Search

Purpose While research has confirmed the feasibility and validity of delivering clinical swallowing evaluations (CSEs) via telepractice, challenges exist for clinical implementation. Using an implementation framework, strategies that supported implementation of CSE services via telepractice within 18 regional/rural sites across five health services were examined. Method A coordinated implementation strategy involving remote training and support was provided to 18 sites across five health services (five hub and spoke services) that had identified a need to implement CSEs via telepractice. Experiences of all 10 speech-language pathologists involved at the hub sites were examined via interviews 1 year post implementation. Interview content was coded using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and constructs were rated for strength and direction of influence, using published CFIR coding conventions. Results Services were established and are ongoing at all sites. Although there were site-specific differences, 10 CFIR constructs were positive influencing factors at all five sites. The telepractice model was perceived to provide clear advantages for the service, and clinicians were motivated by positive patient response. Strategies used to support implementation, including having a well-organized implementation resource and an external facilitator who worked closely with the local champions, were highly valued. Two CFIR constructs, Structural Characteristics and Available Resources , were challenges for all sites. Conclusions A complex interplay of factors influenced service implementation at each site. A strong local commitment to improving patient care, and the assistance of targeted strategies to support local implementation were viewed as central to enabling implementation.

Older people are particularly vulnerable to hospital re-presentation following discharge. Ideal discharge planning processes facilitate the transition from hospital to home and prevent subsequent re-presentations to hospital. The objective of this study was to examine discharge planning processes in two Australian hospitals, compare them between sites and to best-practice recommendations. An ethnographic observational study of discharge planning processes was conducted at two general medical inpatient wards at a large tertiary hospital and a smaller regional hospital in Brisbane, Australia. Participants were patients and ward staff involved in discharge planning during a hospital admission. A literature review was conducted to elicit best-practice recommendations for discharge planning. Data for this study (duration: 112 h) were collected directly using field notes by a research assistant embedded in the ward. A directed qualitative content analysis approach was used for data analysis. Results were compared to best-practice recommendations. Findings indicate that both hospitals implemented various best-practice interventions to enhance communication, collaboration, coordination and patient/family engagement for optimal discharge planning. Strategies used were context specific and effective to varying degrees. Clear responsibilities and goals within the multidisciplinary team helped to create cohesive, well-functioning teams. More work is needed to engage patients and families in discharge planning, and to encourage health professionals to consider patients and family as active team members in the discharge planning process.