在尼泊尔急诊科实施世卫组织创伤护理核对表的挑战和障碍:变革型领导的必要性

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Manas Pokhrel, D. Lamsal, Buddhike Sri Harsha Indrasena, J. Aylott, R. Wrazen
{"title":"在尼泊尔急诊科实施世卫组织创伤护理核对表的挑战和障碍:变革型领导的必要性","authors":"Manas Pokhrel, D. Lamsal, Buddhike Sri Harsha Indrasena, J. Aylott, R. Wrazen","doi":"10.1108/lhs-10-2022-0107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to report on the implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) trauma care checklist (TCC) (WHO, 2016) in an emergency department in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. This research was undertaken as part of a Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowship programme (Subedi et al., 2020) across UK and Nepal, incorporating a two-year rotation through the UK National Health Service, via the Medical Training Initiative (MTI) (AoMRC, 2017). The WHO TCC can improve outcomes for trauma patients (Lashoher et al., 2016); however, significant barriers affect its implementation worldwide (Nolan et al., 2014; Wild et al., 2020). This article reports on the implementation, barriers and recommendations of WHO TCC implementation in the context of Nepal and argues for Transformational Leadership (TL) to support its implementation.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nExplanatory mixed methods research (Creswell, 2014), comprising quasi-experimental research and a qualitative online survey, were selected methods for this research. A training module was designed and implemented for 10 doctors and 15 nurses from a total of 76 (33%) of clinicians to aid in the introduction of the WHO TCC in an emergency department in a hospital in Nepal. The quasi-experimental research involved a pre- and post-training survey aimed to assess participant’s knowledge of the WHO TCC before and after training and before the implementation of the WHO TCC in the emergency department. Post-training, 219 patients were reviewed after four weeks to identify if process measures had improved the quality of care to trauma patients. Subsequently six months later, a qualitative online survey was sent to all clinical staff in the department to identify barriers to implementation, with a response rate of 26 (n = 26) (34%) (20 doctors and 6 nurses). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate quantitative data and the qualitative data were analysed using the five stepped approach of thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006).\n\n\nFindings\nThe evaluation of the implementation of the WHO TCC showed an improvement in care for trauma patients in an emergency setting in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. There were improvements in the documentation in trauma management, showing the training had a direct impact on the quality of care of trauma patients. Notably, there was an improvement in cervical spine examination from 56.1% before training to 78.1%; chest examination 125 (57.07%) before training and 170 (77.62%) post-training; abdominal examination 121 (55.25%) before training and 169 (77.16%) post-training; gross motor examination 13 (5.93%) before training and 131 (59.82%) post-training; sensory examination 4 (1.82%) before training and 115 (52.51%) post-training; distal pulse examination 6 (2.73%) before training and 122 (55.7%) post-training. However, while the quality of documentation for trauma patients improved from the baseline of 56%, it only reached 78% when the percentage improvement target agreed for this research project was 90%. The 10 (n = 10) doctors and 15 (n = 15) nurses in the Emergency Department (ED) all improved their baseline knowledge from 72.2% to 87% (p = 0.00006), by 14.8% and 67% to 85%) (p = 0.006), respectively. Nurses started with lower scores (mean 67) in the baseline when compared to doctors, but they made significant gains in their learning post-training. The qualitative data reported barriers, such as the busyness of the department, with residents and medical officers, suggesting a shortened version of the checklist to support greater protocol compliance. Embedding this research within TL provided a steer for successful innovation and change, identifying action for sustaining change over time.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThe study is a single-centre study that involved trauma patients in an emergency department in one hospital in Nepal. There is a lack of internationally recognised trauma training in Nepal and very few specialist trauma centres; hence, it was challenging to teach trauma to clinicians in a single 1-h session. High levels of transformation of health services are required in Nepal, but the sample for this research was small to test out and pilot the protocol to gain wider stakeholder buy in. The rapid turnover of doctors and nurses in the emergency department, creates an additional challenge but encouraging a multi-disciplinary approach through TL creates a greater chance of sustainability of the WHO TCC.\n\n\nPractical implications\nInternational protocols are required in Nepal to support the transformation of health care. This explanatory mixed methods research, which is part of an International Fellowship programme, provides evidence of direct improvements in the quality of patient care and demonstrates how TL can drive improvement in a low- to medium-income country.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThe Nepal/UK Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowships have an opportunity to implement changes to the health system in Nepal through research, by bringing international level standards and protocols to the hospital to improve the quality of care provided to patients.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research paper is one of the first studies of its kind to demonstrate direct patient level improvements as an outcome of the two-year MTI scheme.\n","PeriodicalId":46165,"journal":{"name":"Leadership in Health Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges and barriers to implementing the WHO Trauma Care Checklist in an emergency department in Nepal: the need for Transformational Leadership\",\"authors\":\"Manas Pokhrel, D. Lamsal, Buddhike Sri Harsha Indrasena, J. Aylott, R. Wrazen\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/lhs-10-2022-0107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to report on the implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) trauma care checklist (TCC) (WHO, 2016) in an emergency department in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. This research was undertaken as part of a Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowship programme (Subedi et al., 2020) across UK and Nepal, incorporating a two-year rotation through the UK National Health Service, via the Medical Training Initiative (MTI) (AoMRC, 2017). The WHO TCC can improve outcomes for trauma patients (Lashoher et al., 2016); however, significant barriers affect its implementation worldwide (Nolan et al., 2014; Wild et al., 2020). This article reports on the implementation, barriers and recommendations of WHO TCC implementation in the context of Nepal and argues for Transformational Leadership (TL) to support its implementation.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nExplanatory mixed methods research (Creswell, 2014), comprising quasi-experimental research and a qualitative online survey, were selected methods for this research. A training module was designed and implemented for 10 doctors and 15 nurses from a total of 76 (33%) of clinicians to aid in the introduction of the WHO TCC in an emergency department in a hospital in Nepal. The quasi-experimental research involved a pre- and post-training survey aimed to assess participant’s knowledge of the WHO TCC before and after training and before the implementation of the WHO TCC in the emergency department. Post-training, 219 patients were reviewed after four weeks to identify if process measures had improved the quality of care to trauma patients. Subsequently six months later, a qualitative online survey was sent to all clinical staff in the department to identify barriers to implementation, with a response rate of 26 (n = 26) (34%) (20 doctors and 6 nurses). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate quantitative data and the qualitative data were analysed using the five stepped approach of thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006).\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe evaluation of the implementation of the WHO TCC showed an improvement in care for trauma patients in an emergency setting in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. There were improvements in the documentation in trauma management, showing the training had a direct impact on the quality of care of trauma patients. Notably, there was an improvement in cervical spine examination from 56.1% before training to 78.1%; chest examination 125 (57.07%) before training and 170 (77.62%) post-training; abdominal examination 121 (55.25%) before training and 169 (77.16%) post-training; gross motor examination 13 (5.93%) before training and 131 (59.82%) post-training; sensory examination 4 (1.82%) before training and 115 (52.51%) post-training; distal pulse examination 6 (2.73%) before training and 122 (55.7%) post-training. However, while the quality of documentation for trauma patients improved from the baseline of 56%, it only reached 78% when the percentage improvement target agreed for this research project was 90%. The 10 (n = 10) doctors and 15 (n = 15) nurses in the Emergency Department (ED) all improved their baseline knowledge from 72.2% to 87% (p = 0.00006), by 14.8% and 67% to 85%) (p = 0.006), respectively. Nurses started with lower scores (mean 67) in the baseline when compared to doctors, but they made significant gains in their learning post-training. The qualitative data reported barriers, such as the busyness of the department, with residents and medical officers, suggesting a shortened version of the checklist to support greater protocol compliance. Embedding this research within TL provided a steer for successful innovation and change, identifying action for sustaining change over time.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nThe study is a single-centre study that involved trauma patients in an emergency department in one hospital in Nepal. There is a lack of internationally recognised trauma training in Nepal and very few specialist trauma centres; hence, it was challenging to teach trauma to clinicians in a single 1-h session. High levels of transformation of health services are required in Nepal, but the sample for this research was small to test out and pilot the protocol to gain wider stakeholder buy in. The rapid turnover of doctors and nurses in the emergency department, creates an additional challenge but encouraging a multi-disciplinary approach through TL creates a greater chance of sustainability of the WHO TCC.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nInternational protocols are required in Nepal to support the transformation of health care. This explanatory mixed methods research, which is part of an International Fellowship programme, provides evidence of direct improvements in the quality of patient care and demonstrates how TL can drive improvement in a low- to medium-income country.\\n\\n\\nSocial implications\\nThe Nepal/UK Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowships have an opportunity to implement changes to the health system in Nepal through research, by bringing international level standards and protocols to the hospital to improve the quality of care provided to patients.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nTo the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research paper is one of the first studies of its kind to demonstrate direct patient level improvements as an outcome of the two-year MTI scheme.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":46165,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leadership in Health Services\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leadership in Health Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/lhs-10-2022-0107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leadership in Health Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lhs-10-2022-0107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是报告世界卫生组织(WHO)创伤护理清单(TCC) (WHO, 2016)在尼泊尔一家三级医院急诊科的实施情况。这项研究是作为英国和尼泊尔混合国际急诊医学奖学金计划(Subedi等人,2020年)的一部分进行的,通过医学培训计划(MTI) (AoMRC, 2017年),通过英国国家卫生服务进行为期两年的轮转。世卫组织TCC可以改善创伤患者的预后(Lashoher et al., 2016);然而,重大障碍影响其在全球范围内的实施(Nolan et al., 2014;Wild et al., 2020)。本文报告了世卫组织在尼泊尔实施TCC的实施情况、障碍和建议,并主张采用变革型领导(TL)来支持其实施。设计/方法论/方法解释性混合方法研究(Creswell, 2014),包括准实验研究和定性在线调查,是本研究选择的方法。为来自76名(33%)临床医生的10名医生和15名护士设计并实施了一个培训模块,以帮助在尼泊尔一家医院的急诊科引入世卫组织TCC。准实验研究包括培训前和培训后调查,旨在评估参与者在培训前后和在急诊科实施世卫组织TCC之前对世卫组织TCC的了解情况。训练后,在四周后对219名患者进行评估,以确定过程措施是否改善了对创伤患者的护理质量。随后6个月后,对科室所有临床工作人员进行定性在线调查,以确定实施障碍,回复率为26 (n = 26)(34%)(20名医生和6名护士)。描述性统计用于评估定量数据,定性数据使用主题分析的五步方法进行分析(Braun和Clarke, 2006)。对世卫组织TCC实施情况的评估表明,尼泊尔一家三级医院急诊环境中创伤患者的护理有所改善。创伤管理文件的改进,表明培训对创伤患者的护理质量有直接影响。值得注意的是,颈椎检查从训练前的56.1%提高到78.1%;训练前胸部检查125例(57.07%),训练后胸部检查170例(77.62%);训练前腹部检查121例(55.25%),训练后腹部检查169例(77.16%);训练前大肌肉运动检查13例(5.93%),训练后大肌肉运动检查131例(59.82%);培训前感官检查4次(1.82%),培训后感官检查115次(52.51%);训练前远端脉搏检查6例(2.73%),训练后122例(55.7%)。然而,尽管创伤患者的文献质量在基线的基础上提高了56%,但当本研究项目商定的百分比改善目标为90%时,它仅达到78%。急诊科(ED) 10名(n = 10)名医生和15名(n = 15)名护士的基线知识分别从72.2%提高到87% (p = 0.00006)、14.8%和67%提高到85% (p = 0.006)。与医生相比,护士在基线上的得分较低(平均67分),但他们在培训后的学习中取得了显著的进步。定性数据报告了一些障碍,例如该部门与住院医生和医务人员的忙碌,建议简化清单,以支持更好地遵守协议。将这项研究嵌入到TL中,为成功的创新和变革提供了指导,确定了随着时间的推移维持变革的行动。研究局限性/意义本研究是一项单中心研究,涉及尼泊尔一家医院急诊科的创伤患者。尼泊尔缺乏国际认可的创伤培训,专业创伤中心也很少;因此,在一个1小时的会议中向临床医生教授创伤是具有挑战性的。尼泊尔需要对卫生服务进行高水平的改革,但本研究的样本很小,无法对协议进行测试和试点,以获得更广泛的利益攸关方的支持。急诊科医生和护士的快速更替带来了额外的挑战,但鼓励采用多学科方法,可为世卫组织技术合作的可持续性创造更大的机会。实际影响尼泊尔需要国际议定书来支持医疗保健的转变。这项解释性混合方法研究是一个国际研究金项目的一部分,它提供了直接改善患者护理质量的证据,并展示了TL如何能够推动中低收入国家的改善。 社会影响尼泊尔/英国混合国际急诊医学奖学金有机会通过研究实施尼泊尔卫生系统的变革,将国际水平的标准和协议引入医院,以提高向患者提供的护理质量。原创性/价值据作者所知,这篇研究论文是同类研究中第一个证明两年MTI计划直接改善患者水平的研究之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges and barriers to implementing the WHO Trauma Care Checklist in an emergency department in Nepal: the need for Transformational Leadership
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to report on the implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) trauma care checklist (TCC) (WHO, 2016) in an emergency department in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. This research was undertaken as part of a Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowship programme (Subedi et al., 2020) across UK and Nepal, incorporating a two-year rotation through the UK National Health Service, via the Medical Training Initiative (MTI) (AoMRC, 2017). The WHO TCC can improve outcomes for trauma patients (Lashoher et al., 2016); however, significant barriers affect its implementation worldwide (Nolan et al., 2014; Wild et al., 2020). This article reports on the implementation, barriers and recommendations of WHO TCC implementation in the context of Nepal and argues for Transformational Leadership (TL) to support its implementation. Design/methodology/approach Explanatory mixed methods research (Creswell, 2014), comprising quasi-experimental research and a qualitative online survey, were selected methods for this research. A training module was designed and implemented for 10 doctors and 15 nurses from a total of 76 (33%) of clinicians to aid in the introduction of the WHO TCC in an emergency department in a hospital in Nepal. The quasi-experimental research involved a pre- and post-training survey aimed to assess participant’s knowledge of the WHO TCC before and after training and before the implementation of the WHO TCC in the emergency department. Post-training, 219 patients were reviewed after four weeks to identify if process measures had improved the quality of care to trauma patients. Subsequently six months later, a qualitative online survey was sent to all clinical staff in the department to identify barriers to implementation, with a response rate of 26 (n = 26) (34%) (20 doctors and 6 nurses). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate quantitative data and the qualitative data were analysed using the five stepped approach of thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006). Findings The evaluation of the implementation of the WHO TCC showed an improvement in care for trauma patients in an emergency setting in a tertiary hospital in Nepal. There were improvements in the documentation in trauma management, showing the training had a direct impact on the quality of care of trauma patients. Notably, there was an improvement in cervical spine examination from 56.1% before training to 78.1%; chest examination 125 (57.07%) before training and 170 (77.62%) post-training; abdominal examination 121 (55.25%) before training and 169 (77.16%) post-training; gross motor examination 13 (5.93%) before training and 131 (59.82%) post-training; sensory examination 4 (1.82%) before training and 115 (52.51%) post-training; distal pulse examination 6 (2.73%) before training and 122 (55.7%) post-training. However, while the quality of documentation for trauma patients improved from the baseline of 56%, it only reached 78% when the percentage improvement target agreed for this research project was 90%. The 10 (n = 10) doctors and 15 (n = 15) nurses in the Emergency Department (ED) all improved their baseline knowledge from 72.2% to 87% (p = 0.00006), by 14.8% and 67% to 85%) (p = 0.006), respectively. Nurses started with lower scores (mean 67) in the baseline when compared to doctors, but they made significant gains in their learning post-training. The qualitative data reported barriers, such as the busyness of the department, with residents and medical officers, suggesting a shortened version of the checklist to support greater protocol compliance. Embedding this research within TL provided a steer for successful innovation and change, identifying action for sustaining change over time. Research limitations/implications The study is a single-centre study that involved trauma patients in an emergency department in one hospital in Nepal. There is a lack of internationally recognised trauma training in Nepal and very few specialist trauma centres; hence, it was challenging to teach trauma to clinicians in a single 1-h session. High levels of transformation of health services are required in Nepal, but the sample for this research was small to test out and pilot the protocol to gain wider stakeholder buy in. The rapid turnover of doctors and nurses in the emergency department, creates an additional challenge but encouraging a multi-disciplinary approach through TL creates a greater chance of sustainability of the WHO TCC. Practical implications International protocols are required in Nepal to support the transformation of health care. This explanatory mixed methods research, which is part of an International Fellowship programme, provides evidence of direct improvements in the quality of patient care and demonstrates how TL can drive improvement in a low- to medium-income country. Social implications The Nepal/UK Hybrid International Emergency Medicine Fellowships have an opportunity to implement changes to the health system in Nepal through research, by bringing international level standards and protocols to the hospital to improve the quality of care provided to patients. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research paper is one of the first studies of its kind to demonstrate direct patient level improvements as an outcome of the two-year MTI scheme.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Leadership in Health Services
Leadership in Health Services HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
17.60%
发文量
51
×
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