 patient cases presented (2%), specialists offered recommendations to the collaborating team (three given from centre to partner and five from partner to centre). Recommendations mainly consisted of alternative diagnostic modalities or treatment plans for a specific patient. Interviews revealed that specialists perceive added value in discussing complex cases because the other team offered a fresh perspective by hearing the case 'as new'. The teams recognise the importance of keeping their medical viewpoints aligned, but the requirement (that the partner should discuss all patients) was seen as outdated., Conclusions: The added value of the video-conferenced MDT is small considering patient care, but the specialists recognised that it is important to keep their medical viewpoints aligned and that their patients benefit from the discussions on complex cases., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To investigate the consequences of increasing capacity to reduce access times, and to explore how patient waiting times and use of physical capacity were influenced by variability., Design: A retrospective case study that combines both primary and secondary data. Secondary data were retrieved from a hospital database to establish inflow and outflow of patients, utilisation of resources and available capacity, realised access times and the weekly number of new patients seen over 1 year. Primary data consisted of field notes, onsite visits and observations, and semistructured interviews., Setting: A secondary care facility, that is, a rheumatology department, in a large Dutch hospital., Participants: Analyses are based on secondary patient data from the hospital database, and the responses of the interviews with physicians, nurses and Lean Six Sigma project leaders., Results: The study shows that artificial variability was increased by managerial decisions to add capacity and to allow an increased inflow of new patients. This, in turn, resulted in undesirable and significant fluctuations in access times. We argue that we witnessed a new multiplier effect that typifies the fluctuations., Conclusions: Adding capacity resources to reduce access times might appear an obvious and effective solution. However, the outcomes were less straightforward than expected, and even led to new artificial variability. The study reveals a phenomenon that is specific to service environments, and especially healthcare, and has detrimental consequences for access times., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: This study investigated whether the attitudes of physicians towards justified and unjustified litigation, and their perception of patient pressure in demanding care, influence their use of defensive medical behaviours., Design: Cross-sectional survey using exploratory factor analysis was conducted to determine litigation attitude and perceived patient pressure factors. Regression analyses were used to regress these factors on to the ordering of extra tests or procedures (defensive assurance behaviour) or the avoidance of high-risk patients or procedures (defensive avoidance behaviour)., Setting: Data were collected from eight Dutch hospitals., Participants: Respondents were 160 physicians and 54 residents (response rate 25%) of the hospital departments of (1) anaesthesiology, (2) colon, stomach and liver diseases, (3) gynaecology, (4) internal medicine, (5) neurology and (6) surgery., Primary Outcome Measures: Respondents' application of defensive assurance and avoidance behaviours., Results: 'Disapproval of justified litigation' and 'Concerns about unjustified litigation' were positively related to both assurance (β=0.21, p<0.01, and β=0.28, p<0.001, respectively) and avoidance (β=0.16, p<0.05, and β=0.18, p<0.05, respectively) behaviours. 'Self-blame for justified litigation' was not significantly related to both defensive behaviours. Perceived patient pressures to refer (β=0.18, p<0.05) and to prescribe medicine (β=0.23, p<0.01) had direct positive relationships with assurance behaviour, whereas perceived patient pressure to prescribe medicine was also positively related to avoidance behaviour (β=0.14, p<0.05). No difference was found between physicians and residents in their defensive medical behaviour., Conclusions: Physicians adopted more defensive medical behaviours if they had stronger thoughts and emotions towards (un)justified litigation. Further, physicians should be aware that perceived patient pressure for care can lead to them adopting defensive behaviours that negatively affects the quality and safety of patient care., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To investigate the relationship between lean adoption and problem-solving behaviour in nursing teams, and to explore the practices of lean leaders on nursing wards to reveal how they can stimulate second-order problem-solving within their teams., Design: A mixed-methods retrospective multiple case study using semistructured interviews. Interview data were used to assess the level of lean maturity (based on a customised validated instrument) and the level of second-order problem-solving (based on scenarios). Within-case and cross-case analyses were employed to identify lean leadership practices., Setting: 14 nursing teams, with different levels of lean maturity, in a Dutch hospital., Participants: Three members of each nursing team were interviewed: the team leader, one nurse from the ward's core team for the lean-based quality improvement programme and one nurse outside the core team., Interventions: The nursing teams were in various phases of a lean-based quality improvement programme: 'The Productive Ward - Releasing Time to Care'., Results: A strongly significant positive relationship between lean maturity and second-order problem-solving was found: β=0.68, R 2 =0.46, p<0.001. Further, the results indicated a potential strengthening effect of lean leadership on this relationship. Seven lean leadership practices emerged from the data collected in a nursing ward setting: (1) convincing and setting an example; (2) unlocking individual and team potential; (3) solving problems systematically; (4) enthusing, actively participating and visualising; (5) developing self-managing teams; (6) sensing, as orchestrator, what is needed for change; and (7) listening, sharing information and appreciating. These practices have a strong link with transformational leadership., Conclusions: As lean matures, nursing teams reach a higher level of second-order problem-solving. In later stages, lean leaders increasingly relinquish responsibility by developing self-managing teams., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Many types of audits are commonly used in hospital care to promote quality improvements. However, the evidence on the effectiveness of audits is mixed. The objectives of this proposed realist review are (1) to understand how and why audits might, or might not, work in terms of delivering the intended outcome of improved quality of hospital care and (2) to examine under what circumstances audits could potentially be effective. This protocol will provide the rationale for using a realist review approach and outline the method., Methods and Analysis: This review will be conducted using an iterative four-stage approach. The first and second steps have already been executed. The first step was to develop an initial programme theory based on the literature that explains how audits are supposed to work. Second, a systematic literature search was conducted using relevant databases. Third, data will be extracted and coded for concepts relating to context, outcomes and their interrelatedness. Finally, the data will be synthesised in a five-step process: (1) organising the extracted data into evidence tables, (2) theming, (3) formulating chains of inference from the identified themes, (4) linking the chains of inference and formulating CMO configurations and (5) refining the initial programme theory. The reporting of the review will follow the 'Realist and Meta-Review Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards' (RAMESES) publication standards., Ethics and Dissemination: This review does not require formal ethical approval. A better understanding of how and why these audits work, and how context impacts their effectiveness, will inform stakeholders in deciding how to tailor and implement audits within their local context. We will use a range of dissemination strategies to ensure that findings from this realist review are broadly disseminated to academic and non-academic audiences., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42016039882., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.)

Objective: Although the guiding principle of clinical governance states that healthcare professionals are the leading contributors to quality and safety in healthcare, little is known about what healthcare professionals perceive as important for clinical governance. The aim of this study is to clarify this by exploring healthcare professionals' views on clinical governance., Design: Based on a literature search, a list of 99 elements related to clinical governance was constructed. This list was refined, extended and restricted during a three-round Delphi study., Setting and Participants: The panel of experts was formed of 24 healthcare professionals from an academic hospital that is seen as a leader in terms of its clinical governance expertise in the Netherlands., Main Outcome Measures: Rated importance of each element on a four-point scale., Results: The 50 elements that the panel perceived as most important related to adopting a bottom-up approach to clinical governance, ownership, teamwork, learning from mistakes and feedback. The panel did not reach a consensus concerning elements that referred to patient involvement. Elements that referred to a managerial approach to clinical governance and standardisation of work were rejected by the panel., Conclusions: In the views of the panel of experts, clinical governance is a practice-based, value-driven approach that has the goal of delivering the highest possible quality care and ensuring the safety of patients. Bottom-up approaches and effective teamwork are seen as crucial for high quality and safe healthcare. Striving for high quality and safe healthcare is underpinned by continuous learning, shared responsibility and good relationships and collaboration between healthcare professionals, managers and patients., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)