Cargando…

Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study

Background: Systemic and structural issues of rapid response system (RRS) models can hinder implementation. This study sought to understand the ways in which acute care clinicians (physicians and nurses) experience and negotiate care for deteriorating patients within the RRS. Methods: Physicians and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rihari-Thomas, John, DiGiacomo, Michelle, Phillips, Jane, Newton, Phillip, Davidson, Patricia M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5553213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28812844
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.156
_version_ 1783256590164426752
author Rihari-Thomas, John
DiGiacomo, Michelle
Phillips, Jane
Newton, Phillip
Davidson, Patricia M.
author_facet Rihari-Thomas, John
DiGiacomo, Michelle
Phillips, Jane
Newton, Phillip
Davidson, Patricia M.
author_sort Rihari-Thomas, John
collection PubMed
description Background: Systemic and structural issues of rapid response system (RRS) models can hinder implementation. This study sought to understand the ways in which acute care clinicians (physicians and nurses) experience and negotiate care for deteriorating patients within the RRS. Methods: Physicians and nurses working within an Australian academic health centre within a jurisdictional-based model of clinical governance participated in focus group interviews. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using thematic content analysis. Results: Thirty-four participants (21 physicians and 13 registered nurses [RNs]) participated in six focus groups over five weeks in 2014. Implementing the RRS in daily practice was a process of informal communication and negotiation in spite of standardised protocols. Themes highlighted several systems or organisational-level barriers to an effective RRS, including (1) responsibility is inversely proportional to clinical experience; (2) actions around system flexibility contribute to deviation from protocol; (3) misdistribution of resources leads to perceptions of inadequate staffing levels inhibiting full optimisation of the RRS; and (4) poor communication and documentation of RRS increases clinician workloads. Conclusion: Implementing a RRS is complex and multifactorial, influenced by various inter- and intra-professional factors, staffing models and organisational culture. The RRS is not a static model; it is both reflexive and iterative, perpetually transforming to meet healthcare consumer and provider demands and local unit contexts and needs. Requiring more than just a strong initial implementation phase, new models of care such as a RRS demand good governance processes, ongoing support and regular evaluation and refinement. Cultural, organizational and professional factors, as well as systems-based processes, require consideration if RRSs are to achieve their intended outcomes in dynamic healthcare settings
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5553213
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55532132017-08-21 Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study Rihari-Thomas, John DiGiacomo, Michelle Phillips, Jane Newton, Phillip Davidson, Patricia M. Int J Health Policy Manag Original Article Background: Systemic and structural issues of rapid response system (RRS) models can hinder implementation. This study sought to understand the ways in which acute care clinicians (physicians and nurses) experience and negotiate care for deteriorating patients within the RRS. Methods: Physicians and nurses working within an Australian academic health centre within a jurisdictional-based model of clinical governance participated in focus group interviews. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using thematic content analysis. Results: Thirty-four participants (21 physicians and 13 registered nurses [RNs]) participated in six focus groups over five weeks in 2014. Implementing the RRS in daily practice was a process of informal communication and negotiation in spite of standardised protocols. Themes highlighted several systems or organisational-level barriers to an effective RRS, including (1) responsibility is inversely proportional to clinical experience; (2) actions around system flexibility contribute to deviation from protocol; (3) misdistribution of resources leads to perceptions of inadequate staffing levels inhibiting full optimisation of the RRS; and (4) poor communication and documentation of RRS increases clinician workloads. Conclusion: Implementing a RRS is complex and multifactorial, influenced by various inter- and intra-professional factors, staffing models and organisational culture. The RRS is not a static model; it is both reflexive and iterative, perpetually transforming to meet healthcare consumer and provider demands and local unit contexts and needs. Requiring more than just a strong initial implementation phase, new models of care such as a RRS demand good governance processes, ongoing support and regular evaluation and refinement. Cultural, organizational and professional factors, as well as systems-based processes, require consideration if RRSs are to achieve their intended outcomes in dynamic healthcare settings Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2017-01-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5553213/ /pubmed/28812844 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.156 Text en © 2017 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Rihari-Thomas, John
DiGiacomo, Michelle
Phillips, Jane
Newton, Phillip
Davidson, Patricia M.
Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title_full Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title_fullStr Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title_full_unstemmed Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title_short Clinician Perspectives of Barriers to Effective Implementation of a Rapid Response System in an Academic Health Centre: A Focus Group Study
title_sort clinician perspectives of barriers to effective implementation of a rapid response system in an academic health centre: a focus group study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5553213/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28812844
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2016.156
work_keys_str_mv AT riharithomasjohn clinicianperspectivesofbarrierstoeffectiveimplementationofarapidresponsesysteminanacademichealthcentreafocusgroupstudy
AT digiacomomichelle clinicianperspectivesofbarrierstoeffectiveimplementationofarapidresponsesysteminanacademichealthcentreafocusgroupstudy
AT phillipsjane clinicianperspectivesofbarrierstoeffectiveimplementationofarapidresponsesysteminanacademichealthcentreafocusgroupstudy
AT newtonphillip clinicianperspectivesofbarrierstoeffectiveimplementationofarapidresponsesysteminanacademichealthcentreafocusgroupstudy
AT davidsonpatriciam clinicianperspectivesofbarrierstoeffectiveimplementationofarapidresponsesysteminanacademichealthcentreafocusgroupstudy