Search

The COVID-19 pandemic magnified the cracks in healthcare performance. Dysfunctionalities and exhaustion appeared, but so did resilience and innovation. Examination of these cracks offers opportunities for learning and potential for new developments just as in the Japanese art of kintsugi, which is about building new objects from pieces of broken ceramic and mending the cracks. Engagement and partnership activities came under strain in Canada, as well - a pioneer in the field. Some were put on hold; others proved resilient and contributed to surmounting the challenges of the pandemic. Applying their Engagement-Capable Environments Framework, Kuluski and colleagues (2024) studied kintsugi in partnership activities in Canada during the pandemic. The resulting case studies exemplify the factors facilitating engagement and partnership during crisis. Through a lens of co-production that we see as a precondition for understanding and improving healthcare during a crisis and beyond, we challenge the results of the study, hoping to open new perspectives and advance engagement and partnership., Commentary.

Paul, Christian, and Tina weave the foundational content for coproducing healthcare service and a frame for thinking. They reflect on several possible additional themes for subsequent attention. They discuss some of the personal tips that have been helpful in their own thinking & work to further the work of coproducing healthcare service. They hint at the exciting challenges they see moving forward, The Power of Coproduction is a podcast series about redesigning health care services to achieve better health through mutual respect, collaboration, and science-informed practices.

OBJECTIVE: Interest in the coproduction concept in healthcare is increasing. According to coproduction, services are, unlike goods, always coproduced by a user and a service provider. This study explored how immigrants and refugees perceive the coproduction of their healthcare service in clinical encounters. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with thirteen patients with varied backgrounds and health problems. Participants were purposefully recruited in an interdisciplinary clinic for immigrants and refugees at a Danish University Hospital. Interviews were transcribed, anonymized, and analyzed using meaning condensation. RESULTS: Patients emphasized the importance of a safe space where they could be themselves and feel supported. This encouraged them to be open and assume an active role in the coproduction of their health. A stable therapeutic alliance based on kindness and kinship helped them find strength and take responsibility for their own health. CONCLUSIONS: This study improves our understanding of how immigrants and refugees experience the coproduction of healthcare services. Further studies, evaluating long-term outcomes of coproduction efforts, are required. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Providing a safe space in which health professionals have time to listen and empathically validate immigrant and refugee patients' lived realities, can enable patients to open up and become agents of their own health.

Background: The impact of hospital accreditation on the experiences of patients remains a weak point in quality improvement research. This is surprising given the time and cost of accreditation and the fact that patient experiences influence outcomes. We investigated the impact of first-time hospital accreditation on patients' experience of support from health-care professionals, information and involvement in decisions. Objective: We aimed to examine the association between first-time hospital accreditation and patient experiences. Methods: We conducted a longitudinal study in the three Faroese hospitals that, unlike hospitals on the Danish mainland and elsewhere internationally, had no prior exposure to systematic quality improvement. The hospitals were accredited in 2017 according to a modified second version of the Danish Healthcare Quality program. Study participants were 18 years or older and hospitalized for at least 24 h in 2016 before or 2018 after accreditation. We administered the National Danish Survey of Patient Experiences for acute and scheduled hospitalization. Patients rated their experiences of support, information and involvement in decision-making on a 5-point Likert scale. We calculated individual and grouped mean item scores, the percentages of scores ≥4, the mean score difference, the relative risk (RR) for high/very high scores (≥4) using Poisson regression and the risk difference. Patient experience ratings were compared using mixed effects linear regression. Results: In total, 400 patients before and 400 after accreditation completed the survey. After accreditation patients reported increased support from health professionals; adjusted mean score difference (adj. mean diff.) = 1.99 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.89, 2.10), feeling better informed before and during the hospitalization; adj. mean diff. = 1.14 (95% CI: 1.07; 1.20) and more involved in decision-making; adj. mean diff. = 1.79 (95% CI: 1.76; 1.82). Additionally, the RR for a

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is one of the leading causes of healthcare utilisation and death worldwide. Treatment according to evidence-based clinical guidelines can reduce mortality, antibiotic exposure and length of hospital stay related to CAP.LOCAL PROBLEM: Several studies, including a pilot study from one of our sites, indicate that physicians show a low grade of guideline adherence when managing patients with CAP.METHODS: To improve the guideline-based treatment of patients with CAP admitted to hospital, we designed a quality improvement study. Four process indicators were combined in a CAP care bundle: chest X-ray, CURB-65 severity score, lower respiratory tract samples and antibiotics within 8 hours from admission. After a 4-month baseline period, we applied multiple interventions at three hospitals during 8 months. Progression in our process indicators was measured continuously and compared with a control site without interventions. After the 8-month intervention period, we continued with a 4-month follow-up period to assess the sustainability of the improvements.RESULTS: The care bundle utilisation rate within 8 hours increased from 11% at baseline to 41% in the follow-up period at the intervention sites, whereas it remained below 3% at the control site. The most considerable improvements have been observed regarding documentation of CURB-65 (34% at baseline, 68% at follow-up) and the collection of lower respiratory tract samples (43% at baseline, 63% at follow-up).CONCLUSION: Our study has demonstrated poor adherence to CAP guidelines at all sites at baseline. After implementing multiple tailored interventions, guideline adherence increased substantially. In conclusion, we recommend that CAP guidelines should be actively adapted in order to be followed in a daily routine.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the use of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and the association with mortality.METHODS: We assembled a cohort of 1317 adults hospitalized with radiographically confirmed CAP in three Danish hospitals. Patients were grouped into no DNR order, early DNR order (≤48 h after admission), and late DNR order (> 48 h after admission). We tested for associations between a DNR order and mortality using a cox proportional hazard model adjusted for patient and disease related factors.RESULTS: Among 1317 patients 177 (13%) patients received a DNR order: 107 (8%) early and 70 (5%) late, during admission. Patients with a DNR order were older (82 years vs. 70 years, p < 0.001), more frequently nursing home residents (41% vs. 6%, p < 0.001) and had more comorbidities (one or more comorbidities: 73% vs. 59%, p < 0.001). The 30-day mortality was 62% and 4% in patients with and without a DNR order, respectively. DNR orders were associated with increased risk of 30-day mortality after adjustment for age, nursing home residency and comorbidities. The association was modified by the CURB-65 score Hazard ratio (HR) 39.3 (95% CI 13.9-110.6), HR 24.0 (95% CI 11.9-48,3) and HR 9.4 (95% CI: 4.7-18.6) for CURB-65 score 0-1, 2 and 3-5, respectively.CONCLUSION: In this representative Danish cohort, 13% of patients hospitalized with CAP received a DNR order. DNR orders were associated with higher mortality after adjustment for clinical risk factors. Thus, we encourage researcher to take DNR orders into account as potential confounder when reporting CAP associated mortality.