首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >The origins and implementation of an intervention to support healthcare staff to deliver compassionate care: exploring fidelity and adaptation in the transfer of Schwartz Center Rounds? from the United States to the United Kingdom
【24h】

The origins and implementation of an intervention to support healthcare staff to deliver compassionate care: exploring fidelity and adaptation in the transfer of Schwartz Center Rounds? from the United States to the United Kingdom

机译:干预的起源和实施支持医疗保健工作人员提供富有同情心的关怀:探索富信誉和适应施瓦茨中心轮的转移?从美国到英国

获取原文
           

摘要

Schwartz Center Rounds? (henceforce Rounds) were developed in the United States (US) in 1995 to provide a regular, structured time and safe place for staff to meet to share the emotional, psychological and social challenges of working in healthcare. Rounds were adopted in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2009 and have been subsequently implemented in over 180 healthcare organisations. Using Rounds as a case study, we aim to inform current debates around maintaining fidelity when an intervention developed in one country is transferred and implemented in another. Interpretive design using nine qualitative interviews (UK?=?3, US?=?6) and four focus groups (UK: Focus group 1 (4 participants), Focus group 2 (5 participants; US: focus group 1 (5 participants) focus group 2 (2 participants) with participants involved in Rounds design and implementation, for example, programme architects, senior leaders, mentors and trainers. We also conducted non-participant observations of Rounds (UK?=?42: USA?=?2) and training days (UK?=?2). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. We identified four core and seven sub-core Rounds components, based upon the US design, and seven peripheral components, based on our US and UK fieldwork. We found high core component fidelity and examples of UK adaptations. We identified six strategies used to maintain high fidelity during Rounds transfer and implementation from the US to UK settings: i) having a legal contract between the two national bodies overseeing implementation, ii) requiring adopting UK healthcare organisations to sign a contract with the national body, iii) piloting the intervention in the UK context, iv) emphasising the credibility of the intervention, v) promoting and evaluating Rounds, and vi) providing implementation support and infrastructure. This study identifies how fidelity to the core components of a particular intervention was maintained during transfer from one country to another by identifying six strategies which participants argued had enhanced fidelity during transfer of Rounds to a different country, with contractual agreements and legitimacy of intervention sources key. Potential disadvantages include limitations to further innovation and adaptation.
机译:Schwartz中心轮? (因此必须轮次)于1995年在美国(美国)开发,为员工提供定期,结构化的时间和安全的地方,以便在医疗保健中分享在医疗保健中的情感,心理和社会挑战。 2009年英国(英国)采用了回合,随后在180多个医疗组织中实施。使用圆形作为一个案例研究,我们的目的是在一个国家开发的干预在另一个国家的干预方面进行待遇,以围绕维护保真度的辩论。使用九个定性访谈(英国?=?3,美国?=?6)和四个焦点小组(英国:焦点组1(4名参与者),焦点集团2(5名参与者;美国:焦点组1(5名参与者)焦点组2(2名参与者)与参与参与轮次设计和实施的参与者,例如,方案建筑师,高级领导,导师和培训师。我们还进行了非参与者的回合观察(英国?=?42:美国?=?2 )和培训日(英国?=?2)。使用主题分析分析数据。根据我们的美国和英国实地,我们确定了基于美国设计和七个外围组件的四个核心和七个子核心组件。我们发现了高核心组成的保真度和英国改编的例子。我们确定了六种策略,用于在来自美国到英国环境中的一轮转移和实施期间保持高保真的策略:i)在监督实施实施的两个国家机构之间进行法律合同采用英国医疗保健人员签署与国家机构的合同,iii)试验英国背景,四)强调干预,诉促进和评估轮次的可信度,并提供了实施支持和基础设施。本研究确定通过确定参与者在转移到不同国家的六个策略期间从一个国家转移到另一个国家的六个策略,在从一个国家转移到另一个国家的策略期间维护了特定干预核心组件的核心组成部分。合同协定和干预来源的合同协定和合法性,这些策略在从一个国家转移到另一个国家。 。潜在的缺点包括进一步创新和适应的局限性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号