Search

Copyright of Canadian Oncology Nursing Journal is the property of Pappin Communications and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Case management (CM) is an intervention for improving integrated care for patients with complex care needs. The implementation of this complex intervention often raises opportunities for change and collective leadership has the potential to optimize the implementation. However, the application of collective leadership in real-world is not often described in the literature. This commentary highlights challenges faced during the implantation of a CM intervention in primary care for people with complex care needs, including stakeholders' buy-in and providers' willingness to change their practice, selection of the best person for the case manager position and staff turnover. Based on lessons learned from PriCARE research program, this paper encourages researchers to adopt collective leadership strategies for the implementation of complex interventions, including promoting a collaborative approach, fostering stakeholders' engagement in a trusting and fair environment, providing a high level of communication, and enhancing collective leadership attitudes and skills. The learnings from the PriCARE program may help guide researchers for implementing complex healthcare interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Canada, different categories of nursing professionals, including registered nurses and practical nurses, often "collaborate" to provide care to patients. How their collaboration is currently conceptualized in the literature varies; and these conceptualizations are not always contextualized by the complex sociopolitical environment in which nursing professionals work. The purpose of this study was to explicate how different categories of nursing professionals (registered nurses and practical nurses) worked together to provide patient care after a provincial health authority implemented a new nursing care delivery model to "optimize" patient care. The authors used Smith's institutional ethnography to guide the study, and data collection methods included observing, conducting interviews, and identifying the texts activated through the nursing professionals' work. Data analysis focused on the social organization of the nursing professionals collaboration, while keeping the complex contexts within they completed their daily work in view. The article concludes with recommendations for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d'etudes sur le Nouveau-Brunswick is the property of Journal of New Brunswick Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are widely recognized as important tools for achieving a patient‐centred approach in health research. While PROMs are subject to several stages of validation during development, even questionnaires with robust psychometric properties may challenge patient comfort and understanding. Aim: Building on the experience of patient engagement in the PriCARE research programme, this paper outlines the team's response to concerns raised by patient partners regarding the administration of the questionnaire. Methods: Based on a participatory action research design and the patient engagement framework in the Strategy for Patient‐Oriented Research of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, PriCARE team members worked together to discuss concerns, review the questionnaires and come up with solutions. Data were collected through participant observation of team meetings. Results: This paper demonstrates how patient partners were engaged in PriCARE and integrated into the programme's governance structure, focusing on the challenges that they raised regarding the questionnaires and how these were addressed by PriCARE team members in a six‐step approach: (1) Recognizing patient partner concerns, discussing concerns and reframing the challenges; (2) Detailing and sharing evidence of the validity of the questionnaires; (3) Evaluating potential solutions; (4) Searching the literature for guidelines; (5) Creating guidelines; and (6) Sharing and refining guidelines. Conclusion: This six‐step approach demonstrates how research teams can integrate patient partners as equal members, develop meaningful collaboration through recognition of individual experiences and expertise and ensure that the patient perspective is taken into consideration in research and healthcare innovation. Patient or Public Contribution: All patient partners from the PriCARE programme were actively involved in the six‐step approach. They were also involved in the preparation of the manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d'etudes sur le Nouveau-Brunswick is the property of Journal of New Brunswick Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aims: To systematically explore the structures, functions, outcomes, roles and nursing credentials of memory clinics where nurses autonomously lead diagnosis and postdiagnostic care. Design: A systematic rapid review was conducted. Data sources: MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL Full‐Text (EBSCO) and EMBASE were systematically searched in December 2019 with no timeframe limitations imposed. Review Methods: The modified PRISMA checklist was used as a guide to facilitate the review. Articles identified were screened and assessed for inclusion criteria, and screening of reference lists of included studies was also completed. Results: Six articles, published between 2011–2019, including two case studies, two descriptive reports, one qualitative study and one programme evaluation were included in the review. Nurse‐led memory clinics were situated in community centres, on university campuses, hospitals and in general practitioners' offices. The services offered included assessment, diagnosis and treatment/postdiagnostic care. Nurse credentials included advanced practice nurses and a community psychiatric nurse who was a non‐medical prescriber. Overall, there was low quantity and quality of evidence to evaluate outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Advances have been made to improve health care for children with complex health conditions (CCHCs); however, little is known of the needs of these children and their families in the Canadian context. In this article, we describe our Canadian Institutes of Health Research funded Quick Strike protocol, a mixed-methods multisite research project that explored CCHC and their families in two Canadian provinces. The aims were (a) to describe and define CCHC, (b) to understand the needs of CCHC and their families, (c) to identify gaps and barriers to services for this population, and (d) to adapt and test the application of a computerized algorithm to yield information on CCHC. The mixed-methods design was comprised of four components: three qualitative and one quantitative. We describe the components of this project and outline the methods and procedures of data collection and analysis for each component. One of the main sources of data was interviews from 121 stakeholders, which included CCHC and family members, as well as health, social, and education professionals. This Quick Strike project was designed to engage stakeholders and the public with integrated knowledge translation threaded as a core element throughout the research process. Multiple strategies were used to validate and disseminate early findings from the research. As we outline in this article, this research project provided the foundation for one innovative service model of care, NaviCare/SoinsNavi, and spawned a number of additional outcomes such as a secondary analysis of the data to describe interprofessional collaboration for CCHC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Case management (CM) is among the most studied effective models of integrated care for people with complex needs. The goal of this study is to scale up and assess CM in primary healthcare for people with complex needs., Methods and Analysis: The research questions are: (1) which mechanisms contribute to the successful scale-up of CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare?; (2) how do contextual factors within primary healthcare organisations contribute to these mechanisms? and (3) what are the relationships between the actors, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes when scaling-up CM for people with complex needs in primary healthcare? We will conduct a mixed methods Canadian interprovincial project in Quebec, New-Brunswick and Nova Scotia. It will include a scale-up phase and an evaluation phase. At inception, a scale-up committee will be formed in each province to oversee the scale-up phase. We will assess scale-up using a realist evaluation guided by the RAMESES checklist to develop an initial programme theory on CM scale-up. Then we will test and refine the programme theory using a mixed-methods multiple case study with 10 cases, each case being the scalable unit of the intervention in a region. Each primary care clinic within the case will recruit 30 adult patients with complex needs who frequently use healthcare services. Qualitative data will be used to identify contexts, mechanisms and certain outcomes for developing context-mechanism-outcome configurations. Quantitative data will be used to describe patient characteristics and measure scale-up outcomes., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained. Engaging researchers, decision-makers, clinicians and patient partners on the study Steering Committee will foster knowledge mobilisation and impact. The dissemination plan will be developed with the Steering Committee with messages and dissemination methods targeted for each audience., 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.)

Existing barriers to care were exacerbated by the development and implementation of necessary public health restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children with complex care needs and their families represent a small portion of the paediatric population, and yet they require disproportionately high access to services. Little is known about the impact of COVID-19 public health measures on this population. This study will generate evidence to uncover the wider impact of COVID-19 measures on the lives of children with complex care needs and their families in relation to policy and service changes. This multi-site sequential mixed methods study will take place across the Canadian Maritime provinces and use an integrated knowledge translation approach. There are two phases to this study: 1) map COVID-19 public health restrictions and service changes impacting children with complex care needs by conducting an environmental scan of public health restrictions and service changes between March 2020 and March 2022 and interviewing key informants involved in the development or implementation of restrictions and service changes, and 2) explore how children with complex care needs and their families experienced public health restrictions and service changes to understand how their health and well-being were impacted., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Curran et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)