Background Information and communication technology are playing a major role in ensuring continuity of healthcare services during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has also disrupted healthcare quality improvement (QI) training and education for healthcare professionals and there is a need to rethink the way QI training and education is delivered. The purpose of this rapid evidence review is to quickly, but comprehensively collate studies to identify what works and what does not in delivering QI training and education using distance learning modalities. Methods Three healthcare databases were searched along with grey literature sources for studies published between 2015 and 2020. Studies with QI training programmes or courses targeting healthcare professionals and students with at least one component of the programme being delivered online were included. Results A total of 19 studies were included in the review. Most studies had a mixed methods design and used blended learning methods, combining online and in-person delivery modes. Most of the included studies reported achieving desired outcomes, including improved QI knowledge, skills and attitudes of participants and improved clinical outcomes for patients. Some benefits of online QI training delivery include fewer required resources, reduced need for on-site instructors, increased programme reach, and more control and flexibility over learning time for participants. Some limitations of online delivery modes include limited learning and networking opportunities, functional and technical problems and long lead time for content adaptation and customisation. Discussion The review highlights that distance learning approaches to QI help in overcoming barriers to traditional QI training. Some important considerations for those looking to adapt traditional programmes to virtual environments include balancing virtual and non-virtual methods, using suitable technological solutions, customising coaching support, and using multiple criteria for programme evaluation. Conclusion Virtual QI and training of healthcare professionals and students is a viable, efficient, and effective alternative to traditional QI education that will play a vital role in building their competence and confidence to improve the healthcare system in post-COVID environment.

Aim The aim of this study is to understand how the behaviour of focal leaders impacts health care team performance and effectiveness. Background Despite recent shifts towards more collectivistic leadership approaches, hierarchical structures that emphasize the role of an individual focal leader (i.e., the formal appointed leader) are still the norm in health care. Our understanding of the effect of focal leader behaviours on health care team performance remains unclear. Evaluation A systematic review was conducted. Five electronic databases were searched using key terms. One thousand forty‐seven records were retrieved. Data extraction, quality appraisal and narrative synthesis were conducted in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Key issues Fifty papers met the criteria for inclusion, were reviewed and synthesized under the following categories: task‐focused leadership, directive leadership, empowering leadership and relational focused leadership. Conclusions Categories are discussed in relation to team performance outcomes, safety specific outcomes, individual‐level outcomes and outcomes related to interpersonal dynamics. Emerging themes are explored to examine and reflect on how leadership is enacted in health care, to catalogue best practices and to cascade these leadership practices broadly. Implications for Nursing Management Empowering and relational leadership styles were associated with positive outcomes for nursing team performance. This underscores the importance of training and encouraging nursing leaders to engage in more collaborative leadership behaviours.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to present a quality improvement approach titled “Picture-Understanding-Action” used in Ireland to enhance the role of healthcare boards in the oversight of healthcare quality and its improvement.Design/methodology/approachThe novel and practical “Picture-Understanding-Action” approach was implemented using the Model for Improvement to iteratively introduce changes across three quality improvement projects. This approach outlines the concepts and activities used at each step to support planning and implementation of processes that allow a board to effectively achieve its role in overseeing and improving quality. This approach matured over three quality improvement projects.FindingsThe “Picture” included quantitative and qualitative aspects. The quantitative “Picture” consisted of a quality dashboard/profile of board selected outcome indicators representative of the health system using statistical process control (SPC) charts to focus discussion on real signals of change. The qualitative picture was based on the experience of people who use and work in health services which “people-ised” the numbers. Probing this “Picture” with collective grounding, curiosity and expert training/facilitation developed a shared “Understanding”. This led to “Action(s)” from board members to improve the “Picture” and “Understanding” (feedback action), to ask better questions and make better decisions and recommendations to the executive (feed-forward action). The Model for Improvement, Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and a co-design approach in design and implementation were key to success.Originality/valueTo the authors’ knowledge, this is the first time a board has undertaken a quality improvement (QI) project to enhance its own processes. It addresses a gap in research by outlining actions that boards can take to improve their oversight of quality of care.

Traditional hierarchical leadership has been implicated in patient safety failings internationally. Given that healthcare is almost wholly delivered by multidisciplinary teams, there have been calls for a more collective and team-based approach to the sharing of leadership and responsibility for patient safety. Although encouraging a collective approach to accountability can improve the provision of high quality and safe care, there is a lack of knowledge of how to train teams to adopt collective leadership. The Collective Leadership for Safety Cultures (Co-Lead) programme is a co-designed intervention for multidisciplinary healthcare teams. It is an open-source resource that offers teams a systematic approach to the development of collective leadership behaviours to promote effective teamworking and enhance patient safety cultures. This paper provides an overview of the co-design, pilot testing, and refining of this novel intervention prior to its implementation and discusses key early findings from the evaluation. The Co-Lead intervention is grounded in the real-world experiences and identified needs and priorities of frontline healthcare staff and management and was co-designed based on the evidence for collective leadership and teamwork in healthcare. It has proven feasible to implement and effective in supporting teams to lead collectively to enhance safety culture. This intervention overview will be of value to healthcare teams and practitioners seeking to promote safety culture and effective teamworking by supporting teams to lead collectively.

Background: With the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the Irish health system needed a contact tracing and management intervention at a national level to undertake high volume, low complexity contact tracing. This paper describes the establishment and first year of a national Contact Management Programme (CMP) in Ireland, its core components, outcomes on key measures (coverage, timeliness, and training) and learnings from the process. Methods: CMP is centred on four steps, 1) case: rapid notification to a person of a result and provision of advice, 2) contacts: rapid identification of contacts, 3) control: rapid public health management of contacts, which includes testing and 4) active follow-up of close contacts with additional testing and public health advice reminder SMS and calls. The outcome measures used in this study are: 1) The proportion of all Irish cases contact traced through the CMP (Coverage), 2) the time taken to complete the 3 types of CMP calls (timeliness), 3) number of contact tracers trained and their feedback (training). Results: 246,666 positive cases were recorded using the CMP between 17th March 2020 and 30th April 2021, with contact tracing successfully completed for 237,759 cases, representing 99% and 96%, respectively, of the 248,529 cases notified in Ireland up to the 30th of April 2021. The average time taken for contact tracing to be completed was 29.4 hours (95% CI 28.9, 29.9) and the median was 16.8 hours (approximate 95% CI 15.9, 17.7). Conclusion: Using the Quality Improvement (QI) approach, the Health Service Executive (HSE) successfully established and scaled up a Contact Management Programme that rapidly notified results to people and traced their close contacts. CMP contributed to the success of the Irish health service in managing the pandemic. CMP slowed COVID-19 transmission and lessened the impact on health services capacity.