Background: Health care organizations are constantly changing as a result of technological advancements, ageing populations, changing disease patterns, new discoveries for the treatment of diseases and political reforms and policy initiatives. Changes can be challenging because they contradict humans' basic need for a stable environment. The present study poses the question: what characterizes successful organizational changes in health care? The aim was to investigate the characteristics of changes of relevance for the work of health care professionals that they deemed successful. Methods: The study was based on semi-structured interviews with 30 health care professionals: 11 physicians, 12 registered nurses and seven assistant nurses employed in the Swedish health care system. An inductive approach was applied using questions based on the existing literature on organizational change and change responses. The questions concerned the interviewees' experiences and perceptions of any changes that they considered to have affected their work, regardless of whether these changes were "objectively" large or small changes. The interviewees' responses were analysed using directed content analysis. Results: The analysis yielded three categories concerning characteristics of successful changes: having the opportunity to influence the change; being prepared for the change; valuing the change. The interviewees emphasized the importance of having the opportunity to influence the organizational changes that are implemented. Changes that were initiated by the professionals themselves were considered the easiest and were rarely resisted. Changes that were clearly communicated to allow for preparation increased the chances for success. The interviewees did not support organizational changes that were perceived to be implemented unexpectedly and/or without prior communication. They conveyed that it was important for them to understand the need for and benefits of organizational changes. They particularly valued and perceived as successful organizational changes with a patient focus, with clear benefits to patients. Conclusions: Organizational changes in health care are more likely to succeed when health care professionals have the opportunity to influence the change, feel prepared for the change and recognize the value of the change, including perceiving the benefit of the change for patients.

Background Implementation of evidence-based practices in health care implies change. Understanding health care professionals’ change responses may be critical for facilitating implementation to achieve an evidence-based practice in the rapidly changing health care environment. The aim of this study was to investigate health care professionals’ responses to organizational and workplace changes that have affected their work. Methods We conducted interviews with 30 health care professionals (physicians, registered nurses and assistant nurses) employed in the Swedish health care system. An inductive approach was applied, using a semi-structured interview guide developed by the authors. We used an analytical framework first published in 1999 to analyze the informants’ change responses in which change responses are perceived as a continuum ranging from a strong acceptance of change to strong resistance to change, describing seven forms of change responses along this continuum. Change response is conceptualized as a tridimensional attitude composed of three components: cognitive, affective and intentional/behavioral. Results Analysis of the data yielded 10 types of change responses, which could be mapped onto 5 of the 7 change response categories in the framework. Participants did not report change responses that corresponded with the two most extreme forms of responses in the framework, i.e., commitment and aggressive resistance. Most of the change responses were classified as either indifference or passive resistance to changes. Involvement in or support for changes occurred when the health care professionals initiated the changes themselves or when the changes featured their active input and when changes were seen as well founded and well communicated. We did not identify any change responses that could not be fitted into the framework. Conclusions We found the framework to be useful for a nuanced understanding of how people respond to changes. This knowledge of change responses is useful for the management of changes and for efforts to achieve more successful implementation of evidence-based practices in health care.

AimTo explore nurses’ perceptions and experiences of patient involvement relevant to patient safety.DesignQualitative design using individual semi‐structured interviews.MethodsInterviews with registered nurses (n = 11) and nurse assistants (n = 8) were conducted in 2015–2016. Nurses were recruited from five different healthcare units in Sweden. The material was analysed using conventional content analysis.ResultsThe analysis resulted in four categories: healthcare professionals’ ways of influencing patient involvement for safer care; patients’ ways of influencing patient involvement for safer care; barriers to patient involvement for safer care; and relevance of patient involvement for safer care. The nurses expressed that patient involvement is a shared responsibility. They also emphasized that healthcare provider has a responsibility to create opportunities for the patient to participate. According to the nurses, involvement can be hindered by factors related to the patient, the healthcare provider and the healthcare system. However, respondents expressed that patient involvement can lead to safer care and benefits for individual patients.

Background Digital consultation with primary care physicians via mobile telephone apps has been spreading rapidly in Sweden since 2014. Digital consultation allows remote working because physicians can work from home, outside their traditional primary care environment. Despite the spread of digital consultation in primary care, there is a lack of knowledge concerning how the new service affects physicians’ psychosocial work environment. Previous research has focused primarily on the patients’ point of view and the cost-effectiveness of digital consultation. Hence, there is a paucity of studies from the perspective of physicians, focusing on their psychosocial work environment. The aim of this study was to investigate primary care physicians’ perceived work demands, control over working processes, and social support when providing digital consultation to primary care patients. Methods The study has a qualitative design, using semi-structured interviews conducted in Sweden in 2019. We used a purposeful sampling strategy to achieve a heterogeneous sample of physicians who represented a broad spectrum of experiences and perceptions. The interviews were conducted by video meeting, telephone, or a personal meeting, depending on what suited the participant best. The interview questions were informed by the Job Demand-Control-Support (JDCS) model, which was also used as the framework to analyze the data by categorizing the physicians’ perceptions and experiences into the three categories of the model (Demand, Control, Support), in the deductive analysis of the data. Results Analysis of the data yielded 9 subcategories, which were mapped onto the 3 categories of the JDCS model. Overall, the participants saw numerous benefits with digital consultations, not only with regard to their own job situation but also for patients and the health care system in general even though they identified some shortcomings and risks with digital care. Conclusions This study has demonstrated that physicians perceive working with digital consultation as flexible with a high grade of autonomy and reasonable to low demands. According to the participants, digital consultation is not something you can work with full time if medical skills and abilities are to be maintained and developed.

ObjectiveThere is a paucity of research on physicians' perspectives on involving patients to achieve safer care. This study aims to explore determinants of patient participation for safer care, according to physicians in Swedish health care.MethodsWe used a deductive descriptive design, applying qualitative content analysis based on the Capability‐Opportunity‐Motivation‐Behaviour framework. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 13 physicians in different types of health care units, to achieve a heterogeneous sample. The main outcome measure was barriers and facilitators to patient participation of potential relevance for patient safety.ResultsAnalysis of the data yielded 14 determinants (ie, subcategories) functioning as barriers and/or facilitators to patient participation of potential relevance for patient safety. These determinants were mapped to five categories: physicians' capability to involve patients in their care; patients' capability to become involved in their care, as perceived by the physicians; physicians' opportunity to achieve patient participation in their care; physicians' motivation to involve patients in their care; and patients' motivation to become involved in their care, as perceived by the physicians.ConclusionThere are many barriers to patient participation to achieve safer care. There are also facilitators, but these tend to depend on initiatives of individual physicians and patients, because organizational‐level support may be lacking. Many of the determinants are interdependent, with physicians' perceived time constraints influencing other barriers.

ObjectivesTo investigate patients’ perceptions of their meetings with healthcare professionals and the extent to which they believe they can influence patient safety in these meetings.DesignCross-sectional survey of patients using a study-specific questionnaire. Data were analysed using both parametric and non-parametric statistics.SettingThe study was conducted in primary and secondary care in three county councils in southeast Sweden by means of a survey questionnaire despatched in January 2017.ParticipantsSurvey data were collected from 1445 patients, 333 of whom were complainants (patients who had filed a complaint about being harmed in healthcare) and 1112 regular patients (patients recruited from healthcare units).Main outcome measuresPatients’ perceptions of meetings with physicians and nurses, beliefs concerning patients’ contributions to safer care and whether the patients had suffered harm in healthcare during the past 10 years.ResultsMost respondents reported that it was easy to ask physicians and nurses questions (84.9% and 86.6%) and to point out if something felt odd in their care (77.7% and 80.7%). In general, complainants agreed to a higher extent compared with regular patients that patients can contribute to safer care (mean 1.92 and 2.13, p<0.001). Almost one-third (31.2%) of the respondents (both complainants and regular patients) reported that they had suffered harm in healthcare during the past 10 years.ConclusionsMost respondents believed that healthcare professionals can facilitate patient interaction and increase patient safety by encouraging patients to ask questions and take an active part in their care. Further research will need to identify strategies to support such questioning in routine practice and ensure that it achieves its intended goals.

Background: Digital consultation with primary care physicians via mobile telephone apps has been spreading rapidly in Sweden since 2014. Digital consultation allows remote working because physicians can work from home, outside their traditional primary care environment. Despite the spread of digital consultation in primary care, there is a lack of knowledge concerning how the new service affects physicians’ psychosocial work environment. Previous research has focused primarily on the patients’ point of view and the cost-effectiveness of digital consultation. Hence, there is a paucity of studies from the perspective of physicians, focusing on their psychosocial work environment. The aim of this study was to investigate primary care physicians’ perceived work demands, control over working processes, and social support when providing digital consultation to primary care patients.Methods: The study has a qualitative design, using semi-structured interviews conducted in Sweden in 2019. We used a purposeful sampling strategy to achieve a heterogeneous sample of physicians who represented a broad spectrum of experiences and perceptions. The interviews were conducted by video meeting, telephone, or a personal meeting, depending on what suited the participant best. The interview questions were informed by the Job Demand-Control-Support (JDCS) model, which was also used as the framework to analyze the data by categorizing the physicians’ perceptions and experiences into the three categories of the model (Demand, Control, Support), in the deductive analysis of the data.Results: Analysis of the data yielded 9 subcategories, which were mapped onto the 3 categories of the JDCS model. Overall, the participants saw numerous benefits with digital consultations, not only with regard to their own job situation but also for patients and the health care system in general even though they identified some shortcomings and risks with digital care.Conclusions: This study has demonstrated that physicians perceive working with digital consultation as flexible with a high grade of autonomy and reasonable to low demands. According to the participants, digital consultation is not something you can work with full time if medical skills and abilities are to be maintained and developed.

Most of the proposed actions were implemented. The use of HFMEA can be improved using fewer team leaders but with more experience. The work involved in writing a report can be reduced without loss of impact on the organization.