METHODS: The Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) meetings and literature reviews were synthesized into a seed document and distributed to spine care experts. After three rounds of a modified Delphi process, all participants reached consensus on the final model of care and implementation steps.
RESULTS: Sixty-six experts representing 24 countries participated. The GSCI model of care has eight core principles: person-centered, people-centered, biopsychosocial, proactive, evidence-based, integrative, collaborative, and self-sustaining. The model of care includes a classification system and care pathway, levels of care, and a focus on the patient's journey. The six steps for implementation are initiation and preparation; assessment of the current situation; planning and designing solutions; implementation; assessment and evaluation of program; and sustain program and scale up.
CONCLUSION: The GSCI proposes an evidence-based, practical, sustainable, and scalable model of care representing eight core principles with a six-step implementation plan. The aim of this model is to help transform spine care globally, especially in low- and middle-income countries and underserved communities. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
METHODS: Contents from the Global Spine Care Initiative (GSCI) Classification System and GSCI care pathway papers provided a foundation for the resources list. A seed document was developed that included resources for spine care that could be delivered in primary, secondary and tertiary settings, as well as resources needed for self-care and community-based settings for a wide variety of spine concerns (e.g., back and neck pain, deformity, spine injury, neurological conditions, pathology and spinal diseases). An iterative expert consensus process was used using electronic surveys.
RESULTS: Thirty-five experts completed the process. An iterative consensus process was used through an electronic survey. A consensus was reached after two rounds. The checklist of resources included the following categories: healthcare provider knowledge and skills, materials and equipment, human resources, facilities and infrastructure. The list identifies resources needed to implement a spine care program in any community, which are based upon spine care needs.
CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first international and interprofessional attempt to develop a list of resources needed to deliver care in an evidence-based care pathway for the management of people presenting with spine-related concerns. This resource list needs to be field tested in a variety of communities with different resource capacities to verify its utility. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Methods: For quantitative data collection, the random, purposive, and convenient sampling techniques were used and 156 respondents selected from relevant organizations operating in Bauchi state, Nigeria, and 15 respondents for Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). A Semi-structured questionnaire was the study instrument, and consent from the participants as well as ethical clearances were duly obtained.
Results: The study revealed that 87.8% of the respondents indicate un-friendly operational policies, while 88.9% of them identified lack of resources (human, money and machineries) as impediments to project sustainability. Also, 74.3% of the respondents said partnership among key stakeholders and 86.6% of them affirmed that community participation and use of available (local) resources ensure health project sustainability. The study further revealed that CSOs fund health projects, support government efforts and encourage development of project sustainability road map in the state.
Conclusion: Hence, health project sustainability plan should form part of a project right from inception through the donor period and thereafter. In addition to the above, internal income framework, community involvement, enabling policies and partnership among stakeholders, especially with the host government, should always guide project implementation, because without these in place, project sustainability will remain a mirage.
METHOD: A modified Delphi study was conducted among students and educators from University Malaya (UM), Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) and Taylor's University (TU) on three undergraduate programmes. In Round 1, participants were asked to select the topics from the respective syllabi to be developed into RLOs. Priority ranking was determined by using frequencies and proportions. The first quartile of the prioritised topics was included in Round 2 survey, which the participants were asked to rate the level of priority of each topic using a 5-point Likert scale. The mean score of the topics was compared between students and educators.
RESULT: A total of 43 educators and 377 students participated in this study. For UM and TU Pharmacy, there was a mismatch in the prioritised topics between the students and educators. For UPM, both the educators and students have prioritised the same topics in both rounds. To harmonise the prioritisation of topics between students and educators for UM and TU Pharmacy, the topics with a higher mean score by both the students and educators were prioritised.
CONCLUSION: The mismatch in prioritised topics between students and educators uncovered factors that might influence the prioritisation process. This study highlighted the importance of conducting needs assessment at the beginning of eLearning resources development.
METHOD: A model was formulated by extending an existing generic knowledge management systems success model by including organisational and system factors relevant to healthcare. It was tested by using data obtained from 263 doctors working within two district health boards in New Zealand.
RESULTS: Of the system factors, knowledge content quality was found to be particularly important for knowledge management systems success. Of the organisational factors, leadership was the most important, and more important than incentives.
CONCLUSION: Leadership promoted knowledge management systems success primarily by positively affecting knowledge content quality. Leadership also promoted knowledge management use for retrieval, which should lead to the use of that better quality knowledge by the doctors, ultimately resulting in better outcomes for patients.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to develop a comprehensive framework for Shariah-compliant healthcare services, ensuring alignment with Islamic practices in healthcare.
METHODS, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: This consensus study employed a key input approach using the fuzzy Delphi method (FDM) and interpretive structural modelling. Conducted in Malaysia, the study involved 10 experts from various regions across the country. These experts were selected based on clear criteria that included professionals with experience in Islamic and/or healthcare, while those lacking relevant expertise were excluded.
RESULTS: The primary outcome was the identification of pertinent elements for the framework, with final elements measured based on expert consensus achieved through FDM. The panel of experts reached consensus on 10 essential elements that form the backbone of the framework for Shariah-compliant healthcare services. These elements include governance, medical ethics, patient care, human resources and professional development, facilities for Islamic worship (ibadah), spiritual care support, end-of-life care, Islamic environment, medicine and drugs, and affordability and accessibility.
CONCLUSION: Ultimately, the development of this comprehensive framework is a crucial step in addressing the specific needs and concerns of Muslim patients worldwide. By incorporating the input and consensus of experts from various relevant fields, the resulting framework provides healthcare professionals with a solid foundation to deliver healthcare services that align with Islamic values, ultimately promoting the well-being of Muslim patients in Malaysia and tourists globally.
DESIGN: Scoping review.
DATA SOURCE: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and Science Direct (January 2009-December 2020).
STUDY SELECTION: Studies that describe older adults' perspectives with regard to their willingness, barriers or motivators towards the use of mobile applications in monitoring and managing their health condition were included.
DATA EXTRACTION: Titles and abstracts were initially screened by two reviewers. Articles agreed by both reviewers were proceeded to full-text screening. One reviewer extracted the data, which were verified by a second reviewer. Findings were further classified according to the 14 TDF domains by two researchers.
RESULTS: Six studies were included in the final scoping review. Barriers to adopting mobile applications for health-related interventions among older adults were the most common topic identified in the included studies. Barriers included being unaware of the existence of mobile health applications, lack of technological skills, lack of perceived ability and time, absence of professional involvements, and violation of trust and privacy. With regard to willingness, older adults are willing to use mobile applications if the apps incorporated features from a trusted source and have valid credentials. Motivators included continuous improvements of mobile applications' design interface and personalised features tailored to older adults' needs.
CONCLUSIONS: With the constant research for more diversified technology, the development of mobile applications to help older adults to manage and monitor health is seen as feasible, but barriers have to be addressed. The most prominent barriers linked to TDF domains were: (1) technological skills, (2) belief about consequences, and (3) memory, attention and decision process. Future interventions should use behaviour change techniques that target these three TDF domains in order to improve the ability to engage older adults with mobile technology.
METHODS: The collaboration integrates HUMS's academic and clinical strengths with JKNS's existing rehabilitation services. Key components include developing postgraduate training for rehabilitation medicine, expanding community-based rehabilitation outreach services, and establishing a referral network between hospitals and community healthcare providers.
RESULTS: The partnership has resulted in the implementation of a comprehensive framework that enhances academic capacity, fosters research collaboration, and improves rehabilitation service delivery across Sabah. This approach is aligned with the WHO's Rehabilitation 2030 initiative, advocating for stronger integration of rehabilitation into healthcare systems.
CONCLUSION: The collaborative efforts between HUMS and JKNS demonstrate the critical role of partnerships between academic institutions and public health departments in strengthening rehabilitation services. This model offers a replicable strategy for influencing policy development and ensuring resource allocation to meet the growing rehabilitation needs in underserved regions.