Dataset Information

Implementation, spread and impact of the Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) across Ontario hospitals: a mixed methods evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Traditional discharge processes lack a patient-centred focus. This project studied the implementation and effectiveness of an individualized discharge tool across Ontario hospitals. The Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) is an individualized discharge tool with guidelines that was co-designed with patients and families to enable a patient-centred process.

Methods

Twenty one acute-care and rehabilitation hospitals in Ontario, Canada engaged in a community of practice and worked over a period of 18 months to implement PODS. An effectiveness-implementation hybrid design using a triangulation approach was used with hospital-collected data, patient and provider surveys, and interviews of project teams. Key outcomes included: penetration and fidelity of the intervention, change in patient-centred processes, patient and provider satisfaction and experience, and healthcare utilization. Statistical methods included linear mixed effects models and generalized estimating equations.

Results

Of 65,221 discharges across hospitals, 41,884 patients (64%) received a PODS. There was variation in reach and implementation pattern between sites, though none of the between site covariates was significantly associated with implementation success. Both high participation in the community of practice and high fidelity were associated with higher penetration. PODS improved family involvement during discharge teaching (7% increase, p = 0.026), use of teach-back (11% increase, p < 0.001) and discussion of help needed (6% increase, p = 0.041). Although unscheduled healthcare utilization decreased with PODS implementation, it was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

This project highlighted the system-wide adaptability and ease of implementing PODS across multiple patient groups and hospital settings. PODS demonstrated an improvement in patient-centred discharge processes linked to quality standards and health outcomes. A community of practice and high quality content may be needed for successful implementation.

SUBMITTER: Hahn-Goldberg S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8052788 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Implementation, spread and impact of the Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) across Ontario hospitals: a mixed methods evaluation.

Hahn-Goldberg Shoshana S Huynh Tai T Chaput Audrey A Krahn Murray M Rac Valeria V Tomlinson George G Matelski John J Abrams Howard H Bell Chaim C Madho Craig C Ferguson Christine C Turcotte Ann A Free Connie C Hogan Sheila S Nicholas Bonnie B Oldershaw Betty B Okrainec Karen K

BMC health services research 20210417 1

<h4>Background</h4>Traditional discharge processes lack a patient-centred focus. This project studied the implementation and effectiveness of an individualized discharge tool across Ontario hospitals. The Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) is an individualized discharge tool with guidelines that was co-designed with patients and families to enable a patient-centred process.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty one acute-care and rehabilitation hospitals in Ontario, Canada engaged in a community of pract ...[more]

PMID: 33865385

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecognizing the need for improved communication with patients at the point of hospital discharge, a group of clinicians, patients, and designers in Toronto, Canada collaborated to develop a standardized tool known as the Patient-Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS). Although quantitative results suggest PODS helps mitigate gaps in knowledge, a qualitative inquiry from the clinician and patient perspective of psychiatric hospital discharge using PODS has not been widely explored. Our aim was to explore clinicians' and patients' experiences with PODS.MethodsWe used a qualitative thematic analysis to explore clinicians' (n = 10) and patients' (n = 6) experiences with PODS. We used convenience sampling to identify and invite potential participants at the Center for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, Canada to participate in semi-structured interviews between February 2019 and September 2019. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach to develop descriptive themes.ResultsEmerging themes from the data between clinicians and patients were both different and complementary. Clinicians described PODS using the concept of "goals of care." They relayed their experiences with PODS as a discrete event and emphasized its role in meeting their "goals of care" for discharge planning. Patients provided more of a "goals of life" perspective on recovery. They characterized PODS as only one facet of their recovery journey and not necessarily as a discrete or memorable event. Patients focused on their outcomes post-discharge and situated their experiences with PODS through its relation to their overall recovery.ConclusionsPODS was experienced differently by clinicians and patients. Clinicians experienced PODS as helpful in orienting them to the fulfillment of goals of care. Patients did not experience PODS as a particularly memorable intervention. Due to the information advantage that clinicians have about PODS, it is not surprising that clinicians and patients experienced the PODS differently. This study expanded our understanding of hospital discharge from clinicians and patients perspectives, and suggests that there are additional areas that need improvement.

Project description:BackgroundMOREOB (Managing Obstetrical Risk Efficiently) is a patient safety program for health care providers and administrators in hospital obstetric units. MOREOB has been implemented widely in Canada and gradually spread to the United States. The main goal of MOREOB is to build a patient safety culture and improve clinical outcomes. In 2013, 26 Ontario hospitals voluntarily accepted provincial funding to participate in MOREOB. The purpose of our study was to assess the effect of MOREOB on participant knowledge, organizational culture, and experiences implementing and participating in the program at these 26 Ontario hospitals.MethodsA convergent parallel mixed-methods study in Ontario, Canada, with MOREOB participants from 26 hospitals. The quantitative component used a descriptive pre-post repeated measures design to assess participant knowledge and perception of culture, administered pre-MOREOB and after each of the three MOREOB modules. Changes in mean scores were assessed using mixed-effects regression. The qualitative component used a qualitative descriptive design with individual semi-structured interviews. We used content analysis to code, categorize, and thematically describe data. A convergent parallel design was used to triangulate findings from data sources.Results308 participants completed the knowledge test, and 329 completed the culture assessment at all four time points. Between baseline and post-Module 3, statistically significant increases on both scores were observed, with an increase of 7.9% (95% CI: 7.1 to 8.8) on the knowledge test and an increase of 0.45 (on a scale of 1-5, 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.52) on the culture assessment. Interview participants (n = 15) described improvements in knowledge, interprofessional communication, ability to provide safe care, and confidence in skills. Facilitators and barriers to program implementation and sustainability were identified.ConclusionsParticipants were satisfied with their participation in the MOREOB program and perceived that it increased health care provider knowledge and confidence, improved safety for patients, and improved communication between team members. Additionally, mean scores on knowledge tests for obstetric content and culture assessment improved. The MOREOB program can help organizations and individuals improve care by concentrating on the human and organizational aspects of patient safety. Further work to improve program implementation and sustainability is required.

Project description:ObjectiveWe aimed to increase the understanding of the scaling of de-implementation strategies by identifying the determinants of the process and developing a determinant framework.Design and methodsThis study has a mixed-methods design. First, we performed an integrative review to build a literature-based framework describing the determinants of the scaling of healthcare innovations and interventions. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant studies from 1995 to December 2020. We systematically extracted the determinants of the scaling of interventions and developed a literature-based framework. Subsequently, this framework was discussed in four focus groups with national and international de-implementation experts. The literature-based framework was complemented by the findings of the focus group meetings and adapted for the scaling of de-implementation strategies.ResultsThe literature search resulted in 42 articles that discussed the determinants of the scaling of innovations and interventions. No articles described determinants specifically for de-implementation strategies. During the focus groups, all participants agreed on the relevance of the extracted determinants for the scaling of de-implementation strategies. The experts emphasised that while the determinants are relevant for various countries, the implications differ due to different contexts, cultures and histories. The analyses of the focus groups resulted in additional topics and determinants, namely, medical training, professional networks, interests of stakeholders, clinical guidelines and patients' perspectives. The results of the focus group meetings were combined with the literature framework, which together formed the supporting the scaling of de-implementation strategies (SPREAD) framework. The SPREAD framework includes determinants from four domains: (1) scaling plan, (2) external context, (3) de-implementation strategy and (4) adopters.ConclusionsThe SPREAD framework describes the determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies. These determinants are potential targets for various parties to facilitate the scaling of de-implementation strategies. Future research should validate these determinants of the scaling of de-implementation strategies.

Project description:BackgroundDigital transformation offers new opportunities to improve the exchange of information between different health care providers, including inpatient, outpatient and care facilities. As information is especially at risk of being lost when a patient is discharged from a hospital, digital transformation offers great opportunities to improve intersectoral discharge management. However, most strategies for improvement have focused on structures within the hospital.ObjectiveThis study aims to evaluate the implementation of a digitalized discharge management system, the project "Optimizing instersectoral discharge management" (SEKMA, derived from the German Sektorübergreifende Optimierung des Entlassmanagements), and its impact on the readmission rate.MethodsA mixed methods design was used to evaluate the implementation of a digitalized discharge management system and its impact on the readmission rate. After the implementation, the congruence between the planned (logic model) and the actual intervention was evaluated using a fidelity analysis. Finally, bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation on the readmission rate. For this purpose, a difference-in-difference approach was adopted based on routine data of hospital admissions between April 2019 and August 2019 and between April 2022 and August 2022. The department of vascular surgery served as the intervention group, in which the optimized discharge management was implemented in April 2022. The departments of internal medicine and cardiology formed the control group.ResultsOverall, 26 interviews were conducted, and we explored 21 determinants, which can be categorized into 3 groups: "optimization potential," "barriers," and "enablers." On the basis of these results, 19 strategies were developed to address the determinants, including a lack of networking among health care providers, digital information transmission, and user-unfriendliness. On the basis of these strategies, which were prioritized by 11 hospital physicians, a logic model was formulated. Of the 19 strategies, 7 (37%; eg, electronic discharge letter, providing mobile devices to the hospital's social service, and generating individual medication plans in the format of the national medication plan) have been implemented in SEKMA. A survey on the fidelity of the application of the implemented strategies showed that 3 of these strategies were not yet widely applied. No significant effect of SEKMA on readmissions was observed in the routine data of 14,854 hospital admissions (P=.20).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the potential of optimizing intersectoral collaboration for patient care. Although a significant effect of SEKMA on readmissions has not yet been observed, creating a digital ecosystem that connects different health care providers seems to be a promising approach to ensure secure and fast networking of the sectors. The described intersectoral optimization of discharge management provides a structured template for the implementation of a similar local digital care networking infrastructure in other care regions in Germany and other countries with a similarly fragmented health care system.

Project description:BackgroundInfection prevention and control (IPC) programs are essential to prevent and control the spread of multidrug-resistant organisms in healthcare facilities (HCFs). The current implementation of these programs in Latin America remains largely unknown.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of IPC program implementation in HCFs from Guatemala, Panama, Ecuador, and Argentina, March-July 2022. We used the World Health Organization (WHO) IPC Assessment Framework (IPCAF) survey, a previously validated structured questionnaire with an associated scoring system that evaluates the eight core components of IPC (IPC program; IPC guidelines; IPC education and training; healthcare-associated infection [HAI] surveillance; multimodal strategies; monitoring and audit of IPC practices and feedback; workload, staffing, and bed occupancy; and the built environment and materials and equipment for IPC). Each section generates a score 0-100. According to the final score, the HCF IPC program implementation is categorized into four levels: inadequate (0-200), basic (201-400), intermediate (401-600), or advanced (601-800). Additionally, we conducted semi-structured interviews among IPC personnel and microbiologists using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model to evaluate barriers and facilitators for IPC program implementation. We performed directed content analysis of interview transcripts to identify themes that focused on barriers and facilitators of IPC program implementation which are summarized descriptively.ResultsThirty-seven HCFs (15 for-profit and 22 non-profit) completed the IPCAF survey. The overall median score was 614 (IQR 569, 693) which corresponded to an "advanced" level of IPC implementation (32% [7/22] non-profit vs. 93% [14/15] for-profit HCFs in this category). The lowest scores were in workload, staffing and bed occupancy followed by IPC training and multimodal strategies. Forty individuals from 16 HCFs were interviewed. They perceived inadequate staffing and technical resources, limited leadership support, and cultural determinants as major barriers to effective IPC guideline implementation, while external accreditation and technical support from public health authorities were perceived as facilitators.ConclusionsEfforts to strengthen IPC activities in Latin American HCFs should focus on improving support from hospital leadership and public health authorities to ensure better resource allocation, promoting safety culture, and improving training in quality improvement.

Project description:BackgroundEarly supported discharge (ESD) models of care for stroke survivors coordinate inpatient and community services, with the aim of reducing length of stay. While there is an established evidence base around the clinical outcomes of ESD), less is known about the implementation of this approach into existing stroke care service. The aim of this case study was to describe staff perceptions of the implementation of an ESD model of care for stroke survivors at a large metropolitan public hospital in Australia.MethodsThis case study utilised a mixed methods design, which was designed in explicit alignment with the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Participants included staff that referred patients for ESD, and staff involved in the planning, implementation or delivery of ESD. Survey data was collected at three time points (ESD commencement, 3 months and 6 months), and focus groups were undertaken at the conclusion of the study. All quantitative data was analysed descriptive, while qualitative data was evaluated using thematic analysis.ResultsResults from both sources of data identified changes in staff perceptions of ESD implementation over time. While very few changes were statistically significant, they were diverse patterns of change across the CFIR constructs over time. The characteristics of individuals and ESD characteristics attracted consistently positive perceptions, while patient needs and resources was the most prevalent theme within the data. While perceptions of factors related to the inner setting were mixed, there was a steady improvement in perceptions about the process across the later stages of implementation.ConclusionsThe sophistication of knowledge translation and implementation in modern complex healthcare environments is highlighted by the multiple interactions between the CFIR domains and constructs. While the implementation process described was generally positive and effective, using the CFIR as a framework confirmed that it also entailed some challenges and unanticipated outcomes.

Dataset Information

Implementation, spread and impact of the Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) across Ontario hospitals: a mixed methods evaluation.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Implementation, spread and impact of the Patient Oriented Discharge Summary (PODS) across Ontario hospitals: a mixed methods evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets