From knowledge to action: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation of First Nations-led knowledge mobilisation on prenatal opioid exposure

Introduction

First Nations communities in Canada are disproportionately impacted by prenatal opioid exposure (POE) and neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). In response, we developed a research partnership with 13 First Nations communities in Ontario. Phase I of the research project, initiated in 2018, included the development of mixed-methods reports on the impact of POE for each community. This protocol outlines the evaluation of phase II, during which nine communities individually co-designed and implemented community-specific knowledge mobilisation (KMb) plans informed by findings from phase I. The evaluation aims to assess advisory working group engagement, KMb implementation and perceived community-level impacts.

Methods and analysis

This mixed-methods evaluation integrates survey and qualitative data to assess First Nations-led KMb products and activities. The Public and Patient Engagement Evaluation Tool, a validated survey instrument, will be administered to advisory group members and analysed descriptively. Focus groups and interviews will be conducted to explore advisory working group members’ experiences and analysed using phenomenological methods. Qualitative findings will be mapped to the Engage with Impact framework to assess outcomes across engagement domains.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval has been granted by Vancouver Island University. All community contacts and advisory working group members will provide informed consent prior to data collection. Phase II activities are governed by formal community agreements. In alignment with First Nations Principles of OCAP (Ownership, Control, Access and Possession), First Nations community partners retain ownership of their KMb products and are actively involved in the design, implementation and dissemination of the project evaluation. Results will be shared through peer-reviewed publications, community reports and knowledge-sharing events.

Stay or go? Exploring physician turnover in European Hospitals–Evidence from the METEOR survey

by Laura Maniscalco, Marco Enea, Peter de Winter, Neeltje de Vries, Anke Boone, Olivia Lavreysen, Kamil Baranski, Walter Mazzucco, Adriano Filadelfio Cracò, Malgorzata Kowalska, Szymon Szemik, Lode Godderis, Domenica Matranga

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2022 there was a shortfall of approximately 1.2 million doctors, impacting healthcare system and patient care. Understanding turnover intentions is crucial for managing the healthcare workforce and ensuring continuous, and high-quality patient care. This study investigates the prevalence of physicians planning to leave their hospital or the profession, and risk factors such as job demand, resources, satisfaction, and burnout across four European countries. A cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted in eight hospitals across Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland and Italy, including both academic and non-academic institutions. Data from Poland were excluded due to a low response rate, to preserve respondent anonymity. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed, adjusted for country, demographics, and work context, using significant variables from the univariable analysis. The overall intention to leave the hospital was 16.5%, with the highest rates in Belgium (19.6%) and Italy (19%), and the lowest in the Netherlands (9.8%). The intention to leave the profession was 9.1%, with the highest rate in the Netherlands (16.1%), followed by Belgium (6.3%) and Italy (5.7%). Physicians at higher risk of leaving the hospital were younger (adjOR = 0.90, 95%CI = 0.86–0.93), lacked colleague support (adjOR = 3.18, 95%CI = 1.06–9.36), and were dissatisfied with job prospects (adjOR = 2.38, 95%CI = 1.02–5.54) and overall work (adjOR = 2.71, 95%CI = 1.09–6.69). Those more likely to leave the profession were from the Netherlands (adjOR = 4.14, 95%CI = 1.62–11.4), surgeons (adjOR = 2.90, 95%CI = 1.22–6.78), working in non-academic hospitals (adjOR = 2.43, 95%CI = 1.01–5.97), lacked development opportunities (adjOR = 5.97, 95%CI = 1.01–36.2), or were dissatisfied with career prospects (adjOR = 2.77, 95%CI = 1.04–7.27). Health system managers and relevant stakeholders involved in the planning, implementation, or evaluation of health policies and reforms aimed at improving healthcare job retention should take into account the key determinants of the intention to leave identified in this study.