Search

Introduction: Academic health centers are poised to improve health through their clinical, education, and research missions. However, these missions often operate in silos. The authors explored stakeholder perspectives at diverse institutions to understand challenges and identify alignment strategies. Methods: Authors used an exploratory qualitative design and thematic analysis approach with data obtained from electronic surveys sent to participants at five U.S. academic health centers (2017‐18), with four different types of medical school/health system partnerships. Participants included educators, researchers, system leaders, administrators, clinical providers, resident/fellow physicians, and students. Investigators coded data using constant comparative analysis, met regularly to reconcile uncertainties, and collapsed/combined categories. Results: Of 175 participants invited, 113 completed the survey (65%). Three results categories were identified. First, five higher‐order themes emerged related to aligning missions, including (a) shared vision and strategies, (b) alignment of strategy with community needs, (c) tension of economic drivers, (d) coproduction of knowledge, and (e) unifying set of concepts spanning all missions. Second, strategies for each mission were identified, including education (new competencies, instructional methods, recruitment), research (shifting agenda, developing partnerships, operations), and clinical operations (delivery models, focus on patient factors/needs, value‐based care, well‐being). Lastly, strategies for integrating each dyadic mission pair, including research‐education, clinical operations education, and research‐clinical operations, were identified. Conclusions: Academic health centers are at a crossroads in regard to identity and alignment across the tripartite missions. The study's results provide pragmatic strategies to advance the tripartite missions and lead necessary change for improved patient health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Good laboratory practices (GLP) increase the quality and traceability of results in health sciences research. However, factors such as high staff turnover, insufficient resources, and a lack of training for managers may limit their implementation in research and academic laboratories. This Scoping Review aimed to identify digital tools for managing academic health sciences and experimental medicine laboratories and their relationship with good practices. Following the PRISMA-ScR 2018 criteria, a search strategy was conducted until April 2021 in the databases PUBMED, Web of Sciences, and Health Virtual Library. A critical appraisal of the selected references was conducted, followed by data charting. The search identified twenty-one eligible articles, mainly originated from high-income countries, describing the development and/or implementation of thirty-two electronic management systems. Most studies described software functionalities, while nine evaluated and discussed impacts on management, reporting both improvements in the workflow and system limitations during implementation. In general, the studies point to a contribution to different management issues related to GLP principles. In conclusion, this review identified evolving evidence that digital laboratory management systems may represent important tools in compliance with the principles of good practices in experimental medicine and health sciences research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]