Digital counselling can alleviate the burden on healthcare systems and patients. While it has been evaluated as a supplement to standard care or a substitute for follow-up visits, its use for initial triaging and counselling remains unstudied. We developed a Digital Intake Tool (DIT) to facilitate the entire pre-colonoscopy counselling process for FIT-positive participants of a colorectal cancer screening program digitally, replacing the need for physicians. In this multicentre prospective non-inferiority study, we evaluated if the DIT could replace in-person counselling. DIT-counselling resulted in adequately prepared participants in 96.5%, compared to 97.6% after in-person counselling, demonstrating non-inferiority. Outpatient visits were significantly reduced, with only 3.4% requiring face-to-face consultations. Patient experiences were highly positive, without increased psychological distress or anxiety, and effective knowledge transfer. This approach benefits patients and healthcare systems, allowing patients to receive care at home, reducing travel and carbon emissions, while increasing outpatient capacity. ICTRP-registration: NL9315, March 8, 2021.

In an increasingly volatile world, organisations must be prepared to navigate high-impact crises such as pandemics, geopolitical tensions, and disasters. As a result, resilience has become a strategic priority. Operationalising resilience, however, remains challenging due to three key barriers. First, the complex, interconnected nature of organisations makes it difficult to understand interdependencies and implement effective resilience interventions. Second, many crises are considered unimaginable, so-called Black Swans, hampering proactive resilience-building. Third, resilience is highly contextual and conceptually ambiguous, leading to uncertainty about its practical application. To address these barriers, this study investigates what decision-makers within complex systems can learn from wargaming (i.e. the practice of simulating decision-making in environments of conflict or competition) Black Swans to support the operationalisation of resilience. Based on four wargames with 57 decision-makers from aviation, defence and other sectors, we conducted a thematic analysis to interpret their outcomes. Our findings suggest that wargaming helps decision-makers (1) develop a shared understanding of their organisation within its complex system; (2) imagine the impact of type-B (unknown knowns) and type-C (ignored knowns) Black Swans on their organisation; and (3) operationalise resilience-as-an-outcome while deepening their theoretical understanding of it. Finally, conducting wargames may enhance resilience capabilities, namely shared situational awareness, the management of keystone fragilities, anticipating future developments, and sensemaking. Our findings suggest that wargaming can be a valuable tool for organisations to operationalise resilience.

Purpose: To identify, appraise, and synthesize qualitative research evidence exploring patients’ needs regarding work-focused healthcare. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement guidelines to identify studies reporting patients’ needs regarding work-focused healthcare. Four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo and Web of Science) were systematically searched from January 2000 until May 2023 and screened in duplicate by pairs of two reviewers. Inclusion criteria were qualitative data collection method, and patients’ perspectives regarding healthcare focusing on work when experiencing work-related problems due to chronic medical conditions. Data extraction and synthesis was executed by means of an inductive thematic analysis approach. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the CASP Qualitative Study checklist. Confidence in the review findings was assessed through the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) approach. Results: Out of 23,677 records, 97 qualitative studies were included. Needs regarding four main themes were identified: (1) Substantive guidance, which comprises the specific content of work-focused healthcare; (2) Clear and continuous process, which comprises clarification and optimization of the work-focused healthcare process; (3) Supportive attitude and behavior, which comprises a positive and supportive attitude and behavior from professionals towards the patients; and (4) Tailored approach, which comprises the delivery of tailored care to the individuals’ needs. 17 subthemes were identified. Conclusion: The broader insight in patients’ needs in work-focused healthcare can help (occupational) healthcare professionals adopt a more patient-centred approach in practice.

Objective: To assess the added value of a novel, mobile educative application to standard counselling on aspirin adherence during pregnancy versus standard counselling alone. Methods: Participants were randomly assigned for additional use of a mobile educative application or standard counselling alone. Main outcome measures were adherence to aspirin measured by two validated questionnaires: Simplified Medication Adherence Questionnaire (SMAQ), Believes and Behaviour Questionnaire (BBQ), and patients reported tablet intake >90%. Results: A total of 174 women with an indication for aspirin during pregnancy were included. The questionnaires were filled in by 126 out of the 174 participants (72.4%). Similar results were found in the app group and the standard counselling groups for both validated questionnaires. Tablet intake >90% was seen in 88.7% and 87.5% (p = 0.834) of the app group and standard counselling group respectively. Subgroup analyses demonstrated a negative effect of BMI and a positive effect of educational level on adherence. Conclusions: Our study revealed no added effect of a novel, mobile educative application to standard counselling on aspirin adherence during pregnancy. Tablet intake was equally high in both groups probably explained by our high educated population. Innovation: Future studies should focus on tailored counselling on medication to pregnant women's needs including medication reminders, addressing concerns, adequate health literacy and side effects, offering rewards to further stimulate aspirin adherence in pregnancy with optimal outcome for mother and their neonate.

The COVID-19 pandemic proved to be an existential public health and economic crisis for the airport system. An interview study was conducted using Amsterdam Airport Schiphol as a use case to prepare for future public health disruptions. The study aimed to uncover key experiences and lessons learned by an airport system during the COVID-19 pandemic by interviewing 16 experts from airport operators, airlines, public health agencies, security services, and the government. After thematic analysis, four themes emerged. The first theme addressed the limited readiness of the airport system; the COVID-19 pandemic seemed unimaginable regardless of prior experiences with infectious diseases or weak signals. The second theme depicts an airport system running behind the facts, one that had difficulties implementing operational interventions and had to deal with extensive reorganisations. The third theme illustrated the complex relational dynamics within the airport system, such as the hesitancy of public health stakeholders towards aviation stakeholders and the government utilising a top-down approach. Finally, theme four provides lessons learned for the future whereby actively fostering a systemic approach, sensemaking capabilities, and informal relations are recommended. Current constructions like Crisis Management Teams and the Airport Operations Centre support these learnings. Further reflection and operationalisation of the study's findings are critical to proactively supporting the airport system's transition from a potential pandemic liability to a strategic asset in mitigating public health disruptions.

Abstract. In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the aviation industry is interested in becoming more resilient; however, its operationalisation remains challenging. This study aims to support the operationalisation of resilience by investigating the sources of resilience of airport crisis management teams' (CMTs). Through six training and debriefs with 54 operational managers and reflexive thematic analysis, three sources of resilience were identified. The first source emphasises the role of metacognition, where practitioners adopt a reflective approach to their decision-making. Metacognition is critical for creating shared situational awareness (SSA) and directionality. The study identified two ways to foster metacognition: being explicit and reflective about the SSA level and asking metacognitive questions. The second source is directionality, which involves establishing and adjusting a shared goal during disruptions. Directionality helps align CMTs, prioritise goals, and provide a benchmark for success. It also facilitates timely escalation to higher-management CMTs when necessary. The third source highlights the importance of mastering the rules of play (e.g. protocols, procedures and leadership styles) as it creates a robust decision-making process. Given the high turnover in aviation personnel, further research is needed to ensure that protocols and procedures are easy to use. Finally, the training methodology used in the study proved effective for evaluating and improving resilience capabilities. It provides a near-real-life experience that allows for detailed analysis. Further exploring the interactions between participants and antagonists could help develop a qualitative resilience indicator, offering new insights into measuring, standardising and operationalising resilience.

Purpose: To explore the experiences and needs concerning work-focused healthcare of patients experiencing problems with work participation due to cardiovascular disease based on all facets of person-centred care. Methods: Nineteen patients who experienced or continue to experience problems with work participation due to cardiovascular disease participated in semi-structured interviews preceded by preparatory written assignments. The transcripts were analysed by means of directed qualitative content analysis. Adapted principles of the Picker Institute for Person-Centred Care provided a template for the analysis. Results: 28 experiences and needs emerged and were grouped into the eight principles for person-centred work-focused healthcare. Randomly presenting one theme for each of the eight principles, the themes included: (1) frequent encounters with occupational healthcare professionals; (2) substantive work-related advice; (3) transparency in communication; (4) support for family; (5) information provision on the work-focused healthcare process; (6) personal control during the process; (7) empathy for the personal situation; and (8) tailored work-focused support. Conclusions: The identified experiences and needs for work-focused healthcare of patients experiencing problems with work participation due to cardiovascular disease clearly indicate the need to improve the delivery of person-centred work-focused healthcare to better meet the individual needs of patients.

Background
Driven by rising retirement age and increasing prevalence of chronic diseases impacting work participation, there is an increasing need for quality and efficiency improvement in social insurance medicine (SIM). SIM provides guidance to individuals facing long-term work disability, assess their functional abilities and eligibility for long-term disability benefits. Value-based healthcare (VBHC) targets quality and efficiency improvements in healthcare by placing a priority on improving patient value. So far, VBHC has been introduced with fundamental principles and essential components for its adoption in curative care. Hence, there is room for debate on what are key enablers for the adoption of value-based SIM.

Purpose
The study aims to explore key enablers for the adoption of VBHC in the practice of SIM.

Methods
In this exploratory qualitative study, participants consisted of 15 professionals with expertise either in SIM (n=10) or with expertise in the adoption of VBHC in the curative care sector (n=5). Each participant took part in both a semistructured individual interview and a focus group interview. Thematic coding was employed to analyse the data.

Results
Seven key enablers were identified: (1) investigate the meaning and implementation constraints of value in SIM, (2) integrate SIM into work-focused care networks, (3) explore the need and feasibility for specialisation based on functional problems, (4) identify the most important work outcomes for the patient, (5) identify proxy indicators for cost drivers, (6) identify value-driven financial incentives and (7) develop an information technology system to exchange data.

Conclusions
This paper provides understanding of what is needed to adopt value-based SIM. Future research should delve deeper into these seven key enablers to facilitate the adoption of VBHC, and thereby promote value creation in the practice of SIM.

Background Digital health (DH) brings considerable benefits, but it comes with potential risks. Human Factors (HF) play a critical role in providing high-quality and acceptable DH solutions. Consultation with designers is crucial for reflecting on and improving current DH design practices. Objectives We investigated the general DH design processes, challenges, and corresponding strategies that can improve the digital patient experience (PEx). Methods A semi-structured interview study with 24 design professionals. All audio recordings were transcribed, deidentified, grammatically corrected, and imported into ATLAS.ti for data analysis. Three coders participated in data coding following the thematic analysis approach. Results We identified eight DH design stages and grouped them into four phases: preparation, problem-thinking, problem-solving, and implementation. The analysis presented twelve design challenges associated with contextual, practical, managerial, and commercial aspects that can hinder the design process. We identified eight common strategies used by respondents to tackle these challenges. Conclusions We propose a Digital Health Design (DHD) framework to improve the digital PEx. It provides an overview of design deliverables, activities, stakeholders, challenges, and corresponding strategies for each design stage.

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of DH applications has outpaced research and practice in digital health (DH) evaluations. Patient experience (PEx) was reported as one of the challenges facing the health system by the World Health Organization. To generate evidence on DH and promote the appropriate integration and use of technologies, a standard evaluation of PEx in DH is required. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically identify evaluation timing considerations (ie, when to measure), evaluation indicators (ie, what to measure), and evaluation approaches (ie, how to measure) with regard to digital PEx. The overall aim of this study is to generate an evaluation guide for further improving digital PEx evaluation. METHODS: This is a 2-phase study parallel to our previous study. In phase 1, literature reviews related to PEx in DH were systematically searched from Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science databases. Two independent raters conducted 2 rounds of paper screening, including title and abstract screening and full-text screening, and assessed the interrater reliability for 20% (round 1: 23/115 and round 2: 12/58) random samples using the Fleiss-Cohen coefficient (round 1: k1=0.88 and round 2: k2=0.80). When reaching interrater reliability (k>0.60), TW conducted the rest of the screening process, leaving any uncertainties for group discussions. Overall, 38% (45/119) of the articles were considered eligible for further thematic analysis. In phase 2, to check if there were any meaningful novel insights that would change our conclusions, we performed an updated literature search in which we collected 294 newly published reviews, of which 102 (34.7%) were identified as eligible articles. We considered them to have no important changes to our original results on the research objectives. Therefore, they were not integrated into the synthesis of this review and were used as supplementary materials. RESULTS: Our review highlights 5 typical evaluation objectives that serve 5 stakeholder groups separately. We identified a set of key evaluation timing considerations and classified them into 3 categories: intervention maturity stages, timing of the evaluation, and timing of data collection. Information on evaluation indicators of digital PEx was identified and summarized into 3 categories (intervention outputs, patient outcomes, and health care system impact), 9 themes, and 22 subthemes. A set of evaluation theories, common study designs, data collection methods and instruments, and data analysis approaches was captured, which can be used or adapted to evaluate digital PEx. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings enabled us to generate an evaluation guide to help DH intervention researchers, designers, developers, and program evaluators evaluate digital PEx. Finally, we propose 6 directions for encouraging further digital PEx evaluation research and practice to address the challenge of poor PEx.

Design is expanding its influence on shaping future healthcare. Ideally, designers apply human-centered design and human factors that introduce theory, principles, and methods to design to optimize people’s healthcare experiences in both digital and non-digital environments. To discuss and implement experience design in healthcare, consensus about experience design in healthcare is needed. Objectives: Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate designers’ views on experience design in health, and to uncover their understanding about three experience design concepts, i.e., user experience (UX), patient experience (PEx), and digital patient experience (dPEx). We conducted online semi-structured interviews study with convenience samples who met the eligibility. We used ATLAS.ti for an in-depth data coding following thematic analysis. 24 international designers of digital health solutions, either in industry or in academia took part in the interviews. We found the similarities and differences mentioned between healthcare design and non-healthcare design relate to (1) design principles, (2) user attributes, and (3) design contexts. Furthermore, the differences between UX, PEx, and dPEx can be mapped on five dimensions: people, contexts, purposes, means, and usage scenarios. These insights can help designers and human factors specialists build a common design language for experience design in healthcare. Our study can also assist designers and human factors specialists with experience design in digital health by pointing out the areas where design thinking generally is appropriate and the places where particular expertise in healthcare design is needed.

Background: Risk-based breast cancer (BC) screening raises new questions regarding information provision and risk communication. This study aimed to: 1) investigate women’s beliefs and knowledge (i.e., mental models) regarding BC risk and (risk-based) BC screening in view of implications for information development; 2) develop novel informational materials to communicate the screening result in risk-based BC screening, including risk visualizations of both quantitative and qualitative information, from a Human-Centered Design perspective. Methods: Phase 1: Interviews were conducted (n = 15, 40–50 years, 5 lower health literate) on women’s beliefs about BC risk and (risk-based) BC screening. Phase 2: In three participatory design sessions, women (n = 4–6 across sessions, 40–50 years, 2–3 lower health literate) made assignments and created and evaluated visualizations of risk information central to the screening result. Prototypes were evaluated in two additional sessions (n = 2, 54–62 years, 0–1 lower health literate). Phase 3: Experts (n = 5) and women (n = 9, 40–74 years) evaluated the resulting materials. Two other experts were consulted throughout the development process to ensure that the content of the information materials was accurate. Interviews were transcribed literally and analysed using qualitative thematic analysis, focusing on implications for information development. Notes, assignments and materials from the participatory design sessions were summarized and main themes were identified. Results: Women in both interviews and design sessions were positive about risk-based BC screening, especially because personal risk factors would be taken into account. However, they emphasized that the rationale of risk-based screening and classification into a risk category should be clearly stated and visualized, especially for higher- and lower-risk categories (which may cause anxiety or feelings of unfairness due to a lower screening frequency). Women wanted to know their personal risk, preferably visualized in an icon array, and wanted advice on risk reduction and breast self-examination. However, most risk factors were considered modifiable by women, and the risk factor breast density was not known, implying that information should emphasize that BC risk depends on multiple factors, including breast density. Conclusions: The information materials, including risk visualizations of both quantitative and qualitative information, developed from a Human-Centered Design perspective and a mental model approach, were positively evaluated by the target group.

Background: To facilitate the maintenance or resumption of participation in work for patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD), there is a need for high-quality work-focused healthcare. According to the concept of value-based healthcare, quality of care can be enhanced by understanding the outcomes that matter most to patients. However, a major challenge in assessing quality of work-focused healthcare in practice is the lack of consensus on which work-related outcomes should be measured. Objective: The objective of this study was to identify a standard set of key work-related outcomes for patients with CVD to be used in practice of work-focused healthcare in the Netherlands, including standardised outcome measures and associated case mix factors. This standard set is intended to assist occupational and other health professionals in delivering work-focused healthcare that meets a patient’s individual needs regarding work participation, and to enhance patients’ engagement in their own work-focused care process. Methods: A 2-round RAND-modified Delphi process was conducted. The process included literature searches, consecutive research team meetings, and several meetings and rounds of voting by a working group. The working group consisted of patients with CVD (n = 6) and health professionals representing different stakeholders (n = 11) involved in work-focused healthcare for this patient population in the Netherlands. Consensus was reached over four phases: (1) establishing the scope of the standard set and defining the population, (2) prioritising and defining the outcome domains, (3) selecting the outcome measures for the most important domains, including clinical data and patient-reported data, and (4) selecting and defining case mix factors. Results: A 23-item patient-reported questionnaire was developed, called the Value@WORK-Q23, including questions on nine work-related outcome domains considered most important for patients with CVD: (1) work participation, (2) physical work ability, (3) mental work ability, (4) suitable work, (5) support from the work environment, (6) flexibility of the work environment, (7) communication with the patient, (8) person-centredness, and (9) interdisciplinary communication. In addition, nine case mix variables was selected, comprising demographic-, disease-, and work factors. Conclusions: The Value@WORK-Q23 provides guidance on measuring the most important work-related outcomes for patients with CVD. Using this work-related set in practice, in addition to existing disease-specific standard sets for CVD may facilitate the provision of high-value work-focused healthcare for this patient population.

Economic studies have shown that living in poverty may produce a subjective feeling of scarcity, which affects people's cognitive functions and decision-making. Understanding this mechanism could inform healthcare designers on designing inclusive health interventions by considering the psychological scarcity and limited cognitive resources of impoverished individuals. We conducted a psychological experiment to test the impact of psychological scarcity on cognitive function and health decisions of rural residents in China. We randomly assign participants to two financial scenarios (hard vs. easy) with the technique of priming to induce their immediate financial worries. Then we measure cognitive function using Raven’s Progressive Matrices and uncover their decision-making priorities with a budget allocation task. 301 participants finished the study and 264 were included in the main analysis. The results show that both immediate financial worries and cumulative poverty have negative effects on participants’ cognitive performance. Responses to scarcity could lead to attentional focus on limited resources, thereby neglecting long-term health consequences, particularly for the lower income group. Based on the findings, we suggest a number of human factors design considerations that are critical to successful healthcare design.

BACKGROUND: Value-based healthcare delivery focuses on optimizing care provided by measuring the healthcare outcomes which are most important to the clients relative to the total care costs. However, the understanding of what adds value for clients during work disability assessment is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To explore what medical examiners (MEs) perceive as valuable during the work disability assessment process, by exploring possible: 1) facilitators, 2) barriers and 3) opportunities to add value for the client during the work disability assessment. METHODS: For this explorative qualitative study, 7 semi-structured interviews were conducted with MEs in the Netherlands. Thematic coding was performed for all interviews. RESULTS: A large variety of facilitators (n = 22), barriers (n = 17) and opportunities (n = 11) were identified and inductively subdivided into four main themes: 1) coherent process, including all time related aspects, 2) interdisciplinary collaboration, including all aspects related to the collaboration between the ME and other professionals, 3) client-centred interaction, including all aspects related to the supportive interplay from the ME towards the client, and 4) information provision on all aspects during the work disability assessment process towards the client to ensure a valuable work disability assessment process. CONCLUSIONS: The overview of identified possible facilitators, barriers and opportunities to add value for clients from the perspective of the ME may stimulate improvement in the current work disability assessment practice and to better match the client needs.

Treatment decision-making can be complex, notably when there are multiple treatments available, with different (probabilities of) benefits and harms, for example, survival and side effects.1 It is precisely in these complex situations that the preferences of the patient are of utmost importance, as the trade-offs of benefits and harms are subjective and concern patients' lives.2 In such trade-offs, shared decision making (SDM) has gained momentum as a strategy to include both the best available evidence and the patient's preferences.3

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the existential public health and economic fragilities of the civil aviation industry. To prevent future public health disruptions, the civil aviation industry is gaining interest in becoming more “resilient” but rarely elaborates on its meaning, hampering decision-making and strategy development. When looking into the academic literature it seems that a proliferation of resilience-related concepts occurred. Although enriching resilience, it also dilutes its meaning and reduces its use for practice. This paper aims to create concept clarity regarding resilience by proposing a categorization of resilience. Based upon a scoping review, this categorization dissects resilience into four reoccurring aspects: fragility, robustness, adaptation, and transformation. This categorization is expected to support sensemaking in disruptive times while assisting decision-making and strategy development on resilience. When applying this categorization in the civil aviation and public health context, the transformative aspect seems underused. Further research will focus on maturing the categorization of resilience and its use as a sensemaking tool.

Background: Misinterpretation of patient preferences in perioperative education can lead to an undesired treatment decision. This explorative interview study presents differences in perspectives of patients and professionals on patient education in complex endovascular aortic aneurysm management. Methods: Using convenience sampling, a cross-sectional interview study was performed among patients who were in various stages of the decision-making process for complex endovascular aortic repair. Five physicians were interviewed, representing the main providers of clinical information. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed inductively. Results: Twelve patients (mean age 76.6 [standard deviation: 6.4], 83% male) were interviewed. Ten (83%) felt like they had no other realistic option besides undergoing surgery, whereas all professionals (5/5) stressed the importance of delicate patient selection. Five patients out of 10 (50%) who commented on their preferred decisional role considered the professional's advice as decisive. All but 1 patient (11/12) reported that the information was easy to understand, whereas 4 out of 5 professionals (80%) doubted whether patients could fully comprehend everything. Patients experienced a lack of information on the recovery process, although professionals stated that this was addressed during consultation. Conclusions: Several differences were found in the perspectives of patients and professionals on education in complex aortic aneurysm management. In order to optimize patient involvement in decision-making, professionals should be aware of these possible discrepancies and address them during consultation. Future research could focus on these differences in more detail by including more patients depending on their treatment and decision stages.