BackgroundCentral to Safety-II is promoting resilience of healthcare practices. In the "Room for Resilience" research project we focus on the role of horizontal and vertical accountability in... Show moreBackgroundCentral to Safety-II is promoting resilience of healthcare practices. In the "Room for Resilience" research project we focus on the role of horizontal and vertical accountability in healthcare teams and aim to discover how the relation between the two impacts team reflections and discussions. In this article, we report on an explorative study at the start of the project which aimed to assess the structures and dynamics of horizontal and vertical accountability.MethodsA qualitative study in six teams in three hospitals in the Netherlands. For the project, each team selected a specific clinical process to work on (e.g. pain assessment). We interviewed healthcare professionals, managers, and quality advisors about these processes, how they are discussed in practice and how teams need to account for them. Additionally, we observed the processes and how teams discuss them in practice. In total, we conducted 35 interviews and 67.5 h of observation. Transcripts and field notes were analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsProfessionals at times varied in what they considered the right approach in the clinical process, with differing views on the importance of certain actions. When processes were discussed, this mostly was done during clinical work, and it often concerned reflections about the care for a specific patient instead of reflecting on the team's general approach of the clinical process. Organized reflections on the processes were sparse. How processes were conducted in practice deviated from guidelines, mainly due to staff shortages, a perceived lack of value of a guideline, equipment issues, and collaboration issues. For most processes, accountability to hierarchical layers consisted of quality indicator scores. Professionals were tasked with registering indicator data but did not find this meaningful for their work.ConclusionsThe observed different perspectives within teams on what good quality care is show the importance of having team reflections about these processes. How vertical accountability was organized at times impacted the conditions for teams to discuss resilient performance. Following these findings, we recommend that reflection on resilient practice and the role of accountability processes is organized on all levels in (and outside) the organization. Show less
Staalduinen, D.J. van; Bekerom, P. van den; Groeneveld, S.; Kidanemariam, M.; Stiggelbout, A.M.; Akker-van Marle, M.E. van den 2022
Background: The aim of this study was to identify and summarize how value-based healthcare (VBHC) is conceptualized in the literature and implemented in hospitals. Furthermore, an overview was... Show moreBackground: The aim of this study was to identify and summarize how value-based healthcare (VBHC) is conceptualized in the literature and implemented in hospitals. Furthermore, an overview was created of the effects of both the implementation of VBHC and the implementation strategies used.Methods: A scoping review was conducted by searching online databases for articles published between January 2006 and February 2021. Empirical as well as non-empirical articles were included.Results: 1729 publications were screened and 62 were used for data extraction. The majority of the articles did not specify a conceptualization of VBHC, but only conceptualized the goals of VBHC or the concept of value. Most hospitals implemented only one or two components of VBHC, mainly the measurement of outcomes and costs or Integrated Practice Units (IPUs). Few studies examined effects. Implementation strategies were described rarely, and were evaluated even less.Conclusions: VBHC has a high level of interpretative variability and a common conceptualization of VBHC is therefore urgently needed. VBHC was proposed as a shift in healthcare management entailing six reinforcing steps, but hospitals have not implemented VBHC as an integrative strategy. VBHC implementation and effectiveness could benefit from the interdisciplinary collaboration between healthcare and management science. Show less
Boddaert, M.S.; Stoppelenburg, A.; Hasselaar, J.; Linden, Y.M. van der; Vissers, K.C.P.; Raijmakers, N.J.H.; Brom, L. 2021
Background Specialist palliative care teams (SPCTs) in hospitals improve quality of life and satisfaction with care for patients with advanced disease. However, referrals to SPCTs are often limited... Show moreBackground Specialist palliative care teams (SPCTs) in hospitals improve quality of life and satisfaction with care for patients with advanced disease. However, referrals to SPCTs are often limited. To identify areas for improvement of SPCTs' service penetration, we explored the characteristics and level of integration of palliative care programmes and SPCTs in Dutch hospitals and we assessed the relation between these characteristics and specialist palliative care referral rates. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of a national cross-sectional survey conducted among hospitals in the Netherlands from March through May 2018. For this survey, a previously developed online questionnaire, containing 6 consensus-based integration indicators, was sent to palliative care programme leaders in all 78 hospitals. For referral rate we calculated the number of annual inpatient referrals to the SPCT as a percentage of the number of total annual hospital admissions. Referral rate was dichotomized into high (>= third quartile) and low (< third quartile). Characteristics of SPCTs with high and low referral rate were compared using univariate analyses. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant. Results In total, 63 hospitals (81%) participated in the survey, of which 62 had an operational SPCT. The palliative care programmes of these hospitals consisted of inpatient consultation services (94%), interdisciplinary staffing (61%), outpatient clinics (45%), dedicated acute care beds (21%) and community-based palliative care (27%). The median referral rate was 0.56% (IQR 0.23-1.0%), ranging from 0 to 3.7%. Comparing SPCTs with high referral rate (>= 1%, n = 17) and low referral rate (< 1%, n = 45) showed significant differences for SPCTs' years of existence, staffing, their level of education, participation in other departments' team meetings, provision of education and conducting research. With regard to integration, significant differences were found for the presence of outpatient clinics and timing of referrals. Conclusion In the Netherlands, palliative care programmes and specialist palliative care teams in hospitals vary in their level of integration and development, with more mature teams showing higher referral rates. Appropriate staffing, dedicated outpatient clinics, education and research appear means to improve service penetration and timing of referral for patients with advanced diseases. Show less
Engel, M.; Stoppelenburg, A.; Ark, A. van der; Bols, F.M.; Bruggeman, J.; Janssens-van Vliet, E.C.J.; ... ; Heide, A. van der 2021
BackgroundIn the Netherlands, healthcare professionals attending patients in the last phase of life, can consult an expert palliative care team (PCT) in case of complex problems. There are two... Show moreBackgroundIn the Netherlands, healthcare professionals attending patients in the last phase of life, can consult an expert palliative care team (PCT) in case of complex problems. There are two types of PCTs: regional PCTs, which are mainly consulted by general practitioners, and hospital PCTs, which are mainly consulted by healthcare professionals in the hospital. Integration of these PCTs is expected to facilitate continuity of care for patients receiving care in different settings. We studied facilitators and barriers in the process of developing and implementing an integrated transmural palliative care consultation service.MethodsA multiple case study was performed in four palliative care networks in the southwest Netherlands. We aimed to develop an integrated transmural palliative care consultation service. Researchers were closely observing the process and participated in project team meetings. A within-case analysis was conducted for each network, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Subsequently, all findings were pooled.ResultsIn each network, project team members thought that the core goal of a transmural consultation service is improvement of continuity of palliative care for patients throughout their illness trajectory. It was nevertheless a challenge for hospital and non-hospital healthcare professionals to arrive at a shared view on goals, activities and working procedures of the transmural consultation service. All project teams experienced the lack of evidence-based guidance on how to organise the service as a barrier. The role of the management of the involved care organisations was sometimes perceived as unsupportive, and different financial reimbursement systems for hospital and out-of-hospital care made implementation of a transmural consultation service complex. Three networks managed to develop and implement a transmural service at some level, one network did not manage to do so.ConclusionsHealthcare professionals are motivated to collaborate in a transmural palliative care consultation service, because they believe it can contribute to high-quality palliative care. However, they need more shared views on goals and activities of a transmural consultation service, more guidance on organisational issues and appropriate financing. Further research is needed to provide evidence on benefits and costs of different models of integrated transmural palliative care consultation services. Show less
Introduction: The revised Dutch colorectal cancer guideline (2014), led to an overall decrease in preoperative radiotherapy (RT) use. This study evaluates hospital variation in RT use for... Show moreIntroduction: The revised Dutch colorectal cancer guideline (2014), led to an overall decrease in preoperative radiotherapy (RT) use. This study evaluates hospital variation in RT use for resectable rectal cancer and the influence of guideline revision, including the nationwide impact of changing RT application on short term outcomes.Methods: Data of surgically resected rectal cancer patients registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit were extracted between 2011 and 2017. Patients were divided into groups based on time of guideline revision (<2014 and >= 2014). Primary outcome was guideline adherence at hospital level regarding RT application, stratified for three stage groups. Secondary outcomes included positive circumferential resection (CRM+) and 30-day complicated postoperative course.Results: The groups consisted of 7364 and 12,057 patients, respectively. In total, 6772 patients did not receive RT (17.6% (<2014) vs. 45.7% (>= 2014), p < 0.001). The largest increase of surgery alone was observed for cT1-2N0 stage rectal cancer (35.1% vs. 91.8%, p < 0.001), with a substantial decrease in hospital variation (IQR 22.2-50.0% vs. IQR 87.6-98.0%). For cT1-3N1MRF-stage rectal cancer, a substantial amount of hospital variation in short course RT remained after guideline revision (IQR 26.8-54.1% vs. IQR 26.2-50.0%). A significant decrease in CRMthorn (5.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.001) and complicated course (22.5% vs. 18.5%, p < 0.001) was observed.Conclusions: Radiotherapy for early-stage rectal cancer was uniformly abandoned after guideline revision, while substantial hospital variation remained for intermediate risk resectable rectal cancer in the Netherlands. The substantial nationwide decrease in the use of RT for rectal cancer treatment did not negatively impact CRM involvement. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Groot, A.E.; Schaik, I.N. van; Visser, M.C.; Nederkoorn, P.J.; Limburg, M.; Aramideh, M.; ... ; Coutinho, J.M. 2016
