The purpose of this Consensus Statement is to provide a global, collaborative, representative and inclusive vision for educating an interprofessional healthcare workforce that can deliver sustainable healthcare and promote planetary health. It is intended to inform national and global accreditation standards, planning and action at the institutional level as well as highlight the role of individuals in transforming health professions education. Many countries have agreed to 'rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes' to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45% within 10 years and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, including in healthcare. Currently, however, health professions graduates are not prepared for their roles in achieving these changes. Thus, to reduce emissions and meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), health professions education must equip undergraduates, and those already qualified, with the knowledge, skills, values, competence and confidence they need to sustainably promote the health, human rights and well-being of current and future generations, while protecting the health of the planet. The current imperative for action on environmental issues such as climate change requires health professionals to mobilize politically as they have before, becoming strong advocates for major environmental, social and economic change. A truly ethical relationship with people and the planet that we inhabit so precariously, and to guarantee a future for the generations which follow, demands nothing less of all health professionals. This Consensus Statement outlines the changes required in health professions education, approaches to achieve these changes and a timeline for action linked to the internationally agreed SDGs. It represents the collective vision of health professionals, educators and students from various health professions, geographic locations and cultures. 'Consensus' implies broad agreement amongst all individuals engaged in discussion on a specific issue, which in this instance, is agreement by all signatories of this Statement developed under the auspices of the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE). To ensure a shared understanding and to accurately convey information, we outline key terms in a glossary which accompanies this Consensus Statement (Supplementary Appendix 1). We acknowledge, however, that terms evolve and that different terms resonate variably depending on factors such as setting and audience. We define education for sustainable healthcare as the process of equipping current and

BackgroundSuccessful implementation of new methods and models of healthcare to achieve better patient outcomes and safe, person-centered care is dependent on the physical environment of the healthcare architecture in which the healthcare is provided. Thus, decisions concerning healthcare architecture are critical because it affects people and work processes for many years and requires a long-term financial commitment from society. In this paper, we describe and suggest several strategies (critical factors) to promote shared-decision making when planning and designing new healthcare environments.DiscussionThis paper discusses challenges and hindrances observed in the literature and from the authors extensive experiences in the field of planning and designing healthcare environments. An overview is presented of the challenges and new approaches for a process that involves the mutual exchange of knowledge among various stakeholders. Additionally, design approaches that balance the influence of specific and local requirements with general knowledge and evidence that should be encouraged are discussed.SummaryWe suggest a shared-decision making and collaborative planning and design process between representatives from healthcare, construction sector and architecture based on evidence and end-users’ perspectives. If carefully and systematically applied, this approach will support and develop a framework for creating high quality healthcare environments.

Aim. The aim of this study was to explore nurses' perceptions of climate and environmental issues and examine how nurses perceive their role in contributing to the process of sustainable development.

Background Despite intentions to increase user participation in the development of health services, the concept of participation and how it unfolds within studies with a participatory design has rarely been addressed. Objective The aim of this study was to describe how user participation manifests itself within a co‐design process involving patients, significant others and health‐care professionals, including potential enablers or barriers. Methods This study was conducted in the context of a co‐design process of a new person‐centred transition from a hospital to continued rehabilitation in the home involving three patients with stroke, one significant other and 11 professionals. Data were collected by observations during the workshops, semi‐structured interviews and questionnaires. Results Four categories: ‘Composition of individuals for an adaptive climate’; ‘The balancing of roles and power’; ‘Different perspectives as common ground for a shared understanding’; and ‘Facilitating an unpredictable and ever‐adaptive process’, with all together nine subcategories, resulted from the analysis. Participation varied between individuals, groups and steps within the process, and on the topic of discussions and the motivation to contribute. Discussion/Conclusion Participation is not something that is realized by only applying participatory design methodology. Participation manifests itself through the interaction of the participants and their skills to handle different perspectives, roles and assignments. Participation is enabled by individual, group and facilitating aspects. Co‐design processes should allow for varying levels of participation among the participants and throughout the process. Patient or public contribution Patients, significant others and health‐care professionals participated as co‐designers of a care transition model between hospital and home.

AimThe aim of this study was to describe, explore and explain the concept of sustainability in nursing.BackgroundAlthough researchers in nursing and medicine have emphasised the issue of sustainability and health, the concept of sustainability in nursing is undefined and poorly researched. A need exists for theoretical and empirical studies of sustainability in nursing.DesignConcept analysis as developed by Walker and Avant.MethodData were derived from dictionaries, international healthcare organisations and literature searches in the CINAHL and MEDLINE databases. Inclusive years for the search ranged from 1990 to 2012. A total of fourteen articles were found that referred to sustainability in nursing.ResultsSustainability in nursing involves six defining attributes: ecology, environment, future, globalism, holism and maintenance. Antecedents of sustainability require climate change, environmental impact and awareness, confidence in the future, responsibility and a willingness to change. Consequences of sustainability in nursing include education in the areas of ecology, environment and sustainable development as well as sustainability as a part of nursing academic programs and in the description of the academic subject of nursing. Sustainability should also be part of national and international healthcare organisations. The concept was clarified herein by giving it a definition.ConclusionSustainability in nursing was explored and found to contribute to sustainable development, with the ultimate goal of maintaining an environment that does not harm current and future generations′ opportunities for good health. This concept analysis provides recommendations for the healthcare sector to incorporate sustainability and provides recommendations for future research.

Aim. To identify instruments measuring the quality of the physical healthcare environment, describe their psychometric properties. Background. The physical healthcare environment is regarded as a quality factor for health care. To facilitate evidence-based design there is a need for valid and usable instruments that can evaluate the design of the healthcare environment. Design. Systematic psychometric review. Data sources. A systematic literature search in Medline, CINAHL, Psychinfo, Avery index and reference lists of eligible papers . Review method. Consensus based standards for selection of health measurement instruments guidelines were used to evaluate psychometric data reported. Results. Twenty-three instruments were included. Most of the instruments are intended for healthcare environments related to the care of older people. Many of the instruments were old, lacked strong, contemporary theoretical foundations, varied in the extent to which they had been used in empirical studies and in the degree to which their validity and reliability had been evaluated. Conclusions. Although we found many instruments for measuring the quality of the physical healthcare environment, none met all of our criteria for robustness. Of the instruments, The Multiphasic environmental assessment procedure, The Professional environment assessment protocol and The therapeutic environment screening have been used and tested most frequently. The Perceived hospital quality indicators are user centred and combine aspects of the physical and social environment. The Sheffield care environment assessment matrix has potential as it is comprehensive developed using a theoretical framework that has the needs of older people at the centre. However, further psychometric and user-evaluation of the instrument is required.Keywords: evidence-based design, healthcare facilities, measurement instruments, nursing, older adults, physical healthcare environment, systematic psychometric review 2796

Introduction: Care transitions are a complex set of actions that risk poor quality outcomes for patients and their significant others. This study explored the transition process between hospital and continued rehabilitation in the home. The process is explored from the perspectives of people with stroke, significant others and healthcare professionals in Stockholm, Sweden. Method: Focus group interviews (n = 10), semi-structured individual interviews (n = 23) and interviews in dyad (n = 4) were conducted with healthcare professionals, people with stroke and significant others, altogether 71 participants. Data was collected and analyzed using Grounded Theory. Results: One core category "Perceptive dialogue for a coordinated transition", and two categories "Synthesis of parallel processes for common understanding" and "The forced transformation from passive attendant to uninformed agent" emerged from the analysis. The transition consisted of several parallel processes which made it difficult for the stakeholders to get a common understanding of the transition as a whole. Enabling a perceptive dialogue was as a prerequisite for the creation of a common understanding of the care transition. Conclusion: This study elucidates that a perceptive dialogue with patients/significant others as well as within and across organizations is part of a coordinated and person-centred transition. There is an extensive need for increased involvement of patients and significant others regarding dialogue about health conditions, procedures at the hospital and preparation for self-management after discharge.

Several studies have found that fatigue is one of the most commonly reported symptoms after stroke and the most difficult to cope with. The present study aimed to investigate the presence and severity of self-reported fatigue six years after stroke onset and associated factors. The cohort “Life After Stroke Phase I” (n = 349 persons) was invited at six years to report fatigue (Fatigue Severity Scale 7-item version), perceived impact of stroke and global recovery after stroke (Stroke Impact Scale), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), life satisfaction (Life Satisfaction Checklist) and participation in everyday social activities (Frenchay Activities Index). At six years 37% of the 102 participants in this cross-sectional study reported fatigue. The results showed that in nearly all SIS domains the odds for post-stroke fatigue were higher in persons with a higher perceived impact. Furthermore, the odds for post-stroke fatigue were higher in those who had experienced a moderate/severe stroke and had signs of depression and anxiety. Fatigue is still present in one-third of persons as long as six years after stroke onset and is perceived to hinder many aspects of functioning in everyday life. There is an urgent need to develop and evaluate interventions to reduce fatigue.