Facilitators and barriers for high-reliability training in medical centers

Regina Knowles, Carol Jones, Blake Webb, Deborah Welsh, Peter Mills
{"title":"Facilitators and barriers for high-reliability training in medical centers","authors":"Regina Knowles, Carol Jones, Blake Webb, Deborah Welsh, Peter Mills","doi":"10.5430/jha.v13n2p10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The study aims to determine the facilitators and barriers to conducting large-scale CRM-based training in a national health care system (VHA). While there are some studies on this topic, none review training in a federal system or provide data on changes within the system.Methods: Design: Focus Groups collecting qualitative data. Review Methods: We held focus-groups for Clinical Team Training (CTT) facility Points of Contact (POC) and CTT Master Trainers. Responses were collected live and presented to all participants in each focus group session to ensure participant comfort and accuracy. All subgroup leaders agreed on iteratively and qualitatively reviewing participant responses from the four open-ended and three poll questions. Each subgroup leader was assigned a question to conduct a preliminary review of participant responses. After the initial review, a second leader also reviewed the participant responses. Over multiple iterations, themes emerged and were formalized by the team.Results: The focus groups revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. The focus groups also identified that language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals by making some non-clinical team members feel excluded as part of the team. Our results support the need for highly visible leadership engagement, adequate time to undertake and complete projects, and overcoming skepticism. See table 1 for themes from each question.Conclusions: Qualitative analysis revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. Focus groups identified that specific language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals who do not have clinical backgrounds. In addition, some participants felt that the use of the term “Projects” created a negative connotation for the required quality improvement project on each unit and instead preferred the terms “micro-project,” “safety strategy,” or “quick wins.”Implemented changes: The program’s name has been rebranded to NCPS Team Training, taking the word clinical out to be more inclusive of all team members who engage in the care of a patient in the clinical setting. A complimentary video series was developed for facility Master Trainers to use as a supplement to their teaching or exclusively as the teaching tool as they facilitate the tabletop simulation exercises. Another change is that the Unit Based Safety Project has been renamed as Unit Based Safety Initiative (UBSI) to remove the stigma of a “project.”","PeriodicalId":15872,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Administration","volume":"132 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5430/jha.v13n2p10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The study aims to determine the facilitators and barriers to conducting large-scale CRM-based training in a national health care system (VHA). While there are some studies on this topic, none review training in a federal system or provide data on changes within the system.Methods: Design: Focus Groups collecting qualitative data. Review Methods: We held focus-groups for Clinical Team Training (CTT) facility Points of Contact (POC) and CTT Master Trainers. Responses were collected live and presented to all participants in each focus group session to ensure participant comfort and accuracy. All subgroup leaders agreed on iteratively and qualitatively reviewing participant responses from the four open-ended and three poll questions. Each subgroup leader was assigned a question to conduct a preliminary review of participant responses. After the initial review, a second leader also reviewed the participant responses. Over multiple iterations, themes emerged and were formalized by the team.Results: The focus groups revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. The focus groups also identified that language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals by making some non-clinical team members feel excluded as part of the team. Our results support the need for highly visible leadership engagement, adequate time to undertake and complete projects, and overcoming skepticism. See table 1 for themes from each question.Conclusions: Qualitative analysis revealed that Leadership engagement in cultural change is imperative. Focus groups identified that specific language and examples used in the curriculum may have inadvertently marginalized individuals who do not have clinical backgrounds. In addition, some participants felt that the use of the term “Projects” created a negative connotation for the required quality improvement project on each unit and instead preferred the terms “micro-project,” “safety strategy,” or “quick wins.”Implemented changes: The program’s name has been rebranded to NCPS Team Training, taking the word clinical out to be more inclusive of all team members who engage in the care of a patient in the clinical setting. A complimentary video series was developed for facility Master Trainers to use as a supplement to their teaching or exclusively as the teaching tool as they facilitate the tabletop simulation exercises. Another change is that the Unit Based Safety Project has been renamed as Unit Based Safety Initiative (UBSI) to remove the stigma of a “project.”
医疗中心开展高可靠性培训的促进因素和障碍
研究目的本研究旨在确定在国家医疗保健系统(退伍军人事务部)中开展基于客户关系管理的大规模培训的促进因素和障碍。虽然有一些关于这一主题的研究,但没有一项研究回顾了联邦系统中的培训情况,也没有提供关于系统内部变化的数据:设计:设计:焦点小组收集定性数据。审查方法:我们为临床团队培训 (CTT) 机构联络点 (POC) 和 CTT 主培训师举行了焦点小组会议。在每次焦点小组会议上,我们都会现场收集并向所有参与者展示答复,以确保参与者的舒适度和准确性。所有分组组长都同意对四道开放式问题和三道民意调查问题的参与者回答进行反复定性审查。每个分组组长被分配一个问题,对参与者的回答进行初步审核。在初步审核之后,第二位组长也对参与者的回答进行审核。经过多次迭代,出现了一些主题,并由小组正式确定下来:焦点小组显示,领导层参与文化变革势在必行。焦点小组还发现,课程中使用的语言和例子可能无意中使一些非临床团队成员感到自己被排斥在团队之外,从而使个人被边缘化。我们的研究结果表明,有必要让领导层高度参与进来,为开展和完成项目留出充足的时间,并克服怀疑态度。每个问题的主题见表 1:定性分析显示,领导层参与文化变革势在必行。焦点小组发现,课程中使用的特定语言和例子可能无意中将没有临床背景的个人边缘化。此外,一些参与者认为,使用 "项目 "一词会给每个单位所要求的质量改进项目带来负面含义,他们更倾向于使用 "微型项目"、"安全策略 "或 "速赢 "等术语:该计划的名称已重新命名为 "NCPS 团队培训",去掉了 "临床 "一词,使其更能涵盖所有在临床环境中参与患者护理的团队成员。我们还开发了一套免费的视频系列,供各机构的主培训师在进行桌面模拟练习时用作教学补充或专门的教学工具。另一个变化是,"基于单元的安全项目 "已更名为 "基于单元的安全倡议"(UBSI),以消除 "项目 "的烙印。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信