Objective: To conceptualize a stakeholder-driven framework to improve collaboration between CPs and GPs in Malaysian primary care to effectively manage medicines in chronic diseases.
Design and Setting: A qualitative study that involved individual semi-structured interviews of the leadership of various associations, guilds, and societies representing CPs, GPs, and Nurses in Malaysia.
Methods: This study collected and reported data in accordance with the guidelines of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting of Qualitative Studies. Key informants were recruited based on purposive (expert) sampling. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and data were coded based on the principles of thematic analysis in NVivo.
Results: A total of 12 interviews (5 CPs, 5 GPs, and 2 nurses) were conducted. Five themes emerged: Theme 1 highlighted a comparison of community pharmacy practice in Malaysia and developed countries; Theme 2 involved current practices in Malaysian primary care; Theme 3 encompassed the advantages of CP-GP collaboration in chronic diseases; Theme 4 highlighted the barriers which impede collaboration in Malaysian primary care; and Theme 5 delineated the way forward for CP-GP collaboration in Malaysia.
Conclusion: The actionable insights obtained from the Malaysian stakeholders offered an outline of a framework to enhance collaboration between CPs and GPs in primary care. Generally, stakeholders were interested in CP-GP collaboration in primary care and identified many positive roles performed by CPs, including prescription review, adherence support, and patient education. The framework of the way forward includes: separation of CP and GP roles through a holistic revision of relevant legislation to grant an active role to CPs in chronic care; definition of protocols for collaborative practices; incentivization of both stakeholders (CPs and GPs); and design and implementation of an effective regulatory mechanism whereby the Malaysian Ministry of Health may take a leading role.
BACKGROUND: Critical thinking is currently considered as an essential component of nurses' professional judgement and clinical decision-making. If confirmed, nursing curricula may be revised emphasising on critical thinking with the expectation to improve clinical decision-making and thus better health care.
DESIGN: Integrated literature review.
METHODS: The integrative review was carried out after a comprehensive literature search using electronic databases Ovid, EBESCO MEDLINE, EBESCO CINAHL, PROQuest and Internet search engine Google Scholar. Two hundred and 22 articles from January 1980 to end of 2015 were retrieved. All studies evaluating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, published in English language with nurses or nursing students as the study population, were included. No qualitative studies were found investigating the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making, while 10 quantitative studies met the inclusion criteria and were further evaluated using the Quality Assessment and Validity Tool. As a result, one study was excluded due to a low-quality score, with the remaining nine accepted for this review.
RESULTS: Four of nine studies established a positive relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making. Another five studies did not demonstrate a significant correlation. The lack of refinement in studies' design and instrumentation were arguably the main reasons for the inconsistent results.
CONCLUSIONS: Research studies yielded contradictory results as regard to the relationship between critical thinking and clinical decision-making; therefore, the evidence is not convincing. Future quantitative studies should have representative sample size, use critical thinking measurement tools related to the healthcare sector and evaluate the predisposition of test takers towards their willingness and ability to think. There is also a need for qualitative studies to provide a fresh approach in exploring the relationship between these variables uncovering currently unknown contributing factors.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review confirmed that evidence to support the existence of relationships between critical thinking and clinical decision-making is still unsubstantiated. Therefore, it serves as a call for nurse leaders and nursing academics to produce quality studies in order to firmly support or reject the hypothesis that there is a statistically significant correlation between critical thinking and clinical decision-making.
BACKGROUND: The relationship between critical care nurses' decision-making and leadership styles in hospitals has been widely studied, but the influence of cognitive bias on decision-making and leadership styles in critical care environments remains poorly understood, particularly in Jordan.
DESIGN: Two-phase mixed methods sequential explanatory design and grounded theory.
SETTING: critical care unit, Prince Hamza Hospital, Jordan. Participant sampling: convenience sampling Phase 1 (quantitative, n = 96), purposive sampling Phase 2 (qualitative, n = 20).
METHODS: Pilot tested quantitative survey of 96 critical care nurses in 2012. Qualitative in-depth interviews, informed by quantitative results, with 20 critical care nurses in 2013. Descriptive and simple linear regression quantitative data analyses. Thematic (constant comparative) qualitative data analysis.
RESULTS: Quantitative - correlations found between rationality and cognitive bias, rationality and task-oriented leadership styles, cognitive bias and democratic communication styles and cognitive bias and task-oriented leadership styles. Qualitative - 'being competent', 'organizational structures', 'feeling self-confident' and 'being supported' in the work environment identified as key factors influencing critical care nurses' cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles. Two-way impact (strengthening and weakening) of cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles on critical care nurses' practice performance.
CONCLUSION: There is a need to heighten critical care nurses' consciousness of cognitive bias in decision-making and leadership styles and its impact and to develop organization-level strategies to increase non-biased decision-making.
DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: This case study aims to share a comprehensive overview of the ideation, conceptualisation and implementation of TGP. The authors also outlined its impact from the individual and organisational perspectives, besides highlighting the lessons learned and recommendations for the way forward.
FINDINGS: TGP set out to deliver experiential learning focusing on formal training, workplace experiences, practical reflection and mentoring by supervisors and other esteemed leaders to fulfil the five competency domains of leadership, organisational governance, communication and relationship, professional values and personal values. The successes and challenges in TGP programme delivery, post-training assessment, outcome evaluation and programme sustainability were outlined.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The authors' experience in setting up TGP provided valuable learning points for other leadership development programme providers. As for any development programme, a continuous evaluation is vital to ensure its relevance and sustainability.
ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Certain aspects of TGP establishment can be referenced and modified to adapt to country-specific settings for others to develop similar leadership programme, especially those in LMICs.