Search

The Australian healthcare sector is a complex mix of government departments, associations, providers, professionals, and consumers. Cybersecurity attacks, which have recently increased, challenge the sector in many ways; however, the best approaches for the sector to manage the threat are unclear. This study will report on a semi-structured focus group conducted with five representatives from the Australian healthcare and computer security sectors. An analysis of this focus group transcript yielded four themes: 1) the challenge of securing the Australian healthcare landscape; 2) the financial challenges of cybersecurity in healthcare; 3) balancing privacy and transparency; 4) education and regulation. The results indicate the need for sector-specific tools to empower the healthcare sector to mitigate cybersecurity threats, most notably using a self-evaluation tool so stakeholders can proactively prepare for incidents. Despite the vast amount of research into cybersecurity, little has been conducted on proactive cybersecurity approaches where security weaknesses are identified weaknesses before they occur. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ward rounds are an important and ubiquitous element of hospital care with a history extending well over a century. Although originally intended as a means of educating medical trainees and junior doctors, over time they have become focused on supporting clinical practice. Surprisingly, given their ubiquity and importance, they are under-researched and inadequately understood. This study aims to contribute knowledge in human reasoning within medical teams, meeting a pressing need for research concerning the reasoning occurring in rounds.Methods: The research reported here aimed to improve the understanding of ward round reasoning by conducting a critical realist case study exploring the collaborative group reasoning mechanisms in the ward rounds of two hospitals in Victoria, Australia. The data collection involved observing rounds, interviewing medical practitioners and holding focus group meetings.Results: Nine group reasoning mechanisms concerning sharing, agreeing and recording information in the categories of information accumulation, sense-making and decision-making were identified, together forming a program theory of ward round reasoning. In addition, themes spanning across mechanisms were identified, further explaining ward round reasoning and suggesting avenues for future exploration. Themes included the use of various criteria, tensions involving mechanisms, time factors, medical roles and hierarchies.Conclusions: This paper contributes to the literature by representing rounds in a manner that strengthens understanding of the form of the group reasoning occurring within, thus supporting theory-based evaluation strategies, redesigned practices and training enhancements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]