A Conceptual Model of Individual Clinical Readiness

Abstract

ABSTRACT Introduction Force readiness is a priority among senior leaders across all branches of the Department of Defense. Units that do not achieve readiness benchmarks are considered non-deployable until the unit achieves the requisite benchmarks. Because military units are made up of individuals, the unit cannot be ready if the individuals within the unit are not ready. For medical personnel, this refers to one’s ability to competently provide patient care in a deployed setting or their individual clinical readiness (ICR). A review of the literature found no conceptual model of ICR. Other potential concepts, such as individual medical readiness, were identified but used inconsistently. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to define ICR and propose a conceptual model to inform future efforts to achieve ICR and facilitate future study of the concept. Materials and Methods Model development occurred using a 3-step theoretical model synthesis process. The process included specification of key concepts, identification of related factors and relationships, and organizing them into an integrated network of ideas. Results ICR is the clinically oriented service members’ (COSM) ability to meet the demands of the militarily relevant, assigned clinical mission. ICR leads to one’s “individual clinical performance,” a key concept distinct from ICR. To understand ICR, one must account for “individual characteristics,” as well as one’s “education,” “training,” and “exposure.” ICR and individual clinical performance are influenced by the “quality of exposure” and the “patient care environment.” One’s “individual clinical performance” also reciprocally influences the patient care environment, as well as the “team’s clinical performance.” These factors (individual clinical performance, team clinical performance, and the patient care environment) influence “patient outcomes.” In the proposed model, patient outcomes are an indirect result of ICR and its antecedents (personal characteristics, education, training, and exposure); one’s individual clinical performance may not be consistent with their ICR. Patient outcomes are also influenced by the “patient environment” (external to the health care environment) and “patient characteristics”; these elements of the model do not influence ICR or individual clinical performance. Conclusion Force readiness is a Department of Defense priority. In order for military units to be deployment ready, so too must their personnel be deployment ready. For COSMs, this includes one’s ability to competently provide patient care in a deployed setting or their ICR. This article defines ICR, as well as identifies another key concept and other factors associated with ICR. The proposed model is a tool for military medical leaders to communicate with and influence non-medical military leaders in the Department of Defense. Future research is needed to further refine the proposed model, determine the strength of the proposed relationships, and identify interventions to improve ICR.