Search results

This study aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of radical innovations in secondary healthcare.

A systematic review was conducted and presented in accordance with a PRISMA flowchart. The databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched for original publications in English between the 1st of January 2010 and 6th of November 2020. The level of radicalness was determined based on five characteristics of radical innovations. The level of evidence was classified according to the level of evidence scale of the University of Oxford. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used as a framework to classify the barriers and facilitators.

Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, nine publications were included, concerning six technological, two organizational and one treatment innovation. The main barriers for radical innovation implementation in secondary healthcare were lack of human, material and financial resources, and lack of integration and organizational readiness. The main facilitators included a supportive culture, sufficient training, education and knowledge, and recognition of the expected added value.

To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review examining the barriers and facilitators of radical innovation implementation in secondary healthcare. To ease radical innovation implementation, alternative performance systems may be helpful, including the following prerequisites: (1) Money, (2) Added value, (3) Timely knowledge and integration, (4) Culture, and (5) Human resources (MATCH). This study highlights the need for more high-level evidence studies in this area.

Given that the workforce constitutes a principal resource of primary care, appraisal of models of care requires thorough investigation of the health workforce in all Models of Child Health Appraised (MOCHA) countries. This chapter explores this in terms of workforce composition, remuneration, qualifications and training in relation to the needs of children and young people. We have focused on two principal disciplines of primary care; medicine and nursing, with a specific focus on training and skills to care for children in primary care, particularly those with complex care needs, adolescents and vulnerable groups. We found significant disparities in workforce provision and remuneration, in training curricula and in resultant skills of physicians and nurses in European Union and European Economic Area Countries. A lack of overarching standards and recognition of some of the specific needs of children reflected in training of physicians and nurses may lead to suboptimal care for children. There are, of course, many other professions that also contribute to primary care services for children, some of which are discussed in Chapter 15, but we have not had resources to study these to the same detail.

The purpose of this article is to examine synergies between a eudaimonic model of psychological well-being (Ryff, 1989) and mental health practice. The model grew out of clinical, developmental, existential and humanistic perspectives that emphasized psychological strengths and capacities, in contrast to the focus on emotional distress and dysfunction in clinical psychology.

Conceptual foundations of the eudaimonic approach are described, along with the six components positive functioning that are used to measure well-being. These qualities may be important in facilitating the recovery experiences, which are of interest in Mental Health and Social Inclusion.

Four categories of empirical evidence about eudaimonia are reviewed: how it changes with aging, how it matters for health, what are its biological and neurological underpinnings and whether it can be promoted. Major contemporary forces against eudaimonia are also considered, including ever-widening inequality, the enduring pandemic and world-wide strife. In contrast, encounters with the arts and nature are put forth as forces for eudaimonia. The relevance of these ideas for mental health research and practice is considered.

Enormous suffering defines our contemporary world. Such realities call for greater attention to factors that undermine as well as nurture the realization of human potential, the core of eudaimonic well-being.

Mental health is often defined as the absence of mental illness. The novelty of the eudaimonic approach is to define mental health as the presence of well-being, assessed with different components of positive functioning.