How can we make the psychiatric workforce more family focused?

[Extract] Initially, the chapter outlines what we mean by family approaches and then overviews our conception of a continuum of family-focused care and expectations for psychiatric agencies and workers. A brief theoretical review of family-focused care is then outlined followed by information about barriers and enablers to family-focused practice. The chapter ends with reflections from multiple countries regarding the current state of family-focused practice and potential ways forward in each country

Design and introduction of a quality of life assessment and practice support system: perspectives from palliative care settings

Background: Quality of life (QOL) assessment instruments, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs), are increasingly promoted as a means of enabling clinicians to enhance person-centered care. However, integration of these instruments into palliative care clinical practice has been inconsistent. This study focused on the design of an electronic Quality of Life and Practice Support System (QPSS) prototype and its initial use in palliative inpatient and home care settings. Our objectives were to ascertain desired features of a QPSS prototype and the experiences of clinicians, patients, and family caregivers in regard to the initial introduction of a QPSS in palliative care, interpreting them in context. Methods: We applied an integrated knowledge translation approach in two stages by engaging a total of 71 clinicians, 18 patients, and 17 family caregivers in palliative inpatient and home care settings. Data for Stage I were collected via 12 focus groups with clinicians to ascertain desirable features of a QPSS. Stage II involved 5 focus groups and 24 interviews with clinicians and 35 interviews with patients or family caregivers during initial implementation of a QPSS. The focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using the qualitative methodology of interpretive description. Results: Desirable features focused on hardware (lightweight, durable, and easy to disinfect), software (simple, user-friendly interface, multi-linguistic, integration with e-health systems), and choice of assessment instruments that would facilitate a holistic assessment. Although patient and family caregiver participants were predominantly enthusiastic, clinicians expressed a mixture of enthusiasm, receptivity, and concern regarding the use of a QPSS. The analyses revealed important contextual considerations, including: (a) logistical, technical, and aesthetic considerations regarding the QPSS as a technology, (b) diversity in knowledge, skills, and attitudes of clinicians, patients, and family caregivers regarding the integration of electronic QOL assessments in care, and (c) the need to understand organizational context and priorities in using QOL assessment data. Conclusion: The process of designing and integrating a QPSS in palliative care for patients with life-limiting conditions and their family caregivers is complex and requires extensive consultation with clinicians, administrators, patients, and family caregivers to inform successful implementation

'Umbrella' review of family-focused care interventions supporting families where a family member has a long-term condition

Aim: To summarise reviews of family-focused care interventions that support families with a family member with a long-term condition across the life course. Design: Umbrella review. Data sources: Medline (1946- 2019), Cochrane Data Base of Systematic Reviews (2019), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect and EMBASE (1947- 2019), CINAHL (1981-2019), Health Technology Assessment Database (2019) and PsycInfo (1806-2019). Review Methods: All authors independently undertook title/abstract screening, data extraction and quality appraisal on a cluster of papers, working in groups of two or three to reach a consensus. The AMSTAR tool was used to appraise the quality of the studies and descriptive syntheses were undertaken. Results: Fifteen reviews met the selection criteria. Overall family-focussed care and associated terms were poorly defined. Typically interventions were educational or psychological therapy/counselling with the goal of empowering individuals to manage their condition. There is some evidence that family-focused care interventions can improve clinical/biological health measures and self-care outcomes such as treatment adherence. Multi-component psychosocial interventions that include cognitive-behavioral therapy, skills training, education and support and are focused on wider family members appear to improve family relationships and martial functioning. Conclusion: Long-term conditions have an impact on individual and family health and well-being, yet the impact of family-focused care interventions on family outcomes was overall inconclusive. A better understanding of how family-focused care interventions improve the health and well-being of individuals and their families is needed to promote the inclusion of family-focused care into practice. Impact: Supporting people with a long-term condition is a key health and social care priority. Family-focused care interventions have potential to improve the health and well-being of individuals and families but there is a need to evaluate their clinical and cost effectiveness. The findings from this review could be used by funding bodies when commissioning research for long-term conditions

Co-construction of the family-focused support conversation: a participatory learning and action research study to implement support for family members whose relatives are being discharged for end-of-life care at home or in a nursing home.

BACKGROUND: Many people move in and out of hospital in the last few weeks of life. These care transitions can be distressing for family members because they signify the deterioration and impending death of their ill relative and forthcoming family bereavement. Whilst there is evidence about psychosocial support for family members providing end-of-life care at home, there is limited evidence about how this can be provided in acute hospitals during care transitions. Consequently, family members report a lack of support from hospital-based healthcare professionals. METHODS: The aim of the study was to implement research evidence for family support at the end-of-life in acute hospital care. Informed by Participatory Learning and Action Research and Normalization Process Theory (NPT) we co-designed a context-specific intervention, the Family-Focused Support Conversation, from a detailed review of research evidence. We undertook a pilot implementation in three acute hospital Trusts in England to assess the potential for the intervention to be used in clinical practice. Pilot implementation was undertaken during a three-month period by seven clinical co-researchers - nurses and occupational therapists in hospital specialist palliative care services. Implementation was evaluated through data comprised of reflective records of intervention delivery (n = 22), in-depth records of telephone implementation support meetings between research team members and co-researchers (n = 3), and in-depth evaluation meetings (n = 2). Data were qualitatively analysed using an NPT framework designed for intervention evaluation. RESULTS: Clinical co-researchers readily incorporated the Family-Focused Support Conversation into their everyday work. The intervention changed family support from being solely patient-focused, providing information about patient needs, to family-focused, identifying family concerns about the significance and implications of discharge and facilitating family-focused care. Co-researchers reported an increase in family members' involvement in discharge decisions and end-of-life care planning. CONCLUSION: The Family-Focused Support Conversation is a novel, evidenced-based and context specific intervention. Pilot implementation demonstrated the potential for the intervention to be used in acute hospitals to support family members during end-of-life care transitions. This subsequently informed a larger scale implementation study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: n/a

Feasibility of Family Focused Obesity Screening in Primary Care

Background: Obesity is associated with serious medical conditions including diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease. It also contributes to decreased productivity at work and school, financial strain, and reduced quality of life. Purpose of Project: To address this problem, a nurse practitioner-led screening and intervention program was piloted at a primary care clinic in southern San Diego. The tool provides a standardized method for screening individuals and their families for nutrition and physical activity deficits associated with obesity, as well as appropriate and effective interventions to prevent and manage obesity. Methods: The Family Nutrition and Physical Activity (FNPA) screening tool is a behaviorally based assessment which evaluates multiple constructs of health. It has demonstrated consistent utility for predicting children’s risk of becoming overweight or developing obesity. Both the screening evaluation and interventions can be applied to the entire family. Results: Across the participants, preintervention data revealed an average BMI of 34.3, and initial FNPA scores averaged 57 out of 80 possible points. After the prescription of interventions, average BMI dropped to 32.5 and average FNPA scores increased to 61 points. All participants reported comfortability discussing the results of the survey and agreed that the interventions were realistic for them. Evaluation: The FNPA is a standardized screening tool which identifies obesogenic behaviors and assists providers as they identify interventions designed to optimize nutrition, exercise, and lifestyle habits. These interventions may help prevent and reduce obesity prevalence rates among primary care patients. Additional research is needed to further explore the use of the FNPA tool in the primary care setting

Primary Health Care: Potential Home for Family-Focused Preventive Interventions

Family-focused prevention programs have been shown to effectively reduce a range of negative behavioral health outcomes but have had limited reach. Three key barriers must be overcome to expand the reach of family-focused prevention programs and thereby achieve a significant public health impact. These barriers are (1) current social norms and perceptions of parenting programs; (2) concerns about the expertise and legitimacy of sponsoring organizations to offer parenting advice; and (3) a paucity of stable, sustainable funding mechanisms. Primary healthcare settings are well positioned to overcome these barriers. Recent changes within health care make primary care settings an increasingly favorable home for family-focused prevention and suggest possibilities for sustainable funding of family-focused prevention programs. This paper discusses the existing advantages of primary care settings and lays out a plan to move toward realizing the potential public health impact of family-focused prevention through widespread implementation in primary healthcare settings

Co-construction of the Family-Focused Support Conversation : A Participatory Learning and Action Research Study to implement support for family members whose relatives are being discharged for end-of-life care at home or in a nursing home

Background Many people move in and out of hospital in the last few weeks of life. These care transitions can be distressing for family members because they signify the deterioration and impending death of their ill relative and forthcoming family bereavement. Whilst there is evidence about psycho-social support for family members providing end of life care at home, there is limited evidence about how this can be provided in acute hospitals during care transitions. Consequently, family members report a lack of support from hospital-based healthcare professionals. Methods The aim of the study was to implement research evidence for family support at the end of life into acute hospital care. Informed by Participatory Learning and Action Research and Normalization Process Theory (NPT) we co-designed a context-specific intervention, the Family-Focused Support Conversation, from a detailed review of research evidence. We undertook a pilot implementation in three acute hospital Trusts to assess the potential for the intervention to be used in clinical practice. Pilot implementation was undertaken during a three-month period by seven clinical coresearchers - nurses and occupational therapists in hospital specialist palliative care services. Implementation was evaluated by data comprised of reflective records of intervention delivery (n=22), in-depth records of telephone implementation support meetings, between research team members and co-researchers (n=3) and in-depth evaluation meetings (n=2). Data were qualitatively analysed using an NPT framework designed for intervention evaluation. Results Clinical co-researchers readily incorporated the Family-Focused Support Conversation into their everyday work. The key disruption to practice was a change in interactional practice, from being patient-focused, providing information about patient needs, to family-focused, identifying family concerns and facilitating family-focused solutions. Co-researchers reported an increase in family members’ involvement in discharge decisions and end of life care planning. Conclusion The Family-Focused Support Conversation is a novel, evidenced-based and context specific intervention. Pilot implementation demonstrated the potential for the intervention to be used in acute hospitals to support family members during end of life care transitions. This informed a larger scale implementation study, reported in a respective paper

Social network type and informal care use in later life:A comparison of three Dutch birth cohorts aged 75-84

Recent societal changes have increased the salience of non-kin relationships. It can be questioned whether networks types that are more strongly non-kin based give more informal care nowadays. We study how informal care use differs according to network type for three birth cohorts. Data from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) on older adults aged 75-84 years, interviewed in 1992, 2002 and 2012 respectively (total sample size N=2151, analytical sample having functional limitations N=926). We found four network types: restricted, family-focused with partner, family-focused without partner and wider community-focused diverse networks. Wider-community focused diverse networks are more common in the late birth cohort, whereas restricted networks and family-focused networks without partner are less common. Logistic regression analyses reveal that those in a family-focused network with a partner use informal care more often than those in the other three network types, and insignificant interaction terms show that this does not differ by birth cohort. Irrespective of their network type, those in the late birth cohort use informal care less often. However, after controlling for need, predisposing and context factors, this cohort-difference is no longer significant. We conclude that despite large-scale societal changes, wider-community-focused diverse networks do not provide more informal care than before and that among the functionally impaired, the odds of receiving informal care does not decline across birth cohorts

The Affordable Care Act: A Family-Friendly Policy

Most of the discussion of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has focused on the extent to which it has extended health insurance coverage to the formerly uninsured. This is certainly an important aspect of the law. However by allowing people to buy insurance through the exchanges and extending Medicaid coverage to millions of people, the ACA also largely ends workers' dependence on their employer for insurance. This gives tens of millions of people the option to change their job, to work part-time, or take time off to be with young children or family members in need of care, or to retire early

Primary Health Care Potential Home for Family-Focused Preventive Interventions

Family-focused prevention programs have been shown to effectively reduce a range of negative behavioral health outcomes but have had limited reach. Three key barriers must be overcome to expand the reach of family-focused prevention programs and thereby achieve a significant public health impact. These barriers are (1) current social norms and perceptions of parenting programs; (2) concerns about the expertise and legitimacy of sponsoring organizations to offer parenting advice; and (3) a paucity of stable, sustainable funding mechanisms. Primary healthcare settings are well positioned to overcome these barriers. Recent changes within health care make primary care settings an increasingly favorable home for family-focused prevention and suggest possibilities for sustainable funding of family-focused prevention programs. This paper discusses the existing advantages of primary care settings and lays out a plan to move toward realizing the potential public health impact of family-focused prevention through widespread implementation in primary healthcare settings