Healthcare Management Forum

The success of any quality improvement project begins with acknowledging problems, defining and addressing each issue in detail, and setting goals. In the case of pressure injuries, the answer is fairly simple. Reduce the number of pressure injuries. Yet, the process yielding a “means to the end” is quite complex. It not only requires a team of interdisciplinary healthcare providers and leaders to ensure success; it requires continuous effort. The intention of this article is to highlight the importance of a comprehensive Pressure Injury Prevention (PIP) program and offer guidance based on evidence. Utilizing an organized framework for planning will help healthcare providers ensure all critical steps are completed. The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP) provides detail surrounding the necessary steps toward compliance with best practice guidelines. A comprehensive checklist provided within the SPIPP article is designed to discuss specific details of the PIP program. The author of this article offers a broader framework and checklist, The Pressure Injury Prevention Implementation Checklist (PIPIC) based on blending several quality improvement methodologies. Challenges associated with pressure injuries continue to affect the lives of both patients and caregivers. Entering a new year, new month, or even new day brings the opportunity for change and improvement. Revamping a PIP program requires careful thought, planning, and dedication, but it is not insurmountable. Organizing a team to address the issues and approach the task with an organized, evidence-based plan will improve the overall PIP program success.

Investment in capacity for implementation of leading practices in regional-level health workforce planning is essential to support equitable distribution of resources and deployment of a health workforce that can meet local needs. Ontario Health Toronto and the Canadian Health Workforce Network (CHWN) co-developed and operationalized an integrated workforce planning process to support evidence-based primary care workforce decision-making for the Toronto region. The resultant planning toolkit incorporates planning processes centred around engagement with stakeholders, including environmental scanning tools and a quantitative planning model. The outputs of the planning process include estimates of population need and workforce capacity and address challenges specific to Toronto, such as patient mobility, anticipated rapid population growth, and physician retirement. We highlight important challenges and key considerations in the development and operationalization of workforce planning processes, particularly at the regional level.

Interprofessional collaborative practice is a key requirement for the successful implementation of integrated healthcare models. Current interprofessional education opportunities seldom include medical laboratory technologists who oversee the production of data that informs the diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of patients. Errors in the laboratory process mostly occur in the pre-analytical and post-analytical phases, which both involve the need for collaboration between medical laboratory technologists and other healthcare providers. In this article, we introduce and describe an innovative work-integrated virtual learning experience that provides technologists with the opportunity to fully participate in interprofessional education.

When looking to promising international approaches to improve quality care in long-term care, it is necessary to avoid cherry-picking specific dimensions ignoring the integrated nature of what makes these approaches promising in the first place. In looking at promising Scandinavian or Green House models, attention is often paid to the size of facility. This often overlooks the importance of higher level of staffing, mix, and compensation of direct care staff and the integration of dietary, laundry, and housekeeping staff to care teams. Other overlooked considerations include recognition of family and friends and policies supporting care continuity.

Family physicians play important roles throughout all stages of a pandemic response; however, actionable descriptions outlining these roles are absent from current pandemic plans. Using a multiple case study design, we conducted a document analysis and interviewed 68 family physicians in four Canadian regions. We identified roles performed by family physicians in five distinct stages of pandemic response: pre-pandemic, phased closure and re-opening, acute care crisis, vaccination, and pandemic recovery. In addition to adopting public health guidance to ensure continued access to primary care services, family physicians were often expected to operationalize public health roles (eg, staffing assessment centres), modulate access to secondary/tertiary services, help provide surge capacity in acute care facilities, and enhance supports and outreach to vulnerable populations. Future pandemic plans should include family physicians in planning, explicitly incorporate family physician roles, and ensure needed resources are available to allow for an effective primary care response.

This article has three aims. First, to reflect on how conceptualizations of the public interest may have shifted due to COVID-19. Second, to focus on the implications of regulatory responses for the health workforce and corresponding lessons as health leaders and systems transition from pandemic response to pandemic recovery. Third, to identify how these lessons lead to potential directions for future research, connecting regulation in a whole-of-systems approach to health system safety and health workforce capacity and sustainability. Pandemic regulatory responses highlighted both strengths and limitations of regulatory structures and frameworks. The COVID-19 pandemic may have introduced new considerations around regulating in the public interest, particularly as the impact of regulatory responses on the health workforce continues to be examined. Clearly articulating practitioner practice parameters, reducing barriers to practice, and working collaboratively with stakeholders were primary aspects of regulators' pandemic responses that impacted the health workforce.

The Mental Health and Substance Use Health (MHSUH) impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic are proving to be significant, complex, and long-lasting. The MHSUH workforce—including psychologists, social workers, psychotherapists, addiction counsellors, and peer support workers as well as psychiatrists, family physicians, and nurses—is the backbone of the response. As health leaders consider how to address long-standing and emerging health workforce challenges, there is an opportunity to move the MHSUH workforce out from the shadows through full inclusion in health workforce planning in Canada. After first examining the roots and consequences of the long-standing exclusion of the MHSUH workforce, this paper presents findings from a recent study showing how the pandemic has compounded MHSUH workforce capacity issues. Priorities for MHSUH workforce action by health leaders include closing regulation gaps, engaging the public and private sectors in coordinated planning, and accelerating data collection through a central health workforce registry.

It is important for health organizations to monitor progress toward gender equity and inclusion goals among health human resources. Within the Canadian healthcare management workforce, however, recent investigations are lacking. This study examines gender differences in composition and compensation among health leadership in Canada using national census data. Findings show that although women represent over half (57%) of senior managers in health and social services, the pipeline from middle management (72%) suggests persistent career barriers disproportionately affect women. Women health and social care managers’ earnings averaged $0.83-.89 for every dollar that a man earned. The gender wage gap remained statistically significant, with women health managers earning 12-20% less than men, after adjusting for age, education and other characteristics. Dynamic decomposition analyses highlighted that most of the gender wage gap could not be explained within the available data—a finding attributable, at least in part, to (unmeasured and unmeasurable) gender discrimination.

Men have a critically important role to play in supporting women from different backgrounds to move into leadership roles. Indeed, it is necessary work for those in positions of privilege to challenge processes that result in inequitable gender outcomes in health leadership. We present the resources that have been compiled into a toolkit for men to support more inclusive health leadership and transformative systemic change. A three-step process was undertaken to search, select, and curate leading evidence-informed practices. Three key clusters of resources in the toolkit address why men’s actions are necessary, what leading actions entail, and the importance of mentorship and sponsorship. Change will require more than shaping the individual attitudes and behaviours of men in leadership positions. Attention to gender and other forms of inequity need to be embedded into the structures, processes and outcomes of teams, organizations, and systems and evaluated for process.

Impact Ethics (www.impactethics.ca) is a Canadian bioethics blog with a diversity of contributors who come from a range of backgrounds – from academics and clinicians to activists and concerned citizens. Our authors are also diverse with respect ethnicity, race, culture, and gender. We publish commentaries about ethical issues in healthcare that affect Canadians. As editors of the blog and as practicing healthcare ethicists, we make note of three crucial determinants of leadership in healthcare ethics. First, leadership in healthcare ethics requires building relationships with other leaders, including those who do not hold formal leadership roles. Second, it is essential for leaders to be open to learning new knowledge and to learning about new practices in healthcare ethics. Third, leaders must have an orientation towards the future, which means building capacity for healthcare ethics within their organizations. The Impact Ethics blog can be used to support each of these determinants of ethics leadership.