Rapid spread of complex change: a case study in inpatient palliative care

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Based on positive findings from a randomized controlled trial, Kaiser Permanente's national executive leadership group set an expectation that all Kaiser Permanente and partner hospitals would implement a consultative model of interdisciplinary, inpatient-based palliative care (IPC). Within one year, the number of IPC consultations program-wide increased almost tenfold from baseline, and the number of teams nearly doubled. We report here results from a qualitative evaluation of the IPC initiative after a year of implementation; our purpose was to understand factors supporting or impeding the rapid and consistent spread of a complex program.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Quality improvement study using a case study design and qualitative analysis of in-depth semi-structured interviews with 36 national, regional, and local leaders.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Compelling evidence of impacts on patient satisfaction and quality of care generated 'pull' among adopters, expressed as a remarkably high degree of conviction about the value of the model. Broad leadership agreement gave rise to sponsorship and support that permeated the organization. A robust social network promoted knowledge exchange and built on an existing network with a strong interest in palliative care. Resource constraints, pre-existing programs of a different model, and ambiguous accountability for implementation impeded spread.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>A complex, hospital-based, interdisciplinary intervention in a large health care organization spread rapidly due to a synergy between organizational 'push' strategies and grassroots-level pull. The combination of push and pull may be especially important when the organizational context or the practice to be spread is complex.</p

Atypical periodic paralysis and myalgia: A novel RYR1 phenotype.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the phenotype of patients with symptoms of periodic paralysis (PP) and ryanodine receptor (RYR1) gene mutations. METHODS: Cases with a possible diagnosis of PP but additional clinicopathologic findings previously associated with RYR1-related disorders were referred for a tertiary neuromuscular clinical assessment in which they underwent detailed clinical evaluation, including neurophysiologic assessment, muscle biopsy, and muscle MRI. Genetic analysis with next-generation sequencing and/or targeted Sanger sequencing was performed. RESULTS: Three cases with episodic muscle paralysis or weakness and additional findings compatible with a RYR1-related myopathy were identified. The McManis test, used in the diagnosis of PP, was positive in 2 of 3 cases. Genetic analysis of known PP genes was negative. RYR1 analysis confirmed likely pathogenic variants in all 3 cases. CONCLUSIONS: RYR1 mutations can cause late-onset atypical PP both with and without associated myopathy. Myalgia and cramps are prominent features. The McManis test may be a useful diagnostic tool to indicate RYR1-associated PP. We propose that clinicopathologic features suggestive of RYR1-related disorders should be sought in genetically undefined PP cases and that RYR1 gene testing be considered in those in whom mutations in SCN4A, CACNA1S, and KCNJ2 have already been excluded