Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37612671›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2023

Learning tools used to translate resilience in healthcare into practice: a rapid scoping review.

Cecilie Haraldseid-Driftland, Heidi Dombestein, Anh Hai Le, Stephen Billett, Siri Wiig

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Organizational Resilience in Healthcare: A Scoping Review.Journal of healthcare management / American College of Healthcare Executives
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Cecilie Haraldseid-DriftlandCentre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036, Stavanger, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4085-1972
Heidi DombesteinCentre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036, Stavanger, Norway. heidi.dombestein@uis.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7478-2429
Anh Hai LeSchool of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, 4122, Australia.
Stephen BillettSchool of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Mount Gravatt, QLD, 4122, Australia.
Siri WiigCentre for Resilience in Healthcare, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Stavanger, N-4036, Stavanger, Norway.
University of Stavanger · NOGriffith University · AU

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd 275367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHistorically, 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.

methodsA 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.

resultsThe 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.

conclusionsThe 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.

Indexed as

ChecklistHealth FacilitiesComputer SimulationHealth PersonnelHumansQuality of Health CareCollaborative learningHealthcareLearning toolsQualityResilienceSystems perspective

Identifiers

PMID37612671
PMCPMC10463810
OpenAlexW4386096033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.