Search

Introduction Effective primary healthcare services have been identified by the World Health Organization as the most equitable approach to enhancing universal healthcare. Robust models of mentoring for registered nurses (RNs) transitioning to primary healthcare roles have yet to be described in the Australian context. A robust mentoring model can support RNs to fulfill their potential, bridging the gap between theory and practice. In 2015, the peak body for nurses in primary health care (PHC) began developing a transition to practice program, including embedded mentoring to support newly graduated and more experienced registered and enrolled nurses. This quality improvement study reports the experiences and perspectives of nurses participating as mentors in two separate offerings of the program delivered between 2019 and 2021. Method A two-phase concurrent mixed methods evaluation utilized data from pre- and post online surveys and post program meetings. Quantitative items underwent descriptive analyses. Thematic analysis of free-text responses and comments was conducted independently by two researchers. Mentors voluntarily provided self-report data and were informed that data is routinely collected to support continuous quality improvement processes for all programs. An Information Sheet informed mentors of data usage, confidentiality, and options to withdraw without penalty from the program at any time. Results Seventy-nine mentors were recruited to support two groups of nurses ( N = 111). Mentor self-rated overall satisfaction with program participation was 86.67% (very or extremely satisfied). Mentors described being “witness to mentee growth,” “having facilitated access to learning” and receiving “unexpected benefits” including personal and professional growth and enhanced enthusiasm for their role in PHC. Conclusion The embedded mentoring reported in this article combined a focus on skills acquisition and professional identity with the provision of a range of resources and support activities. Sustainable mentoring programs will be an important mechanism for supporting the expanding roles required of nurses working in primary health.

Abstract Background Process improvement in healthcare is informed by knowledge from the private sector. Skilled individuals may aid the adoption of this knowledge by frontline care delivery workers through knowledge brokering. However, the effectiveness of those who broker knowledge is limited when the context they work within proves unreceptive to their efforts. We therefore need greater insight into the contextual conditions that support individuals to broker process improvement knowledge to the frontline of care delivery, and how policy makers and organizations might generate such conditions. Methods Our research took place in a healthcare system within an Australian State. We undertook a qualitative, embedded single case study over the four year period of a process improvement intervention encompassing 57 semi-structured interviews (with knowledge brokers, policy makers, and executive sponsors), 12 focus groups, and 137 h of observation, which included the frontline implementation of actual process improvement initiatives, where knowledge brokering took place. Results We identified four phases of the process improvement intervention that moved towards a more mature collaboration within which knowledge brokering by improvement advisors began to emerge as effective. In the first phase knowledge brokering was not established. In the second phase, whilst knowledge brokering had been initiated, the knowledge being brokered lacked legitimacy amongst frontline practitioners, resulting in resistance. Only in the fourth and final phase of the intervention did the collective experience of policy makers result in reflections on how they might engender a more receptive context for knowledge brokering. Conclusion We highlight a number of suggested actions that policy makers might consider, if they wish to engender contextual conditions that support knowledge brokering. Policy makers might consider: ensuring they respect local context and experience, by pulling good ideas upward, rather than imposing foreign knowledge from on high; facilitating the lateral diffusion of knowledge by building cultural linkages between people and organizations; strengthening collaboration, not competition, so that trans-organisational flow of ideas might be encouraged; being friend, not foe, to healthcare organizations on their knowledge integration journey. In sum, we suggest that top-down approaches to facilitating the diffusion and adoption of new ideas ought to be reconsidered.

Abstract Background Implementation science seeks to enable change, underpinned by theories and frameworks such as the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Yet academia and frontline healthcare improvement remain largely siloed, with limited integration of implementation science methods into frontline improvement where the drivers include pragmatic, rapid change. Using the CIFR lens, we aimed to explore how pragmatic and complex healthcare improvement and implementation science can be integrated. Methods Our research involved the investigation of a case study that was undertaking the implementation of an improvement intervention at a large public health service. Our research involved qualitative data collection methods of semi-structured interviews and non-participant observations of the implementation team delivering the intervention. Thematic analysis identified key themes from the qualitative data. We examined our themes through the lens of CFIR to gain in-depth understanding of how the CFIR components operated in a ‘real-world’ context. Results The key themes emerging from our research outlined that leadership, context and process are the key components that dominate and affect the implementation process. Leadership which cultivates connections with front line clinicians, fosters engagement and trust. Navigating context was facilitated by ‘bottom-up’ governance. Multi-disciplinary and cross-sector capability were key processes that supported pragmatic and agile responses in a changing complex environment. Process reflected the theoretically-informed, and iterative implementation approach. Mapping CFIR domains and constructs, with these themes demonstrated close alignment with the CFIR. The findings bring further depth to CFIR. Our research demonstrates that leadership which has a focus on patient need as a key motivator to engage clinicians, which applies and ensures iterative processes which leverage contextual factors can achieve successful, sustained implementation and healthcare improvement outcomes. Conclusions Our longitudinal study highlights insights that strengthen alignment between implementation science and pragmatic frontline healthcare improvement. We identify opportunities to enhance the relevance of CFIR in the ‘real-world’ setting through the interconnected nature of our themes. Our study demonstrates actionable knowledge to enhance the integration of implementation science in healthcare improvement.

Introduction Current nursing programs provide little pre-registration information and clinical exposure to primary health care nursing practice. Newly graduated nurses and those transitioning to primary health care report disorientation and confusion. Limited knowledge about the ideal elements of a program to support transitioning nurses is an imperative to understand how best to support nurses during this period. The peak body for nurses in primary health care was funded to develop and implement a 1-year transition to practice improvement initiative for nurses in Australia about to be employed in or who are new to primary health care. This quality improvement evaluation study aimed to determine the impact of the transition program on participants’ nursing knowledge, skills, and confidence, and their overall satisfaction with the program. Methods A mixed methods evaluation of the project utilized data from online pre- and post-participation surveys, mentor meetings, and field notes. Descriptive statistics and paired t -tests were employed for quantitative items. Free text and field notes were subject to broad thematic analysis. Findings from qualitative and quantitative data were triangulated. Results Ninety-three nurse participants and 62 mentors were recruited. There were statistically significant differences between mean summed post-completion and pre-completion self-assessment rating scores for knowledge, skills, and confidence. Program elements were well received. The orientation workshop, mentoring, and education activities were identified as most influential in supporting transition. The self-assessment framework was identified as least influential. Conclusion A 12-month transition program was effective in building the knowledge, skills, and confidence of participants to deliver comprehensive and effective nursing services.

Therapeutic virtual reality (VR) has the potential to address the challenges of equitable delivery of evidence-based psychological treatment. However, little is known about therapeutic VR regarding the perspectives and needs of real-world service providers. This exploratory study aimed to assess the acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of therapeutic VR among clinicians, managers, and service staff working in mental healthcare and explore potential implementation barriers and enablers. Eighty-one staff from a network of private psychiatric hospitals in Victoria, Australia (aged M + SD: 41.88 + 12.01 years, 71.6% female; 64% clinical staff) completed an online survey, which included the Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Appropriateness of Intervention Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM). While 91% of participants had heard about VR technology, only 40% of participants had heard of therapeutic VR being used in mental healthcare, and none had used therapeutic VR in a clinical setting. Most participants perceived VR to be acceptable (84%), appropriate (69%), and feasible (59%) to implement within their role or service and envisioned a range of possible applications. However, participants expressed concerns regarding safety, efficacy, and logistical challenges across clinical settings. Findings suggest a strong interest for therapeutic VR among Australian mental health providers working in the private system. However, dissemination efforts should focus on addressing identified barriers to ensure mental health providers are adequately informed and empowered to make implementation decisions.

Objectives: Virtual reality (VR) has emerged as a highly promising tool for assessing and treating a range of mental illnesses. However, little is known about the perspectives of key stakeholders in mental healthcare, whose support will be critical for its successful implementation into routine clinical practise. This study aimed to explore the perspectives of staff working in the private mental health sector around the use of therapeutic VR, including potential implementation barriers and facilitators.Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with cross-disciplinary clinicians (n = 14) and service managers (n = 5), aged 28–70 years working in a major private mental health hospital in Victoria, Australia. Transcripts were analysed using general inductive coding to allow themes to naturally emerge.Results: Three major themes were identified: clinical factors (four subthemes), organisational factors (five subthemes), and professional factors (three subthemes). The themes encompassed enabling factors and potential barriers that need to be addressed for successful implementation of VR. Clinical factors highlighted the influence of knowledge or perceptions about appropriate clinical applications, therapeutic efficacy, safety and ethical concerns, and patient engagement. Organisational factors emphasised the importance of service contexts, including having a strong business case, stakeholder planning, recruitment of local opinion leaders to champion change, and an understanding of resourcing challenges. Professional factors highlighted the need for education and training for staff, and the influence of staff attitudes towards technology and perceived usability of VR.Conclusions: In addition to enabling factors, potential implementation barriers of therapeutic VR were identified, including resourcing constraints, safety and ethical concerns, negative staff attitudes towards technology and VR system limitations. Future dissemination should focus on addressing knowledge and skills gaps and attitudinal barriers through development of clinical guidelines, training programs, and implementation resources (e.g., adoption decision tools, consultation opportunities).