Search

Abstract Background Chief Executive Officer’s (CEO) are integral leaders of health care organisation. Over the last two decades in United States (US) hospitals, it has been noted that CEO turnover rates are increasing, and it was reported that the CEO turnover rates have augmented from 14% in 2008 to 18% in 2017 in the private sector. In Australia, it was discovered that during two years, 41 executives had 18 distinct positions. It has been highlighted that the increasing CEO turnover is a major issue for Australian and international health care organisations. Some of the negative consequences of CEO turnover include organisational instability, high financial costs, loss of human capital and adverse effects on staff morale and patient care. Objective Our scoping review aimed to map and summarise the evidence associated with CEO turnovers in both health and non-health setting, and answer the following questions: 1. What are the reasons for CEO departure?, 2. What are the strategies to minimise CEO turnover? Results A protocol explaining the objectives, inclusion criteria and methods for this scoping review were specified in advance and published. This scoping review included 17 studies (13 health and 4 non-health setting) published over a 31-year period that investigated and described the increasing CEO turnover rates. All 17 studies identified causes of CEO turnover along with certain studies identifying facilitators of CEO retention. We classified CEO’s departure reasons into three major themes: organizational, performance, and personal. Organisational factors include CEO departures due to issues within the organisation, performance factors include issues with CEO’s work and personal factors captures personal reasons for CEO’s leaving their job. Conclusion CEOs are under immense pressure to deliver good results and drive growth while satisfying the interests of internal and external stakeholders. There are various reasons for CEO’s departure however the most common factor identified is organisational.

Abstract Background Coronary artery disease including acute coronary syndrome (ACS) constitutes the most common cause of death in people with cardiovascular disease. Prompt diagnosis and early initiation of treatment significantly impact on patient outcomes. Positive patient experience with their initial care is linked to positive clinical outcomes. Objective This qualitative review aimed to investigate patients’ experience of care provision and the challenges faced by them during their different stages of care following an ACS. Methods Searches of four databases - MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsychINFO - were conducted from inception until July 13, 2022, and were limited to English-language publications. Assessment of methodological quality of studies was performed using the Jonna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative assessment and review instrument. Data were extracted using the standardised data extraction tool from JBI. Data synthesis following the JBI approach of meta-aggregation was performed. The level of confidence for each synthesised finding was established based on ConQual. Results Overall, from 578 records, 10 studies were included with 39 findings extracted from the included studies. The main synthesised findings were the need to provide tailored information and appropriate management at different stages of care, and that timely management and trust in health care workers are associated with greater patient satisfaction and more positive experiences. Conclusion Patients with an ACS experience many challenges during different stages of their care. Clinicians should be aware of the challenges they face and provide tailored information to patients that is appropriate for their different stages of management in order to best optimise patient experience and improve patient outcomes.

Abstract Background Dyspnea is considered a silent threat to people diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease and may be a common concern in patients, however, little is known about how it affects quality of life. This study explored the experiences of independently mobile people who are affected by dyspnea in daily life. Methodology This was a cross-sectional mixed methods study that included an online questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The participants were included if they were diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease; had a self-reported Hoehn and Yahr Score I, II or III; were mobilizing independently; and were Arabic speakers. Participants were excluded if they had any other musculoskeletal, cardiac, respiratory, or neurological diseases; or were previous or current smokers; or had been previously hospitalized due to respiratory complications. Results A total of 117 participants completed the Arabic version of the Dyspnea-12 Questionnaire. Dyspnea was reported in all participants and that it had an adverse effect on their quality of life, especially during activities of daily living. Additionally, participants reported a lack of knowledge about pulmonary rehabilitation and were unaware of the availability and potential benefits of participation in programs. Conclusion Dyspnea was reported in people in the early stages (Hoehn and Yahr Stages I, II, and III) of Parkinson’s disease, and may benefit from routine assessment of lung function, dyspnea management and participation in pulmonary rehabilitation.

Abstract Scoping reviews, mapping reviews, and evidence and gap maps are evidence synthesis methodologies that address broad research questions, aiming to describe a bigger picture rather than address a specific question about intervention effectiveness. They are being increasingly used to support a range of purposes including guiding research priorities and decision making. There is however a confusing array of terminology used to describe these different approaches. In this commentary, we aim to describe where there are differences in terminology and where this equates to differences in meaning. We demonstrate the different theoretical routes that underpin these differences. We suggest ways in which the approaches of scoping and mapping reviews may differ in order to guide consistency in reporting and method. We propose that mapping and scoping reviews and evidence and gap maps have similarities that unite them as a group but also have unique differences. Understanding these similarities and differences is important for informing the development of methods used to undertake and report these types of evidence synthesis.

Abstract Background Management decisions in health influence patient care outcomes; however, health management development courses in China are rare. This study aims to document and evaluate a transnational Master of Health Administration (MHA) course launched in 2000 for the benefit of Chinese health managers. Methods A case study of the MHA program jointly run by an Australian university and a Chinese Medical University was conducted. We reviewed the development of the MHA course through a document analysis (key events recorded in achieves, minutes, and audits) followed by reflection (by two course coordinators), extracting key themes related to adaptative strategies. We then conducted a questionnaire survey of 139 graduates seeking their views on relevance, satisfaction and challenges associated with each subject within the course, the relevance of key management skills (as determined by the Australasian College of Health Service Management competency framework), and the impact of the course on their personal career trajectories. Chi-square tests identified differences in the responses by age, gender, pre-training position, and current workplace. Results The curriculum pedagogy followed the principles of practice-based reflective learning. Research findings and student feedback shaped the curriculum design and subject content, to enhance management practices of the students. Survey participants expressed high levels of satisfaction and confirmed the relevance of all study subjects. Two subjects, health economics and data management, were perceived as being the most challenging. Of the ten management skills we assessed, relatively low self-rated confidence was found in “strategic thinking” and “planning”. Younger and less experienced graduates were more likely to report learning challenges (p

Abstract Background The changing and evolving healthcare environment means organisations are under increasing pressure to deliver value-based, high quality care to patients through enabling access, reducing costs and improving outcomes. These factors result in an increased pressure to deliver efficient and beneficial interventions to improve patient care and support sustainability beyond the scope of the implementation of such interventions. Additionally, the literature highlights the importance of coordination, cooperation and working together across areas is critical to achieving implementation success. This paper discusses the development of a triple C model for implementation that supports sustainability of complex interventions in health care services. Methods In order to develop the proposed implementation model, we adapted the formal tradition of theory building that is described in sociology. Firstly, we conducted a review of the literature on complex interventions and the available implementation models used to embed these interventions to identify the key aspects relating to successful implementation. Secondly, we devised a framework that encompassed these findings into a simple and workable model that can be easily embedded into everyday practice. This proposed model uses clear, systemic explanation, adds to the current knowledge in this area and is fit for purpose, providing healthcare workers with a simple easy-to-follow framework to embed practice change. Results A three-stage implementation model was devised based on the findings of the literature and named the Triple C model (Consultation, Collaboration and Consolidation). The three stages are interconnected and overlap to support sustainability is considered at all levels of the project ensuring its greater success. This model considers the sustainability within any implementation project. Sustainability of interventions are a key consideration for continuous and successful change in any health care organisation. A set of criteria were developed for each of the three stages to support adaptability and sustainment of interventions are maintained throughout the life of the intervention. Conclusion Ensuring sustainability of interventions requires continuing effort and embedding the need for sustainability throughout all stages of an implementation project. The Triple C model offers a new approach for healthcare clinicians to support sustainability of organizational change.