Centre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036, Stavanger, Norway.
School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, 4122, Australia.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Aug 23;23(1):890. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09922-6.
Historically, efforts to improved healthcare provisions have focussed on learning from and understanding what went wrong during adverse events. More recently, however, there has been a growing interest in seeking to improve healthcare quality through promoting and strengthening resilience in healthcare, in light of the range of changes and challenges to which healthcare providers are subjected. So far, several approaches for strengthening resilience performance have been suggested, such as reflection and simulation. However, there is a lack of studies that appraise the range of existing learning tools, the purposes for which they are designed, and the types of learning activities they comprise. The aim of this rapid scoping review is to identify the characteristics of currently available learning tools designed to translate organizational resilience into healthcare practice.
A rapid scoping review approach was used to identify, collect, and synthesise information describing the characteristics of currently available learning tools designed to translate organizational resilience into healthcare practice. EMBASE and Medline Ovid were searched in May 2022 for articles published between 2012 and 2022.
The review identified six different learning tools such as serious games and checklists to guide reflection, targeting different stakeholders, in various healthcare settings. The tools, typically, promoted self-reflection either individually or collaboratively in groups. Evaluations of these tools found them to be useful and supportive of resilience; however, what constitutes resilience was often difficult to discern, particularly the organizational aspect. It became evident from these studies that careful planning and support were needed for their successful implementation.
The tools that are available for review are based on guidelines, checklists, or serious games, all of which offer to prompt either self-reflection or group reflections related to different forms of adaptations that are being performed. In this paper, we propose that more guided reflections mirroring the complexity of resilience in healthcare, along with an interprofessional collaborative and guided approach, are needed for these tools to be enacted effectively to realise change in practice. Future studies also need to explore how tools are perceived, used, and understood in multi-site, multi-level studies with a range of different participants.
从历史上看，改善医疗服务的努力一直集中在从不良事件中吸取教训并了解出现问题的原因。然而，最近，鉴于医疗保健提供者面临的一系列变化和挑战，人们越来越有兴趣通过促进和加强医疗保健的弹性来提高医疗保健质量。到目前为止，已经提出了几种增强弹性性能的方法，例如反思和模拟。然而，缺乏评估现有学习工具范围、设计目的以及包含的学习活动类型的研究。本快速范围审查的目的是确定旨在将组织弹性转化为医疗实践的现有学习工具的特点。
使用快速范围审查方法来识别、收集和综合描述旨在将组织弹性转化为医疗实践的现有学习工具的特点的信息。2022 年 5 月，在 EMBASE 和 Medline Ovid 上搜索了 2012 年至 2022 年期间发表的文章。
该审查确定了六种不同的学习工具，例如严肃游戏和检查表，以指导不同利益相关者在各种医疗保健环境中的反思。这些工具通常单独或在小组中以协作方式促进自我反思。对这些工具的评估发现它们有助于提高韧性；然而，韧性的构成往往难以辨别，尤其是组织方面。从这些研究中可以明显看出，需要精心规划和支持才能成功实施。
可用于审查的工具基于指南、检查表或严肃游戏，所有这些都旨在提示与正在进行的不同形式的适应相关的自我反思或小组反思。在本文中，我们建议需要更具指导性的反思，反映医疗保健中的弹性复杂性，以及跨专业的协作和指导方法，以便这些工具能够有效地实施，从而实现实践中的变革。未来的研究还需要探索在具有不同参与者的多地点、多层面研究中，工具是如何被感知、使用和理解的。
