Background: Champions have been documented in the literature as an important strategy for implementation, yet their effectiveness has not been well synthesized in the health care literature. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether champions, tested in isolation from other implementation strategies, are effective at improving innovation use or outcomes in health care.Methods: The JBI systematic review method guided this study. A peer-reviewed search strategy was applied to eight electronic databases to identify relevant articles. We included all published articles and unpublished theses and dissertations that used a quantitative study design to evaluate the effectiveness of champions in implementing innovations within health care settings. Two researchers independently completed study selection, data extraction, and quality appraisal. We used content analysis and vote counting to synthesize our data.Results: After screening 7566 records titles and abstracts and 2090 full text articles, we included 35 studies in our review. Most of the studies (71.4%) operationalized the champion strategy by the presence or absence of a champion. In a subset of seven studies, five studies found associations between exposure to champions and increased use of best practices, programs, or technological innovations at an organizational level. In other subsets, the evidence pertaining to use of champions and innovation use by patients or providers, or at improving outcomes was either mixed or scarce.Conclusions: We identified a small body of literature reporting an association between use of champions and increased instrumental use of innovations by organizations. However, more research is needed to determine causal relationship between champions and innovation use and outcomes. Even though there are no reported adverse effects in using champions, opportunity costs may be associated with their use. Until more evidence becomes available about the effectiveness of champions at increasing innovation use and outcomes, the decision to deploy champions should consider the needs and resources of the organization and include an evaluation plan. To further our understanding of champions’ effectiveness, future studies should (1) use experimental study designs in conjunction with process evaluations, (2) describe champions and their activities and (3) rigorously evaluate the effectiveness of champions’ activities.Registration: Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ba3d2). Registered on November 15, 2020.

Job satisfaction is a predictor of intention to stay and turnover among allied healthcare providers. However, there is limited research examining job satisfaction among allied health professionals, specifically in residential long-term care (LTC) settings. The purpose of this study was to identify factors (demographic, individual, and organizational) that predict job satisfaction among allied healthcare providers in residential LTC. We conducted a secondary analysis of data from Phase 2 of the Translating Research in Elder Care program. A total of 334 allied healthcare providers from 77 residential LTC in three Western Canadian provinces were included in the analysis. Generalized estimating equation modeling was used to assess demographics, individual, and organizational context predictors of allied healthcare providers’ job satisfaction. We measured job satisfaction using the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire Job Satisfaction Subscale. Both individual and organizational context variables predicted job satisfaction among allied healthcare providers employed in LTC. Demographic variables did not predict job satisfaction. At the individual level, burnout (cynicism) (β = −.113, p = .001) and the competence subscale of psychological empowerment (β = −.224, p = < .001), were predictive of lower job satisfaction levels while higher scores on the meaning (β = .232, p = .001), self-determination (β = .128, p = .005), and impact (β = .10, p = .014) subscales of psychological empowerment predicted higher job satisfaction. Organizational context variables that predicted job satisfaction included: social capital (β = .158, p = .012), organizational slack-time (β = .096, p = .029), and adequate orientation (β = .088, p = .005). This study suggests that individual allied healthcare provider and organizational context features are both predictive of allied healthcare provider job satisfaction in residential LTC settings. Unlike demographics and structural characteristics of LTC facilities, all variables identified as important to allied healthcare providers’ job satisfaction in this study are potentially modifiable, and therefore amenable to intervention.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships between preceptor characteristics (emotional intelligence, personality and cognitive intelligence) and new graduate nurse socialization outcomes regarding turnover intent, job satisfaction, role conflict and ambiguity during a preceptorship programme. To date, no studies have explored these relationships.Design: A cross‐sectional and multi‐site design with purposeful sampling.Methods: Dyads of preceptors and new nurses were recruited at the end of their preceptorship programme. Pearson's correlational analysis was used to examine the relationships.Results: A sample of 41 preceptors and 44 new graduate nurses participated in this study, making 38 dyads with complete data. The preceptor personality traits of openness, conscientiousness and emotional stability were significantly related to new graduate nurses who reported greater turnover intent, job dissatisfaction, role conflict and ambiguity. No significant relationships were noted between preceptor EI and IQ and the outcome of new graduate nurses.

Patient experience, an essential indicator of quality patient care, is of increasing importance to hospitals that want to improve and maintain strong patient experience metrics to remain competitive in the business of healthcare. The aim of this study was to clarify the concept of the patient experience by identifying its existing definitions, methods of measurement, and underlying themes and attributes, to differentiate it from similar concepts and propose an operational and theoretical definition to guide valid and reliable development of future assessment tools. Walker and Avant’s eight-step methodology served as the framework for this concept analysis. A literature search, using seven databases and one search engine, was conducted of existing literature published any time up until September 2021. The search identified 19,447 references of which 436 articles and organizational websites were included. Twenty attributes (n= 20) were found to define the patient experience: (1) communication; (2) respect for patients; (3) information and education; (4) patient-centered care; (5) comfort and pain; (6) discharge from hospital; (7) hospital environment; (8) professionalism and trust; (9) clinical care and staff competency; (10) access to care; (11) global ratings (12) medication; (13) transitions and continuity; (14) emotional dimension; (15) outcomes; (16) hospital processes; (17) safety and security; (18) interdisciplinary team; (19) social dimension; and, (20) patient dependent features. The proposed definition of the patient experience is: “Patient experience is the combination of external and internal hospital processes, patient-centered attributes, patient-staff and staff-staff interactions during all episodes of care.” Experience Framework This article is associated with the Policy & Measurement lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework. (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens.