Implementing health research through academic and clinical partnerships : a realistic evaluation of the Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC)

Background: The English National Health Service has made a major investment in nine partnerships between higher education institutions and local health services called Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC). They have been funded to increase capacity and capability to produce and implement research through sustained interactions between academics and health services. CLAHRCs provide a natural ‘test bed’ for exploring questions about research implementation within a partnership model of delivery. This protocol describes an externally funded evaluation that focuses on implementation mechanisms and processes within three CLAHRCs. It seeks to uncover what works, for whom, how, and in what circumstances. Design and methods: This study is a longitudinal three-phase, multi-method realistic evaluation, which deliberately aims to explore the boundaries around knowledge use in context. The evaluation funder wishes to see it conducted for the process of learning, not for judging performance. The study is underpinned by a conceptual framework that combines the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services and Knowledge to Action frameworks to reflect the complexities of implementation. Three participating CLARHCS will provide indepth comparative case studies of research implementation using multiple data collection methods including interviews, observation, documents, and publicly available data to test and refine hypotheses over four rounds of data collection. We will test the wider applicability of emerging findings with a wider community using an interpretative forum. Discussion: The idea that collaboration between academics and services might lead to more applicable health research that is actually used in practice is theoretically and intuitively appealing; however the evidence for it is limited. Our evaluation is designed to capture the processes and impacts of collaborative approaches for implementing research, and therefore should contribute to the evidence base about an increasingly popular (e.g., Mode two, integrated knowledge transfer, interactive research), but poorly understood approach to knowledge translation. Additionally we hope to develop approaches for evaluating implementation processes and impacts particularly with respect to integrated stakeholder involvement

Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method

Background: The extensive and rapidly expanding research literature on electronic patient records (EPRs) presents challenges to systematic reviewers. This literature is heterogeneous and at times conflicting, not least because it covers multiple research traditions with different underlying philosophical assumptions and methodological approaches. Aim: To map, interpret and critique the range of concepts, theories, methods and empirical findings on EPRs, with a particular emphasis on the implementation and use of EPR systems. Method: Using the meta-narrative method of systematic review, and applying search strategies that took us beyond the Medline-indexed literature, we identified over 500 full-text sources. We used ‘conflicting’ findings to address higher-order questions about how the EPR and its implementation were differently conceptualised and studied by different communities of researchers. Main findings: Our final synthesis included 24 previous systematic reviews and 94 additional primary studies, most of the latter from outside the biomedical literature. A number of tensions were evident, particularly in relation to: [1] the EPR (‘container’ or ‘itinerary’); [2] the EPR user (‘information-processer’ or ‘member of socio-technical network’); [3] organizational context (‘the setting within which the EPR is implemented’ or ‘the EPR-in-use’); [4] clinical work (‘decision-making’ or ‘situated practice’); [5] the process of change (‘the logic of determinism’ or ‘the logic of opposition’); [6] implementation success (‘objectively defined’ or ‘socially negotiated’); and [7] complexity and scale (‘the bigger the better’ or ‘small is beautiful’). Findings suggest that integration of EPRs will always require human work to re-contextualize knowledge for different uses; that whilst secondary work (audit, research, billing) may be made more efficient by the EPR, primary clinical work may be made less efficient; that paper, far from being technologically obsolete, currently offers greater ecological flexibility than most forms of electronic record; and that smaller systems may sometimes be more efficient and effective than larger ones. Conclusions: The tensions and paradoxes revealed in this study extend and challenge previous reviews and suggest that the evidence base for some EPR programs is more limited than is often assumed. We offer this paper as a preliminary contribution to a much-needed debate on this evidence and its implications, and suggest avenues for new research

Framework of Social Customer Relationship Management in E-Health Services

Healthcare organization is implementing Customer Relationship Management (CRM) as a strategy for managing interactions with patients involving technology to organize, automate, and coordinate business processes. Web-based CRM provides healthcare organization with the ability to broaden service beyond its usual practices in achieving a complex patient care goal, and this paper discusses and demonstrates how a new approach in CRM based on Web 2.0 or Social CRM helps healthcare organizations to improve their customer support, and at the same time avoiding possible conflicts, and promoting better healthcare to patients. A conceptual framework of the new approach will be proposed and highlighted. The framework includes some important features of Social CRM such as customer's empowerment, social interactivity between healthcare organization-patients, and patients-patients. The framework offers new perspective in building relationships between healthcare organizations and customers and among customers in e-health scenario. It is developed based on the latest development of CRM literatures and case studies analysis. In addition, customer service paradigm in social network's era, the important of online health education, and empowerment in healthcare organization will be taken into consideration.Comment: 15 pages. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1204.3689, arXiv:1203.3919, arXiv:1204.3685, arXiv:1203.4309, arXiv:1204.3691, arXiv:1203.392

Healing conversations: Developing a practical framework for clinical communication between Aboriginal communities and healthcare practitioners

In recognition of the ongoing health disparities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (hereafter Aboriginal), this scoping review explores the role and impact of the clinical communication process on Aboriginal healthcare provision. A medical education lens is applied, looking at the utility of a tailored clinical communication framework to assist health practitioners work more effectively with Aboriginal peoples and communities. The initial framework, building on existing communication guides, proposes four domains: content, process, relational and environmental. It places emphasis on critical self-reflection of the health practitioner’s own cultural identity and will be guided by collective Aboriginal world-views in select Australian settings. Using a two-eyed seeing approach the framework will be developed and tested in health professional education. The aim of this research journey is to enable health practitioners to have more effective healthcare conversations with Aboriginal peoples, working toward more socially just and equitable healthcare interactions and outcome

Unmasking quality: exploring meanings of health by doing art

This paper arises from a presentation at the ‘Quality in Healthcare’ symposium at Cumberland Lodge, England, in 2013. MK, CR and SH conceived the paper and led the writing of the manuscript. JF, JL-D, AC, DE contributed substantially to the intellectual content of the paper through providing critical commentary and interpretation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript

Addendum to Informatics for Health 2017: Advancing both science and practice

This article presents presentation and poster abstracts that were mistakenly omitted from the original publication

A systematic review of the factors - enablers and barriers - affecting e-learning in health sciences education

Background: Recently, much attention has been given to e-learning in higher education as it provides better access to learning resources online, utilising technology – regardless of learners’ geographical locations and timescale – to enhance learning. It has now become part of the mainstream in education in the health sciences, including medical, dental, public health, nursing, and other allied health professionals. Despite growing evidence claiming that e-learning is as effective as traditional means of learning, there is very limited evidence available about what works, and when and how e-learning enhances teaching and learning. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesise the factors – enablers and barriers – affecting e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) that have been reported in the medical literature. Methods: A systemic review of articles published on e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, DH-DATA, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Global Health, from 1980 through 2019, using ‘Textword’ and ‘Thesaurus’ search terms. All original articles fulfilling the following criteria were included: (1) e-learning was implemented in health sciences education, and (2) the investigation of the factors – enablers and barriers – about el-HSE related to learning performance or outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, both relevant published and unpublished papers were searched. Data were extracted and quality appraised using QualSyst tools, and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Results: Out of 985 records identified, a total of 162 citations were screened, of which 57 were found to be of relevance to this study. The primary evidence base comprises 24 papers, with two broad categories identified, enablers and barriers, under eight separate themes: facilitate learning; learning in practice; systematic approach to learning; integration of e-learning into curricula; poor motivation and expectation; resource-intensive; not suitable for all disciplines or contents, and lack of IT skills. Conclusions: This study has identified the factors which impact on e-learning: interaction and collaboration between learners and facilitators; considering learners’ motivation and expectations; utilising user-friendly technology; and putting learners at the centre of pedagogy. There is significant scope for better understanding of the issues related to enablers and facilitators associated with e-learning, and developing appropriate policies and initiatives to establish when, how and where they fit best, creating a broader framework for making e-learning effective