Objectives: Despite decades of effort, programs continue to struggle to integrate competencies related quality improvement (QI) and interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP) into health professions education. Additionally, while QI and ICP may seem intuitively linked and there exists some examples of a coordinated approach, the literature regarding competencies, including knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs), is still largely focused on QI and ICP as separate fields of knowledge and practice. This study explored distinctions and connections between quality improvement (QI) and interprofessional collaborative practice (ICP) competency domains in health professions education.

Methods: The authors used a qualitative case study approach with an instrumental case, that is, the University of Missouri-Columbia (MU), where QI and ICP were intentionally integrated as part of core curricula in health professional schools and programs. Eleven faculty members from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, and health care administration participated in interviews exploring their teaching choices in either classroom or clinical settings.

Results: Study participants defined the goal of teaching QI and ICP as enabling learners to deliver safe and patient-centered care and described the knowledge and skills required for QI and the attitudes and skills required for ICP. Furthermore, they described the relationship between QI and ICP as one mediated by systems thinking, where ICP is backgrounded as a critical pre-requisite and QI is foregrounded as a vector for developing interprofessional competencies.

Conclusions: The MU case elucidates the potential synergies that occur when faculty address quality improvement and interprofessional collaborative practice competencies with an integrated approach that leverages connections, while also respecting distinctions. For health professions education programs looking to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their curricular approach to these fields, it may be fruitful to consider ICP as background and QI as foreground, remembering that without each other, ICP risks losing meaning and QI risks losing impact.

Improvement science has emerged as an interdisciplinary field of enquiry to provide methodological and scientific rigour to the practice and study of improvements in healthcare, and with contributions from a wide range of stakeholders and perspectives. However, compared to more well-established health-related sciences, the science of improvement remains in relative infancy. Whilst the improvement community has grown considerably, there is no existing articulation of the scope of what matters to the health and social care improvement community, and how this aligns to the enquiries of the field of improvement science. This paper aims to outline key areas of interest to the improvement community, and to propose distinguishing features of improvement science that help differentiate it from other areas of enquiry. Two over-arching research questions are identified, along with ten associated areas of enquiry which are grouped into three clusters: (1) improvement in practice, (2) aligning improvement efforts and (3) advancing the contribution of the improvement community. Four features that collectively define and distinguish the field of improvement science are proposed. The outline of the improvement landscape provides a common language for the diverse improvement community, supporting people to transcend disciplinary interests and constraints, and to consider how, collectively, we can improve health and care. Others are invited to refine and advance mapping of the improvement landscape by identifying gaps and increasing contributions from diverse perspectives.

Introduction: The Esther Network (EN) person-centred care (PCC) advocacy training aims to promote person-centred attitudes among health practitioners in Singapore. This study aimed to assess the relationship between the training and practitioners’ PCC attributes over a 3-month period, and to explore power sharing by examining the PCC dimensions of “caring about the service user as a whole person” and the “sharing of power, control and information”. Methods: A repeated-measure study design utilising the Patient-Practitioner Orientation Scale (PPOS), was administered to 437 training participants at three time points – before training (T1), immediately after (T2) and three months after training (T3). A five-statement questionnaire captured knowledge of person-centred care at T1 and T2. An Overall score, Caring and Sharing sub-scores were derived from the PPOS. Scores were ranked and divided into three groups (high, medium and low). Ordinal Generalised Estimating Equation (GEE) model analysed changes in PPOS scores over time. Results: A single, short-term training appeared to result in measurable improvements in person-centredness of health practitioners, with slight attenuation at T3. There was greater tendency to “care” than to “share power” with service users across all three time points, but the degree of improvement was larger for sharing after training. The change in overall person-centred scores varied by sex and profession (females score higher than males, allied health showed a smaller attenuation at T3). Conclusion: Training as a specific intervention, appeared to have potential to increase health practitioners’ person-centredness but the aspect of equalising power was harder to achieve within a hierarchical structure and clinician-centric culture. An ongoing network to build relationships, and a supportive system to facilitate individual and organisational reflexivity can reinforce learning.

Healthcare is in constant change with fast development in knowledge, new technology and varying needs and expectations from patients, citizens, management, and politicians. There is a challenge in balancing the involved actors´ focus, needs, preferences, and resources for healthcare improvement. Improvement of healthcare is an ongoing activity, sometimes managed and controlled, often not. A key ingredient for success is competence where the need for competence varies with perspectives of the improving actors. Actors in healthcare improvement are professionals, patients, politicians, management, citizens, researchers, research foundations and others. In this report a review of frameworks in healthcare improvement are presented together with management myths and questions around needs for healthcare improvement competence and capabilities currently on the agenda.

Most improvement initiatives of some size have substantial parts of IT and have had so for a considerable time. This rather long experience of more and less successful IT implementation and use is transparent and useful in all kinds of healthcare improvement. One important issue in this report is what has real impact is the actual understanding and use of innovations and artefacts by healthcare actors in a broad sense for healthcare improvement (e.g., new clinical evidence, clinical guidelines, process changes, information systems and more). The aim in this report is to review frameworks which can be useful in healthcare improvement as well as in the study of healthcare improvement.

Conclusions concern what is found to be important to study and understand healthcare improvement, considering the presented frameworks. Improvement of healthcare is present in all the frameworks but in different ways and what is emphasized concerning scope and focus. Improving healthcare take place in the interaction of at least two parts, one of which is healthcare professionals, and another is the patient/next-of-kin. Professionals and patient populations interact in processes of social networks and structures. Actors and context are useful concepts for understanding action (use) and its social contexts. The actual use of innovations is best understood in terms of integration into clinical activities and processes – actors’ interaction, coordination and communication activities and processes.

Theoretical implications are that there is a need for more research concerning meso and macro perspectives on methods for healthcare improvement, and the interplay of perspectives regarding the understanding of improvement in healthcare. Of course, a challenge is that the objects of improvement are complex adaptive systems of healthcare is not easily to catch in simple rules. They are genuinely difficult both to change and evaluate changes. Practical implications of the report support design and contents of education programs in improvement of healthcare, in better understanding usefulness, practice, use, and experience base. To help the understanding of the need and usefulness of integrating different perspectives for successful healthcare improvement, e.g., micro, meso, and macro perspectives, use of mixed methods and more. 

INTRODUCTION: Blended learning has taken on new prominence in the fields of higher and continuing education, especially as programs have shifted in response to teaching in a global pandemic. The faculty at the Jönköping Academy's Masters in Quality Improvement and Leadership program has been offering a blended learning curriculum, based on four core design principles, since 2009. We studied key features of the enacted curriculum to understand conditions that can support an effective blended learning model. METHODS: We used a case study approach underpinned by interactive research. Document analysis, a focus group, individual interviews, and stimulated recall interviews were used for data collection. Themes were identified through qualitative content analysis and data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. RESULTS: We grouped data into six emergent themes that clarify the enacted curriculum of an established Master's program: focusing on a common purpose, developing technical and relational knowledge and skills, linking theory and practice in the workplace, leveraging collaboration for mutual benefit, concentrating on leadership and coaching, and applying a blended and interprofessional learning model. CONCLUSION: Educators faced with increased demands to be flexible and to offer opportunities for distance education can learn from this case example of effective teaching of quality improvement and leadership in a blended format.

Förbättringskunskap har tillämpats i förändringsarbetet inom vården i Sverige i stor utsträckning sedan ämnet introducerades i Läkartidningen år 2002.

Flera tillämpningar har dokumenterats i vetenskapliga publikationer med koppling till förbättrade kliniska utfall, ofta visade i nationella kvalitetsregister.

Förbättringsvetenskap bidrar till utvärdering och utveckling av förbättringskunskapstillämpning.

Patienters och närståendes erfarenhet och kunskap integreras i nyare beskrivningar och tillämpning av förbättringskunskap.

Förbättringskunskap behöver tillämpas av såväl kliniska medarbetare som ledare och uppdragsgivare för att möta kommande utmaningar för hälso- och sjukvården.

In 2002, Läkartidningen published a call to apply improvement knowledge in efforts to change health services. Looking back over the past 20 years, we highlight many scientifically documented examples of such application. Many efforts, often within »breakthrough collaboratives«, have included Swedish national quality registries, with documented health outcome improvements related to application of Improvement Knowledge. Applications have been evaluated through improvement science studies. A literature review documented 32 PhD theses addressing healthcare improvement published by Swedish universities. Increasingly, improvement knowledge definitions and applications include - and harness - the experiences and knowledge among patients and their families. To meet challenges in the future, all health care stakeholders will need to master and apply improvement knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Harm from medications is a major patient safety challenge. Most adverse drug events arise when a medication is prescribed or reevaluated. Therefore, interventions in this area may improve patient safety. A medication plan, that is, a plan for continued treatment with medications, may support patient safety. Participation of patients in the design of health care products or services may improve patient safety. Co-design, as in the Double Diamond framework from the Design Council, England, can emphasize patient involvement. As the COVID-19 pandemic brought restrictions to face-to-face co-design approaches, interest in remote approaches increased. However, it is uncertain how best to perform remote co-design. Therefore, we explored a remote approach, which brought together older persons and health care professionals to co-design a medication plan prototype in the electronic health record, aiming to support patient safety.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe how remote co-design was applied to create a medication plan prototype and to explore participants' experiences with this approach.

METHODS: Within a case study design, we explored the experiences of a remote co-design initiative with 14 participants in a regional health care system in southern Sweden. Using descriptive statistics, quantitative data from questionnaires and web-based workshop timestamps were analyzed. A thematic analysis of the qualitative data gathered from workshops, interviews, and free-text responses to the survey questions was performed. Qualitative and quantitative data were compared side by side in the discussion.

RESULTS: The analysis of the questionnaires revealed that the participants rated the experiences of the co-design initiative very high. In addition, the balance between how much involved persons expressed their wishes and were listened to was considered very good. Marked timestamps from audio recordings showed that the workshops proceeded according to the plan. The thematic analysis yielded the following main themes: Everyone's perspective matters, Learning by sharing, and Mastering a digital space. The themes encompassed what helped to establish a permissive environment that allowed the participants to be involved and share viewpoints. There was a dynamic process of learning and understanding, realizing that despite different backgrounds, there was consensus about the requirements for a medication plan. The remote co-design process seemed appealing, by balancing opportunities and challenges and building an inviting, creative, and tolerant environment.

CONCLUSIONS: Participants experienced that the remote co-design initiative was inclusive of their perspectives and facilitated learning by sharing experiences. The Double Diamond framework was applicable in a digital context and supported the co-design process of the medication plan prototype. Remote co-design is still novel, but with attentiveness to power relations between all involved, this approach may increase opportunities for older persons and health care professionals to collaboratively design products or services that can improve patient safety.

Background: Immigrant women’s challenges in realizing sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) are exacerbated by the lack of knowledge regarding how to tailor post-partum contraceptive services to their needs. Therefore, the overall aim of the IMPROVE-it project is to promote equity in SRHR through improvement of contraceptive services with and for immigrant women, and, thus, to strengthen women’s possibility to choose and initiate effective contraceptive methods post-partum. Methods: This Quality Improvement Collaborative (QIC) on contraceptive services and use will combine a cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with a process evaluation. The cRCT will be conducted at 28 maternal health clinics (MHCs) in Sweden, that are the clusters and unit of randomization, and include women attending regular post-partum visits within 16 weeks post birth. Utilizing the Breakthrough Series Collaborative model, the study’s intervention strategies include learning sessions, action periods, and workshops informed by joint learning, co-design, and evidence-based practices. The primary outcome, women’s choice of an effective contraceptive method within 16 weeks after giving birth, will be measured using the Swedish Pregnancy Register (SPR). Secondary outcomes regarding women’s experiences of contraceptive counselling, use and satisfaction of chosen contraceptive method will be evaluated using questionnaires completed by participating women at enrolment, 6 and 12 months post enrolment. The outcomes including readiness, motivation, competence and confidence will be measured through project documentation and questionnaires. The project’s primary outcome involving women’s choice of contraceptive method will be estimated by using a logistic regression analysis. A multivariate analysis will be performed to control for age, sociodemographic characteristics, and reproductive history. The process evaluation will be conducted using recordings from learning sessions, questionnaires aimed at participating midwives, intervention checklists and project documents. Discussion: The intervention’s co-design activities will meaningfully include immigrants in implementation research and allow midwives to have a direct, immediate impact on improving patient care. This study will also provide evidence as to what extent, how and why the QIC was effective in post-partum contraceptive services. Trial registration: NCT05521646, August 30, 2022.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is a chronic heart condition. Persons with heart failure often have limited physical capability, cognitive impairments, and low health literacy. These challenges can be barriers to healthcare service co-design with family members and professionals. Experience-Based Co-Design is a participatory healthcare quality improvement approach drawing on patients', family members' and professionals' experiences to improve healthcare. The overall aim of this study was to use Experience-Based Co-Design to identify experiences of heart failure and its care in a Swedish cardiac care setting, and to understand how these experiences can translate into heart failure care improvements for persons with heart failure and their families.

METHODS: A convenience sample of 17 persons with heart failure and four family members participated in this single case study as a part of an improvement initiative within cardiac care. In line with Experienced-Based Co-Design methodology, field notes from observations of healthcare consultations, individual interviews and meeting minutes from stakeholders' feedback events, were used to gather participants' experiences of heart failure and its care. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to develop themes from data.

RESULTS: Twelve service touchpoints, organized within five overarching themes emerged. The themes told a story about persons with heart failure and family members struggling in everyday life due to a poor quality of life, lack of support networks, and difficulties understanding and applying information about heart failure and its care. To be recognized by professionals was reported to be a key to good quality care. Opportunities to be involved in healthcare varied, Further, participants' experiences translated into proposed changes to heart failure care such as improved information about heart failure, continuity of care, improved relations, and communication, and being invited to be involved in healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings offer knowledge about experiences of life with heart failure and its care, translated into heart failure service touchpoints. Further research is warranted to explore how these touchpoints can be addressed to improve life and care for persons with heart failure and other chronic conditions.