20 research outputs found
Applying a healthcare model to Huntington's disease: the key worker approach
This paper follows on from an overview of the literature and current policy for Huntington’s disease (HD) published by the BJNN (Wilson et al. 2014). The previous paper highlighted a paucity of knowledge in terms of best practice available for those commissioning services to draw upon when planning care of those with HD. This discussion paper draws on this literature base and findings from a recent longitudinal research study from Wilson’s (2013) unpublished PhD thesis (available online at http://etheses.nottingham.ac.uk/3487/) to suggest a model of care, which may provide some guidance
Recommended from our members
The impact of mental health recovery narratives on recipients experiencing mental health problems: Qualitative analysis and change model.
BACKGROUND: Mental health recovery narratives are stories of recovery from mental health problems. Narratives may impact in helpful and harmful ways on those who receive them. The objective of this paper is to develop a change model identifying the range of possible impacts and how they occur. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with adults with experience of mental health problems and recovery (n = 77). Participants were asked to share a mental health recovery narrative and to describe the impact of other people's recovery narratives on their own recovery. A change model was generated through iterative thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: Change is initiated when a recipient develops a connection to a narrator or to the events descripted in their narrative. Change is mediated by the recipient recognising experiences shared with the narrator, noticing the achievements or difficulties of the narrator, learning how recovery happens, or experiencing emotional release. Helpful outcomes of receiving recovery narratives are connectedness, validation, hope, empowerment, appreciation, reference shift and stigma reduction. Harmful outcomes are a sense of inadequacy, disconnection, pessimism and burden. Impact is positively moderated by the perceived authenticity of the narrative, and can be reduced if the recipient is experiencing a crisis. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that incorporate the use of recovery narratives, such as peer support, anti-stigma campaigns and bibliotherapy, can use the change model to maximise benefit and minimise harms from narratives. Interventions should incorporate a diverse range of narratives available through different mediums to enable a range of recipients to connect with and benefit from this material. Service providers using recovery narratives should preserve authenticity so as to maximise impact, for example by avoiding excessive editing
Planning for tranquil spaces in rural destinations through mixed methods research
There is a view that applied researchers produce more relevant findings for practitioners in the tourism industry if they use quantitative methods. This paper claims that findings relevant to industry can be produced through the use of qualitative methods of data collection, and indeed a unique perspective is offered by qualitative research that a quantitative approach may not produce. Furthermore, a mixed methods approach to research combines the advantages offered by both qualitative and quantitative research, and is advocated as an appropriate way forward when both types of data are needed. Using a unique mixed-methods study of the meaning of tranquillity to visitors to and authorities and residents in Dorset, Southern England, this paper illustrates the value of both qualitative and quantitative data to tourism planners. The study reveals that tranquillity was most commonly aligned to the natural environment whereas non-tranquillity concerned both sounds and sights of manmade origin
Developing new ways of measuring the quality and impact of ambulance service care: the PhOEBE mixed-methods research programme
Background
Ambulance service quality measures have focused on response times and a small number of emergency conditions, such as cardiac arrest. These quality measures do not reflect the care for the wide range of problems that ambulance services respond to and the Prehospital Outcomes for Evidence Based Evaluation (PhOEBE) programme sought to address this.
Objectives
The aim was to develop new ways of measuring the impact of ambulance service care by reviewing and synthesising literature on prehospital ambulance outcome measures and using consensus methods to identify measures for further development; creating a data set linking routinely collected ambulance service, hospital and mortality data; and using the linked data to explore the development of case-mix adjustment models to assess differences or changes in processes and outcomes resulting from ambulance service care.
Design
A mixed-methods study using a systematic review and synthesis of performance and outcome measures reported in policy and research literature; qualitative interviews with ambulance service users; a three-stage consensus process to identify candidate indicators; the creation of a data set linking ambulance, hospital and mortality data; and statistical modelling of the linked data set to produce novel case-mix adjustment measures of ambulance service quality.
Setting
East Midlands and Yorkshire, England.
Participants
Ambulance services, patients, public, emergency care clinical academics, commissioners and policy-makers between 2011 and 2015.
Interventions
None.
Main outcome measures
Ambulance performance and quality measures.
Data sources
Ambulance call-and-dispatch and electronic patient report forms, Hospital Episode Statistics, accident and emergency and inpatient data, and Office for National Statistics mortality data.
Results
Seventy-two candidate measures were generated from systematic reviews in four categories: (1) ambulance service operations (n = 14), (2) clinical management of patients (n = 20), (3) impact of care on patients (n = 9) and (4) time measures (n = 29). The most common operations measures were call triage accuracy; clinical management was adherence to care protocols, and for patient outcome it was survival measures. Excluding time measures, nine measures were highly prioritised by participants taking part in the consensus event, including measures relating to pain, patient experience, accuracy of dispatch decisions and patient safety. Twenty experts participated in two Delphi rounds to refine and prioritise measures and 20 measures scored ≥ 8/9 points, which indicated good consensus. Eighteen patient and public representatives attending a consensus workshop identified six measures as important: time to definitive care, response time, reduction in pain score, calls correctly prioritised to appropriate levels of response, proportion of patients with a specific condition who are treated in accordance with established guidelines, and survival to hospital discharge for treatable emergency conditions. From this we developed six new potential indicators using the linked data set, of which five were constructed using case-mix-adjusted predictive models: (1) mean change in pain score; (2) proportion of serious emergency conditions correctly identified at the time of the 999 call; (3) response time (unadjusted); (4) proportion of decisions to leave a patient at scene that were potentially inappropriate; (5) proportion of patients transported to the emergency department by 999 emergency ambulance who did not require treatment or investigation(s); and (6) proportion of ambulance patients with a serious emergency condition who survive to admission, and to 7 days post admission. Two indicators (pain score and response times) did not need case-mix adjustment. Among the four adjusted indicators, we found that accuracy of call triage was 61%, rate of potentially inappropriate decisions to leave at home was 5–10%, unnecessary transport to hospital was 1.7–19.2% and survival to hospital admission was 89.5–96.4% depending on Clinical Commissioning Group area. We were unable to complete a fourth objective to test the indicators in use because of delays in obtaining data. An economic analysis using indicators (4) and (5) showed that incorrect decisions resulted in higher costs.
Limitations
Creation of a linked data set was complex and time-consuming and data quality was variable. Construction of the indicators was also complex and revealed the effects of other services on outcome, which limits comparisons between services.
Conclusions
We identified and prioritised, through consensus processes, a set of potential ambulance service quality measures that reflected preferences of services and users. Together, these encompass a broad range of domains relevant to the population using the emergency ambulance service. The quality measures can be used to compare ambulance services or regions or measure performance over time if there are improvements in mechanisms for linking data across services.
Future work
The new measures can be used to assess different dimensions of ambulance service delivery but current data challenges prohibit routine use. There are opportunities to improve data linkage processes and to further develop, validate and simplify these measures.
Funding
The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme
An evidence-based approach to the use of telehealth in long-term health conditions: development of an intervention and evaluation through pragmatic randomised controlled trials in patients with depression or raised cardiovascular risk
Background: Health services internationally are exploring the potential of telehealth to support the
management of the growing number of people with long-term conditions (LTCs).
Aim: To develop, implement and evaluate new care programmes for patients with LTCs, focusing on
two common LTCs as exemplars: depression or high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.
Methods
Development: We synthesised quantitative and qualitative evidence on the effectiveness of telehealth for
LTCs, conducted a qualitative study based on interviews with patients and staff and undertook a postal
survey to explore which patients are interested in different forms of telehealth. Based on these studies we developed a conceptual model [TElehealth in CHronic disease (TECH) model] as a framework for the
development and evaluation of the Healthlines Service for patients with LTCs.
Implementation: The Healthlines Service consisted of regular telephone calls to participants from health
information advisors, supporting them to make behaviour change and to use tailored online resources.
Advisors sought to optimise participants’ medication and to improve adherence.
Evaluation: The Healthlines Service was evaluated with linked pragmatic randomised controlled trials
comparing the Healthlines Service plus usual care with usual care alone, with nested process and economic
evaluations. Participants were adults with depression or raised CVD risk recruited from 43 general practices
in three areas of England. The primary outcome was response to treatment and the secondary outcomes
included anxiety (depression trial), individual risk factors (CVD risk trial), self-management skills, medication
adherence, perceptions of support, access to health care and satisfaction with treatment.
Trial results
Depression trial: In total, 609 participants were randomised and the retention rate was 86%. Response
to treatment [Patient Health Questionnaire 9-items (PHQ-9) reduction of ≥ 5 points and score of < 10 after
4 months] was higher in the intervention group (27%, 68/255) than in the control group (19%, 50/270)
[odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 2.5; p = 0.02]. Anxiety also improved. Intervention
participants reported better access to health support, greater satisfaction with treatment and small
improvements in self-management, but not improved medication adherence.
CVD risk trial: In total, 641 participants were randomised and the retention rate was 91%. Response to
treatment (maintenance of/reduction in QRISK®2 score after 12 months) was higher in the intervention
group (50%, 148/295) than in the control group (43%, 124/291), which does not exclude a null effect
(odds ratio 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.9; p = 0.08). The intervention was associated with small improvements in
blood pressure and weight, but not smoking or cholesterol. Intervention participants were more likely to
adhere to medication, reported better access to health support and greater satisfaction with treatment,
but few improvements in self-management.
The Healthlines Service was likely to be cost-effective for CVD risk, particularly if the benefits are sustained,
but not for depression. The intervention was implemented largely as planned, although initial delays and
later disruption to delivery because of the closure of NHS Direct may have adversely affected participant
engagement.
Conclusion: The Healthlines Service, designed using an evidence-based conceptual model, provided modest health benefits and participants valued the better access to care and extra support provided.
This service was cost-effective for CVD risk but not depression. These findings of small benefits at extra
cost are consistent with previous pragmatic research on the implementation of comprehensive telehealth
programmes for LTCs
Recommended from our members
Cross-national comparative mixed-methods case study of recovery-focused mental health care planning and co-ordination: Collaborative Care Planning Project (COCAPP)
The care programme approach in England and care and treatment planning in Wales are systems designed to provide mental health service users with a named care co-ordinator who meets regularly with the service user, oversees their care and develops a written plan to guide the care that they receive. These approaches are meant to help people towards recovery. In this study, we investigated whether care is organised to help people’s recovery and whether this is done in a personalised way. We identified six NHS trust/health board sites in England and Wales, and surveyed staff and service users to measure views on recovery, empowerment and therapeutic relationships. At each site we also interviewed managers, clinical staff care co-ordinators, service users and carers about their experiences of care planning. We found that good relationships are important for service users, carers and care co-ordinators in care planning and supporting recovery. Experiences of care planning and co-ordination varied within all sites. People do not always feel involved in their own care. The understanding of recovery and personalisation varied among the service users and staff interviewed. Workers say that there is too much paperwork and, like service users, they rarely look at care plans once written. Staff focus on risk but this does not often appear to be discussed with people using services, which may be problematic. We recommend research to investigate new ways of working and training to increase staff contact time with service users and carers and to improve a focus on recovery