Search

Background Coproduction is defined as patients and clinicians collaborating equally and reciprocally in healthcare and is a crucial concept for quality improvement (QI) of health services. Learning Health Networks (LHNs) provide insights to integrate coproduction with QI efforts from programmes from various health systems.Objective We describe interventions to develop and maintain patient and family partner (PFP) coproduction, measured by PFP-reported and programme-reported scales. We aim to increase percentage of programmes with PFPs reporting active QI work within their programme, while maintaining satisfaction in PFP-clinician relationships.Methods Conducted in the Cystic Fibrosis Learning Network (CFLN), an LHN comprising over 30 cystic fibrosis (CF) programmes, people with CF, caregivers and clinicians cocreated interventions in readiness awareness, inclusive PFP recruitment, onboarding process, partnership development and leadership opportunities. Interventions were adapted by CFLN programmes and summarised in a change package for existing programmes and the orientation of new ones. We collected monthly assessments for PFP and programme perceptions of coproduction and PFP self-rated competency of QI skills and satisfaction with programme QI efforts. We used control charts to analyse coproduction scales and run charts for PFP self-ratings.Results Between 2018 and 2022, the CFLN expanded to 34 programmes with 52% having ≥1 PFP reporting active QI participation. Clinicians from 76% of programmes reported PFPs were actively participating or leading QI efforts. PFPs reported increased QI skills competency (17%–32%) and consistently high satisfaction and feeling valued in their work.Conclusions Implementing system-level programmatic strategies to engage and sustain partnerships between clinicians and patients and families with CF improved perceptions of coproduction to conduct QI work. Key adaptable strategies for programmes included onboarding and QI training, supporting multiple PFPs simultaneously and developing financial recognition processes. Interventions may be applicable in other health conditions beyond CF seeking to foster the practice of coproduction.

Abstract Introduction A learning health network is a type of learning health system in which stakeholders use network organization to improve health and health care. Building on existing resources in the cystic fibrosis (CF) community, the Cystic Fibrosis Learning Network (CFLN) was designed to improve medical outcomes and quality of life through an intentional focus on achieving reliable evidence‐based chronic care delivery and creating a system for data‐driven collaborative learning. Methods We describe the development and growth of the CFLN considering six domains of a Network Maturity Grid: system leadership; governance and policy management; quality improvement (QI); engagement and community building; data and analytics; and research. We illustrate the impact of the CFLN experience on chronic care processes and indicators of collaborative infrastructure. Results The CFLN represents 36 accredited care centers in the CF Foundation Care Center Network caring for over 6300 patients. Of 6779 patient clinical care visits/quarter, 77% are entered into the CF Foundation Patient Registry within 30 days, providing timely means to track outcomes. Collaborative visit planning is occurring in 93% of clinical care visits to share agenda setting with patients and families. Almost all CFLN teams (94%, n = 34) have a patient/family partner (PFP), and 74% of PFPs indicate they are actively participating, taking ownership of, or leading QI initiatives with the interdisciplinary care team. In 2022, 97% of centers reported completing 1–13 improvement cycles per month, and 82% contributed to monthly QI progress reports to share learning. Conclusion The CFLN is a maturing, collaborative infrastructure. CFLN centers practice at an advanced level of coproduction. The CFLN fosters interdisciplinary and PFP leadership and the performance of consistent data‐driven improvement cycles. CFLN centers are positioned to respond to rapid changes in evidence‐based care and advance the practice of QI and implementation science on a broader scale.

Abstract Objective To establish a basis for a domain ontology ‐ a formal, explicit specification of a shared conceptualization ‐ of collaborative learning healthcare systems (CLHSs) in order to facilitate measurement, explanation, and improvement. Methods We adapted the “Methontology” approach to begin building an ontology of CLHSs. We specified the purpose of an ontology, acquired domain knowledge via literature review, conceptualized a common framework of CLHSs using a grounded approach, refined these concepts based on expert panel input, and illustrated concept application via four cases. Results The set of concepts identified as important to include in an ontology includes goals, values, structure, actors, environment, and products. To establish this set of concepts, we gathered input from content experts in two ways. First, expert panel methods were used to elicit feedback on these concepts and to test the elicitation of terms for the vocabulary of the Values concept. Second, from these discussions we developed a mapping exercise to test the intuitiveness of the concepts, requesting that network leaders from four CLHSs complete a mapping exercise to associate characteristics of their networks with the high‐level concepts, building the vocabulary for each concept in a grounded fashion. We also solicited feedback from these participants on the experience of completing the mapping exercise, finding that the exercise is acceptable and could aid in CLHS development and collaboration. Respondents identified opportunities to improve the operational definitions of each concept to ensure that corresponding vocabularies are distinct and non‐overlapping. Discussion Our results provide a foundation for developing a formal, explicit shared conceptualization of CLHSs. Once developed, such a tool can be useful for measurement, explanation, and improvement. Further work, including alignment to a top‐level ontology, expanding the vocabulary, and defining relations between vocabulary is required to formally build out an ontology for these uses.

An urgent need exists to develop new antibacterial drugs for children. We conducted research with investigators of pediatric antibacterial drug trials to identify facilitators and barriers in the conduct of these trials. Seventy-three investigators completed an online survey assessing the importance of 15 facilitators (grouped in 5 topical categories) and the severity of 36 barriers (grouped in 6 topical categories) to implementing pediatric antibacterial drug trials. Analysis focused on the identification of key factors that facilitate the successful implementation of pediatric antibacterial drug trials and the key barriers to implementation. Almost all investigators identified two factors as very important facilitators: having site personnel for enrollment and having adequate funding. Other top factors were related to staffing. Among the barriers, factors related to parent concerns and consent were prominent, particularly obtaining parental consent when there was disagreement between parents, concerns about the number of blood draws, and concerns about the number of invasive procedures. Having overly narrow eligibility criteria was also identified as a major barrier. The survey findings suggest three areas in which to focus efforts to help facilitate ongoing drug development: (1) improving engagement with parents of children who may be eligible to enroll in a pediatric antibacterial drug trial, (2) broadening inclusion criteria to allow more participants to enroll, and (3) ensuring adequate staffing and establishing sustainable financial strategies, such as funding pediatric trial networks. The pediatric antibacterial drug trials enterprise is likely to benefit from focused efforts by all stakeholders to remove barriers and enhance facilitation.

Enrollment of children into pediatric clinical trials remains challenging. More effective strategies to improve recruitment of children into trials are needed. This study used in-depth qualitative interviews with parents who were approached to enroll their children in a clinical trial in order to gain an understanding of the barriers to pediatric clinical trial participation. Twenty-four parents whose children had been offered the opportunity to participate in a clinical trial were interviewed: 19 whose children had participated in at least 1 clinical trial and 5 who had declined participation in any trial. Each study aspect, from the initial explanation of the study to the end of the study, can affect the willingness of parents to consent to the proposed study and future studies. Establishing trust, appropriate timing, a transparent discussion of risks and benefits oriented to the layperson, and providing motivation for children to participate were key factors that impacted parents' decisions. In order for clinical trial accrual to be successful, parents' priorities and considerations must be a central focus, beginning with initial trial design. The recommendations from the parents who participated in this study can be used to support budget allocations that ensure adequate training of study staff and improved staffing on nights and weekends. Studies of parent responses in outpatient settings and additional inpatient settings will provide valuable information on the consent process from the child's and parent's perspectives. Further studies are needed to explore whether implementation of such strategies will result in improved recruitment for pediatric clinical trials.