Conectar
To explore frontline decision-making, adaptation, and learning in ambulance care during the evolving COVID-19 pandemic.
Descriptive and interpretative qualitative study.
Twenty-eight registered nurses from the Swedish ambulance services described 56 critical incidents during the COVID-19 pandemic through free-text questionnaires. The material was analysed using the Critical Incident Technique and Interpretive Description through the lens of potential for resilient performance.
The findings were synthesized into four themes: ‘Navigating uncharted waters under never-ending pressure’, ‘Balancing on the brink of an abyss’, ‘Sacrificing the few to save the many’ and ‘Bracing for the next wave’. Frontline decision-making during a pandemic contribute to ethical dilemmas while necessitating difficult prioritizations to adapt and respond to limited resources. Learning was manifested through effective information sharing and the identification of successful adaptations as compared to maladaptations.
During pandemics or under other extreme conditions, decisions must be made promptly, even amidst emerging chaos, potentially necessitating the use of untested methods and ad-hoc solutions due to initial lack of knowledge and guidelines. Within ambulance care, dynamic leadership becomes imperative, combining autonomous frontline decision-making with support from management. Strengthening ethical competence and fostering ethical discourse may enhance confidence in decision-making, particularly under ethically challenging circumstances.
Performance under extreme conditions can elevate the risk of suboptimal decision-making and adverse outcomes, with older adults being especially vulnerable. Thus, requiring targeted decision support and interventions. Enhancing patient safety in ambulance care during such conditions demands active participation and governance from management, along with decision support and guidelines. Vertical communication and collaboration between management and frontline professionals are essential to ensure that critical information, guidelines, and resources are effectively disseminated and implemented. Further research is needed into management and leadership in ambulance care, alongside the ethical challenges in frontline decision-making under extreme conditions.
Findings are reported per consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ).
No Patient or Public Contribution.
Chronic non-cancer pain presents a global health problem, with a significant increase in opioid prescriptions over recent decades. However, opioid therapy poses risks of adverse events, overdose and non-medical use. As a result, many patients seek to discontinue or reduce their opioid intake. Strategies for opioid tapering often lack efficacy, prompting the investigation of novel approaches like open-label placebo (OLP), that is, the administration of a placebo with full disclosure that it is a placebo. OLP has shown efficacy in chronic non-cancer pain syndromes and has been suggested as a promising candidate for medication tapering. This study aims to assess whether OLPs can enhance the reduction of daily morphine equivalent dose (MED) in chronic non-cancer pain patients and examines its potential in mitigating opioid withdrawal symptoms.
This study is designed as a randomised, controlled, single-centre trial. Participants will be randomised into either an OLP group or a control group. The study duration will span six to nine weeks, during which all participants will aim to reduce their opioid intake. Both groups will monitor their opioid intake daily using a diary app and will receive feedback on their progress of reducing opioids. Additionally, participants in the OLP group will receive OLP tablets for the entire study period. During the first week, the OLP group will undergo a one week learning phase using a classical conditioning paradigm, where each opioid intake is paired with a placebo. In the subsequent five weeks, the OLP group will enter a dose-extension phase in which only the first opioid intake of the day is paired with a placebo, and additional placebos can be taken as desired. At the end of the study, qualitative interviews will be conducted with the first 15 participants in the OLP group. The primary outcome measure is daily opioid intake. Secondary outcomes include opioid withdrawal symptoms, pain severity, disability, anxiety, depression, opioid beliefs, intervention expectancy and qualitative data. Statistical analyses will include analysis of covariance and regression models.
The ethics committee of the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland, approved the study (SNCTP-nr.: SNCTP000005853/BASEC nr.: 2023–02327).
Participants will be compensated with 100 Swiss Francs for their full participation in the study. Participants who will take part in the qualitative interview will be compensated with additional 15 Swiss Francs.
This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT06350786.
Effective health care relies on person-centeredness and teamwork, which are known to improve outcomes. These two concepts have been defined individually, but we could not find a definition of the combined concept. A preliminary definition was developed through a concept analysis; however, consensus on the concept has not been reached.
The aim of this study was to reach consensus on the definition and attributes of person-centered teamwork.
A consensus design allowed experts to collaborate and share their experience and wisdom to refine and reach consensus on the definition and attributes of person-centered teamwork. An e-Delphi was used to engage the experts.
Three rounds of online engagement with 12 experts were needed to reach consensus on the definition and attributes of person-centered teamwork. The attributes reached consensus of 82% after the first round. The definition had 82% consensus after the three rounds. The definition had been adjusted and refined according to the expert input. The newly adjusted definition was established.
We successfully used the e-Delphi method to obtain consensus on the attributes and definition of person-centered teamwork. The definition of person-centered teamwork can be further developed and included in clinical practice to guide improved clinical outcomes. The consensus definition of person-centered teamwork provides a clear understanding of the meaning thereof, which may in turn enrich the usability thereof in clinical practice. Person-centered teams improve outcomes for persons receiving care in hospitals. Building person-centered teams are now better understood and the foundation of building these teams defined. We engaged with 12 experts in the academic and clinical field of person-centeredness and teamwork. The use and value of the Delphi method to obtain consensus is now better understood and can assist future research development.
To establish consensus on items to be included in an instrument to measure person-centred teamwork in a hospital setting. The objective was to identify the items through a methodological literature review. Refine the items and obtain consensus on the items.
A definition and related attributes of person-centred teamwork have been agreed upon. An instrument is needed to measure and monitor person-centred teamwork in hospital settings.
Consensus, electronic Delphi design.
Items were identified through a methodological literature review. These items were included in three electronic Delphi rounds. Using purposive and snowball sampling, 16 international experts on person-centred care, teamwork and/or instrument development were invited to participate in three electronic Delphi rounds via Google Forms. Descriptive statistics were used to demonstrate their agreement on the relevance and clarity of each item. Items were included if consensus was 0.75. Content analysis was used to analyse written feedback from experts.
The response rate was 56% (n = 9/16). Nine experts participated over an 8-week period to reach consensus on the items to be included in an instrument to measure person-centred teamwork in hospital settings. The experts' responses and suggestions for rephrasing, removing and adding items were incorporated into each round.
A Delphi consensus exercise was completed, and experts reached agreement on 38 items to be included in an instrument that can be used to evaluate person-centred teamwork in hospital settings.
We engaged with nine international experts in the academic and clinical field of person-centeredness, teamwork and/or instrument development. An online platform was used to allow the experts to give input into the study. The experts engaged from their own environment with full autonomy and anonymity. Person-centred teamwork, aimed at improving practice is now measurable. Person-centred teams improve outcomes of patients. Person-centred teamwork was specifically developed to assist low compliance areas in hospitals.
FreshRSS 