Background: While the challenges for psychological well-being for Australian healthcare workers have been documented, there has been a dearth of qualitative research on the sources of resilience that sustained workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study identified sources of resilience that clinicians used to cope with frontline challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 frontline health professionals, across five Australian hospitals, between October 2020 and April 2021. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and the results were analysed using thematic analysis based on a phenomenological approach. Results: Three sources of resilience were identified by respondents: personal, relational, and organisational. A positive mindset, sense of purpose, and self-care behaviours emerged as key sources of personal resilience. Teamwork, altruism, and social support from family and friends contributed to relational resilience. Leadership, effective communication, and effective implementation of COVID-19 policies were associated with resilience at the organisational level. Frontline healthcare workers also voiced the need for the implementation of further strategies to support personal resilience whilst nurturing resilience within clinical teams and across entire healthcare organisations. Conclusions: Trust in healthcare systems, organisation leaders, colleagues, and personal support teams was an overarching theme supporting resilience.

Objective: In 2018 the Australian Commission on Quality and Safety in Health Care released a new consumer driven Australian Hospital Patient Experience Question set. The objective was to explore the acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, resources and sustainability of implementing the AHPEQS, and to review which questions correlated with overall rating of care. Methods: Thirty-six Australian private hospitals participated in the AHPEQS implementation over an 18-month period. Results: Responses were analysed for 86 180 patient experience surveys. Positive patient experiences (Question 12) correlated most highly with Question 2 (My individual needs were met; correlation coefficient (CC) 0.45, P < 0.001), Question 4 (I felt cared for; CC 0.45, P < 0.001) and Question 9 (When I was in the hospital, I felt confident in the safety of my treatment and care; CC 0.44, P < 0.001). Day procedure patients rated their experience higher than overnight patients. Uptake was rapid across the 36 hospitals, with minimal resources and demonstrable acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, penetration and sustainability. Conclusion: Utilising a consumer-driven survey highlighting treatment and care, assisted in enhancing staff engagement and continuous improvement in patient experience in acute, day procedure and rehabilitation hospitals. What is known about the topic?: Patient experience in hospital is associated with healthcare quality, safety and outcomes. What does this paper add?: From a consumer perspective, feeling cared for, having needs met and confidence in the safety of care, correlated with a positive patient experience. What are the implications for practitioners?: Investing staff time and health service resources into a consumer-driven patient experience survey tool, which highlighted treatment and care, assisted in enhancing staff engagement and continuous improvement in patient experience in acute, day procedure and rehabilitation hospitals.

Obtaining pre-surgery PROM measures is not always feasible. The aim of this study was to examine if self-reports of change following elective surgery correlate with change scores from a validated PROM (15-item Quality of Recovery (QoR-15)). This cross-sectional study across 29 hospitals enrolled elective surgery patients. PROMs were collected one-week pre-surgery, as well as one- and four-weeks post-surgery via an electronic survey. We examined associations between patient “judgement of change” at one and four-weeks after surgery and the actual pre-to post-surgery PROM change scores. A total of 4177 surveys were received. The correlation between patient judgement of change, and the actual change score was moderately strong at one-week (n = 247, rs = 0.512, p < 0.001), yet low at four-weeks (n = 241, rs = 0.340, p < 0.001). Patient judgement was aligned to the direction of the PROM change score from pre- to post-surgery. We also examined the correlation between the QoR-15 (quality of recovery) and the EQ-5D-5L (QOL). There was a moderately strong positive correlation between the two PROMs (n = 356, rs = 0.666, p < 0.001), indicating that change in quality of recovery was related to change in QOL. These findings support the use of a single “judgement of change” recall question post-surgery.