Leading wellness in healthcare:A qualitative study of leadership practices for wellness in hospital settings

Ways of dealing with workplace stress and enhancing healthcare workers wellness are sought globally. The aim of this study was to explore healthcare leaders\u27 practice in relation to the implementation of a workplace wellness program called SEED in the context of multiple crises (bushfires and COVID-19) affecting a local health district in New South Wales, Australia. Practice theory informed interviews (n = 23), focus groups (n = 2) and co-analysis reflexive discussions (n = 2) that were conducted with thirteen leaders and twenty healthcare workers. A pragmatic approach to program implementation for healthcare workers\u27 wellness explored the process and actions that resulted from leadership practice in an inductive thematic analysis. Preliminary themes were presented in the co-analysis sessions to ensure the lived experiences of the SEED program were reflected and co-interpretation of the data was included in the analysis. Three key themes were identified. 1) Leading change-implementing a wellness program required leaders to try something new and be determined to make change happen. 2) Permission for wellness-implicit and explicit permission from leaders to engage in wellness activities during worktime was required. 3) Role-modelling wellness-leaders viewed SEED as a way to demonstrate leadership in supporting and caring for healthcare workers. SEED provided a platform for leaders who participated to demonstrate their leadership practices in supporting wellness activities. Leadership practices are critical to the implementation of healthcare wellness programs. The implementation of SEED at a time of unprecedented crisis gave leaders and healthcare workers opportunities to experience something new including leadership that was courageous, responsive and authentic. The study highlighted the need for workplace wellness programs to intentionally include leaders rather than only expect them to implement them. The practices documented in this study provide guidance to others developing, implementing and researching workplace wellness programs

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Study participant demographics.

Ways of dealing with workplace stress and enhancing healthcare workers wellness are sought globally. The aim of this study was to explore healthcare leaders’ practice in relation to the implementation of a workplace wellness program called SEED in the context of multiple crises (bushfires and COVID-19) affecting a local health district in New South Wales, Australia. Practice theory informed interviews (n = 23), focus groups (n = 2) and co-analysis reflexive discussions (n = 2) that were conducted with thirteen leaders and twenty healthcare workers. A pragmatic approach to program implementation for healthcare workers’ wellness explored the process and actions that resulted from leadership practice in an inductive thematic analysis. Preliminary themes were presented in the co-analysis sessions to ensure the lived experiences of the SEED program were reflected and co-interpretation of the data was included in the analysis. Three key themes were identified. 1) Leading change—implementing a wellness program required leaders to try something new and be determined to make change happen. 2) Permission for wellness—implicit and explicit permission from leaders to engage in wellness activities during worktime was required. 3) Role-modelling wellness—leaders viewed SEED as a way to demonstrate leadership in supporting and caring for healthcare workers. SEED provided a platform for leaders who participated to demonstrate their leadership practices in supporting wellness activities. Leadership practices are critical to the implementation of healthcare wellness programs. The implementation of SEED at a time of unprecedented crisis gave leaders and healthcare workers opportunities to experience something new including leadership that was courageous, responsive and authentic. The study highlighted the need for workplace wellness programs to intentionally include leaders rather than only expect them to implement them. The practices documented in this study provide guidance to others developing, implementing and researching workplace wellness programs.</div

Summary of the findings.

Fig 1-Leading wellness in healthcare: A qualitative study of leadership partices for wellness in hospital settings.</p

COREQ (COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research) checklist.

COREQ (COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research) checklist.</p

A Narrative Inquiry into the Practices of Healthcare Workers’ Wellness Program: The SEED Experience in New South Wales, Australia

The 2019–2020 Australian bushfires followed by the COVID-19 pandemic brought the significant mental health implications of working in healthcare to the fore. The importance of appropriate support services to ensure the resilience and recovery of healthcare workers has been highlighted. In response to healthcare staff experiences during the bushfires, the SEED Wellness Program was created in 2020 in the Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District in New South Wales, Australia. SEED used a participant-led design to engage healthcare staff in workplace-based restorative activities. Guided by practice theory, this study aimed to identify and describe SEED wellness practices that supported healthcare staff. Thirty-three healthcare workers participated in focus groups or individual interviews between June 2021 and March 2022. The analysis involved inductive thematic individual and collective exploration of SEED practices, including co-analysis with participants. Eight core practices that supported participants’ wellbeing were identified, including responsive and compassionate leading, engaging staff at every stage of the recovery process, creating a sense of connection with others, and collective caring. The study found that workplace wellness initiatives are optimised when they are place-based and grounded in local knowledge, needs, and resources incorporating a collective and supportive team approach. Moreover, to ensure engagement in, and sustainability of these initiatives, both bottom-up and top-down commitment is required

Supporting recovery, healing and wellbeing with Aboriginal communities of the southeast coast of Australia: a practice-based study of an Aboriginal community-controlled health corganisation’s response to cumulative disasters

The recent crises of bushfires, floods, and the COVID-19 pandemic on the southeast coast of Australia were unprecedented in their extent and intensity. Few studies have investigated responses to cumulative disasters in First Nations communities, despite acknowledgement that these crises disproportionately impact First Nations people. This study was conducted by a team of Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal researchers in partnership with Waminda, South Coast Women's Health and Wellbeing Aboriginal Corporation, an Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation.It investigated the collective experiences of people affected by cumulative disasters to identify the practices that support healing, and recovery for Aboriginal communities. The study addresses a knowledge gap of how Waminda, designs, manages and delivers responses to address complex health and social issues in the context of cumulative disasters