Quick and dirty? A systematic review of the use of rapid ethnographies in healthcare organisation and delivery

BACKGROUND: The ability to capture the complexities of healthcare practices and the quick turnaround of findings make rapid ethnographies appealing to the healthcare sector, where changing organisational climates and priorities require actionable findings at strategic time points. Despite methodological advancement, there continue to be challenges in the implementation of rapid ethnographies concerning sampling, the interpretation of findings and management of field research. The purpose of this review was to explore the benefits and challenges of using rapid ethnographies to inform healthcare organisation and delivery and identify areas that require improvement. METHODS: This was a systematic review of the literature using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool to assess the quality of the articles. We developed the search strategy using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Settingframework and searched for peer-reviewed articles in MEDLINE, CINAHL PLUS, Web of Science and ProQuest Central. We included articles that reported findings from rapid ethnographies in healthcare contexts or addressing issues related to health service use. RESULTS: 26 articles were included in the review. We found an increase in the use of rapid ethnographies in the last 2‰years. We found variability in terminology and developed a typology to clarify conceptual differences. The studies generated findings that could be used to inform policy and practice. The main limitations of the studies were: the poor quality of reporting of study designs, mainly data analysis methods, and lack of reflexivity. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid ethnographies have the potential to generate findings that can inform changes in healthcare practices in a timely manner, but greater attention needs to be paid to the reflexive interpretation of findings and the description of research methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017065874

A Cautionary Tale: The ‘New’ Medical Tourism Industry in Argentina

Argentina’s universal model of healthcare and open immigration policies make it a popular destination for people from neighbouring countries requiring free medical treatments. These medical tourists come from Bolivia, Peru, and Paraguay. They are often from low-income households and rural areas, and travel to Argentina seeking medical attention in public hospitals because they are unable to pay for services in their own countries. In addition to these patients, current governmental-private sector agreements are being put in place to attract patients from the US and Europe. This new initiative – called Medicina Argentina (Argentina Healthcare) – hopes to raise the number of foreign patients from 6000 per year to 100,000. In theory, this change in government policy seeks to: provide services to patients who might not be able to access them in their own countries (due to high cost, unavailability, or long waiting lists), increase Argentine tourism income, and improve the quality of the medical services available for local populations. However, in practice, it will mean that an already overburdened healthcare system will have to adapt to suit the needs of short-term, medical tourists. The flow of foreign patients will interact with local migrating patients to create a tiered system of medical tourism, posing ethical and legal challenges in the distribution of scarce resources and regulation of medical care. In this article, I explore the ethical and practical impact of this “new” medical tourism industry on the care provided to the local population

Gender Matters: A Gender Analysis of Healthcare Workers’ Experiences during the First COVID-19 Pandemic Peak in England

The coronavirus (COVID-19) arrived in the United Kingdom (UK) in February 2020, placing an unprecedented burden on the National Health Service (NHS). Literature from past epidemics and the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the importance of using a gender lens when considering policy, experiences, and impacts of the disease. Researchers are increasingly examining the experiences of healthcare workers (HCWs), yet there is a dearth of research considering how gender shapes HCWs’ personal experiences. As the majority of HCWs in the UK and worldwide are women, research that investigates gender and focuses on women’s experiences is urgently needed. We conducted an analysis of 41 qualitative interviews with HCWs in the British NHS during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020. Our findings demonstrate that gender is significant when understanding the experiences of HCWs during COVID-19 as it illuminates ingrained inequalities and asymmetrical power relations, gendered organizational structures and norms, and individual gendered bodies that interact to shape experiences of healthcare workers. These findings point to important steps to improve gender equality, the wellbeing of healthcare workers, and the overall strength of the NHS

Boundary work during COVID-19: The transformation of research review and set-up

Background and aims: The rapid setting up of research during the COVID-19 pandemic led to changes in ways of working within research organisations. The aim of this study was to examine the experiences of staff involved in the research review and set-up system at a large NHS and university partnership in the UK through the lens of boundary theory. / Methods: We carried out a rapid qualitative appraisal based on telephone interviews (n=25) to explore how staff experienced the research review and set-up system during the pandemic. / Results: In light of the pressures created by the pandemic, the boundaries established to set up distinct groups and responsibilities were modified to allow for different ways of working. Some of the new structures and processes were seen positively and brought groups that previously worked at a distance closer together. / Conclusions: The reconceptualisation of relations within the research system during the pandemic added more fluidity to ways of working within the research office and contributed to closer working interactions and an expanded team ethos

Examining What We Know in Relation to How We Know It: A Team-Based Reflexivity Model for Rapid Qualitative Health Research

Reflexivity constitutes a core component of qualitative research and has been actively integrated into long-term and “lone ranger” approaches to qualitative research. However, its application to team-based approaches and particularly to rapid qualitative team-based approaches continues to lag behind. In this article, we introduce a reflexivity model we developed for teams undertaking rapid qualitative studies. Utilizing our most recent application of this model to a rapid qualitative appraisal of health care workers’ experiences delivering care during the COVID-19 pandemic as a case study, we identify the steps to put this model into practice and its main outcomes. Our application of the model revealed that the team’s practices could be grouped along four dimensions: design assumptions, data collection and analysis processes, multidisciplinary collaboration, and responsible dissemination. Reflexivity can improve the relations within the team and the quality of the research output, if it is implemented as a continuous and iterative process

The impact of maternity service restrictions related to COVID-19 on women's experiences of giving birth in England: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant changes in maternity service delivery in England, including: antenatal appointments being cancelled or held by phone; women having to attend antenatal scans alone; partners not being allowed to accompany women during labor; visitor restrictions on postnatal wards; and limited postnatal support. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 46 women aged 18–45 who had low-risk pregnancies and gave birth to their babies using NHS services in England between 1st March 2020 and 1st March 2021. RESULTS: Our thematic analysis of interview data generated key themes: profound negative impacts of birth partners not being allowed to accompany women (including on emotional wellbeing, birth preferences and care-seeking choices); deep frustration about policy variation between trusts and inconsistent implementation of guidance; women being more concerned about the risk of giving birth alone than of COVID-19 infection; and women turning towards private care or delaying seeking NHS care so that they could have the birth experience they desired. The latter two results are, to the best of our knowledge, unique to this paper. CONCLUSION: Our participants reported significant negative affects to their emotional and physical wellbeing because of maternity service restrictions. Going forward, efforts are required by policymakers and health service providers to re-establish trust in NHS maternity care and ensure capacity to provide for potential shifts in birthplace preferences. Health systems strengthening efforts should prioritise protecting the rights of women to access high quality, person-centred care in the event of future health emergencies that strain NHS capacity

En clave intercultural: Intervenciones en el final de la vida con fundamento en las “diferencias culturales” / Through an intercultural lens: Grounding end of life interventions in “cultural difference” approaches

El artículo indaga en los modos en que el personal sanitario en contextos institucionales de atención en el final de vida se apropia de los discursos sobre las “diferencias culturales” de las poblaciones que atienden para basar sus intervenciones, interpretando qué es lo que los pacientes y sus familias necesitan. Sostiene que la apelación a discursos en clave culturalista aparece cuando los pacientes pertenecen a minorías étnicas, atravesando la comunicación de la enfermedad; la gestión de la atención y el cuidado y la espiritualidad, la religiosidad y los sistemas de creencias. Se trata de un análisis secundario basado en datos propios recabados en investigaciones realizadas en Servicios de Cuidados Paliativos, Oncología y Hospices de Argentina. Este fundamento “culturalista” de las intervenciones es atravesado por estereotipos y prenociones sobre las identidades culturales de poblaciones que ya tienen una alta carga de estigmatización en la sociedad y reproduce actitudes paternalistas y condescendientes. Concluye que negar o ignorar otras cosmovisiones es tan nocivo como reificarlas. / The purpose of this article is to explore the ways in which healthcare professionals who provide care to patients during end of life use discourses based on arguments of “cultural differences” to justify their interventions and interpretations of patients’ and their families’ needs. The article argues that this reliance on cultural discourses appears when patients belong to ethnic minorities. These discourses shape the communication of the disease as well as the delivery of care and spiritual services. The article is based on the secondary analysis of data collected in palliative care, oncology and hospice services in Argentina. A conclusion of this study is that the “culturalist” nature of these interventions leads to stereotypes and preconceptions of the cultural identity of patient populations and reproduces paternalistic and condescending attitudes. Furthermore, these cultural discourses led to the reification and decontextualization of patients’ cosmovisions, producing harmful effects on populations who are already suffering from social stigma and confronting the end of life

The Narrated, Nonnarrated, and the Disnarrated: Conceptual Tools for Analyzing Narratives in Health Services Research

While analyzing the narratives of children receiving pediatric oncology treatment and their parents, we encountered three ways to look at their narratives: what was narrated, nonnarrated, and disnarrated. The narrated refers to the actors (characters) and events (scenes) individuals decided to include in the narration of their experiences, the nonnarrated are everything not included in narration, and the disnarrated are elements that are narrated in the story but did not actually take place. We use our reflection to illustrate how an integrative analysis of these different forms of narration can allow us to produce a holistic interpretation of people’s experiences of illness. This approach is still in the early stages of development, but we hope this article can promote a debate in the field and lead to the refinement of an important tool for narrative analysis. Storytellers shape the world according to the narratives they tell. In health services research, these stories describe the complex constellations of beliefs, values, emotions, intentions, identities, attitudes, and motivations that research participants use to express themselves as individuals and embed themselves within the illness narratives they enact and tell. The research we present here is based on narrative data collected from pediatric oncology patients and their families in Buenos Aires, Argentina. We analyzed the interviews by identifying the primary actors within the illness narrative (i.e., characters) and dominant scenes of activity, organized thematically, based on treatment trajectories. During the analysis process, we encountered three ways to analyze the narratives of the children and their parents. These included searching for the following: (a) who and what is present in narratives (i.e., narrated), (b) who and what is not present within the story (i.e., nonnarrated), and (c) what is alluded to in the text, yet did not actually happen (i.e., disnarrated). This article presents a reflection of this approach, the contributions it made to the interpretation of the data collected in this study, and its potential application in other research projects

NHS Hospital 'Learning from Deaths' reports: A qualitative and quantitative analysis of the first year of a countrywide patient safety programme

Introduction: Potentially preventable deaths occur worldwide within healthcare organisations. Organisational learning from incidents is essential to improve quality of care. In England, inconsistencies in how NHS secondary care trusts reviewed, investigated and shared learning from deaths, resulted in the introduction of national guidance on ‘Learning from Deaths’ (LfDs) in 2017. This guidance provides a ‘framework for identifying, reporting, investigating and learning from deaths’. Amendments to NHS Quality Account regulations, legally require NHS trusts in England to report quantitative and qualitative information relating to patient deaths annually. The programme intended trusts would share this learning and take measurable action to prevent future deaths. / Method: We undertook qualitative and quantitative secondary data analysis of all NHS secondary care trust LfDs reports within their 2017/18 Quality Accounts, to review how organisations are using the LfDs programme to learn from and prevent, potentially preventable deaths. / Results: All statutory elements of LfDs reporting were reported by 98 out of 222 (44%) trusts. The percentage of deaths judged more likely than not due to problems in healthcare was between 0% and 13%. The majority of trusts (89%) reported lessons learnt; the most common learning theme was poor communication. 106 out of 222 trusts (48%) have shared or plan to share the learning within their own organisation. The majority of trusts (86%) reported actions taken and 47% discussed or had a plan for assessment of impact. 37 out of 222 trusts (17%) mentioned involvement of bereaved families. / Conclusions: The wide variation in reporting demonstrates that some trusts have engaged fully with LfDs, while other trusts appear to have disengaged with the programme. This may reveal a disparity in organisational learning and patient safety culture which could result in inequity for bereaved families. Many themes identified from the LfD reports have previously been identified in national and international reports and inquiries. Further work is needed to strengthen the LfDs programme

Stories for Change: The impact of Public Narrative on the co-production process

INTRODUCTION: Involving service users in health service design and delivery is considered important to improve the quality of healthcare because it ensures that the delivery of healthcare is adapted to the needs of the users. Co-production is a process used to involve service users, but multiple papers have highlighted the need for the mechanisms and values guiding co-production to be more clearly stated. The aim of this paper was to evaluate the mechanisms and values that guided the co-production approach of the Stories for Change project, which used Public Narrative as part of the co-design process to create change in National Health Service maternity services. METHODS: This study was conducted using a rapid feedback evaluation approach. Semistructured interviews (n = 16) were the main source of data, six of which were maternity service users, with observations (5 h) and documentary analysis also carried out in parallel. RREAL sheets were used for data analysis to organize data based on key topics of interest. RESULTS: This study identified three broad mechanisms and values underpinning the co-production approach: creating an open and safe space to share ideas, learning how to tell stories using Public Narrative and having service providers who play a key role in strengthening the health system listen to stories compelling them to action. This study identified the main areas for improvement of the Stories for Change project related to recruitment, the inclusion of participants, the co-design process, the Skills Session and the Learning Event. CONCLUSION: Our study provided a deeper understanding of the co-production approach that addresses the need to uncover the mechanism and values underlying co-production and co-design approaches. This study expands on the literature pertaining to the influence of storytelling in creating meaningful change in health care. We propose a co-design methodology that uses Public Narrative as a model for service user engagement to help inform future healthcare development processes. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The experiences and perceptions of maternity service users and health professionals informed this evaluation. The project organizers were involved in the manuscript preparation stage by providing feedback, and service users wrote a commentary on the project from the lived experience perspective