24 research outputs found

    The Essence of Functioning in Sleep Disorders

    Get PDF
    This doctoral project seeks to answer the question about the essence of functioning, disability and health in the lived experience of persons with any kind of primary sleep disorder. Its overall objective is the development of a first version of Core Sets of categories of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in an evidence- and consensus-based process. To this end, four separate studies exploring different perspectives (researcher, clinical, patient, health professional) have been conducted and their results provided the evidence basis for selecting the relevant categories for the ICF Core Sets for Sleep Disorders during an international consensus conference. The doctoral thesis first-authored by the doctoral candidate therefore consists of five separate publications (1 Systematic Review, 2 Patient Studies, 1 Expert Survey, 1 Conference Results) that describe the different steps in the development process

    A Systematic Review of Functioning in Vocational Rehabilitation Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

    Get PDF
    Background: Vocational rehabilitation (VR) is aimed at engaging or re-engaging individuals with work participation and employment. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) by the World Health Organization can be operationalized in the context of VR. The objective of this study is to review the literature to identify outcomes or measures being used in VR using a systematic review methodology and link those measures to the ICF. Methods: We applied a structured search strategy using multiple databases. Items or constructs of the measures or outcomes identified were linked to the ICF by two trained individuals. Results: We have identified 648 measures which contained 10,582 concepts that were linked to the ICF which resulted in 87 second-level ICF categories. Out of the 87 categories, 31 (35.6%) were related to body functions, 43 (49.4%) were related to activities and participation, and 13 (14.9%) were related to environmental factors. No category was related to body structures. Conclusions: Our review found great diversity in the ICF contents of the measures used in different VR settings and study populations, which indicates the complexity of VR. This systematic review has provided a list of ICF categories which could be considered towards a successful V

    Social prescribing: where is the evidence? Commissioned editorial

    Get PDF
    Social prescribing is the topic of the moment. Many national organisations and individuals from policy, practice, and academia (such as NHS England, the RCGP, the Mayor of London, and National Institute for Health Research) are rightly advocating social prescriptions as an important way to expand the options available for GPs and other community-based practitioners to provide individualised care for people’s physical and mental health through social interventions. No robust figures exist but it is thought that around 20% of patients consult their GP for primarily social issues, given this and the driving forces of an ageing population, increased complex health and social needs, and increasing demand on services, social prescribing is rapidly gaining popularity.As a concept and a model for delivering health and social interventions, social prescribing has proliferated without a concomitant evidence base.1 This is partly due to resource limitations on evaluators and partly due to difficulties in conceptualising what social prescribing is and what good evidence for a complex service might look like. Here, we briefly outline different models of social prescribing, the current evidence base and its limitations, explore problems relating to what constitutes good evidence, and discuss some potential ways forward.An immediate difficulty is the range of activity that the term ‘social prescribing’ embraces. Such heterogeneity is a function of social prescribing being the demand-driven formalisation of referrals to existing community services and organisations, which is necessarily locally different. More generally, at one extreme there are narrow interventions that focus on one clinical area and aim to prevent or reduce progression to chronic disease. Such interventions tend to include targeted life-style interventions (for example physical activity, healthy eating or cooking), medicines management or group mentoring, and are typically accessed through the healthcare system. At the other extreme, a large number of schemes are

    Exploring perceived barriers, drivers, impacts and the need for evaluation of public involvement in health and social care research: a modified Delphi study

    Get PDF
    Mixed method, three-phase, modified Delphi technique, conducted as part of a larger MRC multiphase project: http://www.piiaf.org.ukThis is a freely-available open access publication. Please cite the published version which is available via the DOI link in this recordAbstract Objective To explore areas of consensus and conflict in relation to perceived public involvement (PI) barriers and drivers, perceived impacts of PI and ways of evaluating PI approaches in health and social care research. Background Internationally and within the UK the recognition of potential benefits of PI in health and social care research is gathering momentum and PI is increasingly identified by organisations as a prerequisite for funding. However, there is relatively little examination of the impacts of PI and how those impacts might be measured. Design Mixed method, three-phase, modified Delphi technique, conducted as part of a larger MRC multiphase project. Sample Clinical and non-clinical academics, members of the public, research managers, commissioners and funders. Findings This study found high levels of consensus about the most important barriers and drivers to PI. There was acknowledgement that tokenism was common in relation to PI; and strong support for the view that demonstrating the impacts and value of PI was made more difficult by tokenistic practice. PI was seen as having intrinsic value; nonetheless, there was clear support for the importance of evaluating its impact. Research team cohesion and appropriate resources were considered essential to effective PI implementation. Panellists agreed that PI can be challenging, but can be facilitated by clear guidance, together with models of good practice and measurable standards. Conclusions This study is the first to present empirical evidence of the opinions voiced by key stakeholders on areas of consensus and conflict in relation to perceived PI barriers and drivers, perceived impacts of PI and the need to evaluate PI. As such it further contributes to debate around best practice in PI, the potential for tokenism and how best to evaluate the impacts of PI. These findings have been used in the development of the Public Involvement Impact Assessment Framework (PiiAF), an online resource which offers guidance to researchers and members of the public involved in the PI process.The study was supported by the Medical Research Council's Methodology Research Programme [G0902155/93948]

    ‘Mind the gaps’: the accessibility and implementation of an effective depression relapse prevention programme in UK NHS services: learning from mindfulness-based cognitive therapy through a mixed-methods study

    Get PDF
    Objectives Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an evidence-based approach for people at risk of depressive relapse to support their long-term recovery. However, despite its inclusion in guidelines, there is an ‘implementation cliff’. The study objective was to develop a better explanation of what facilitates MBCT implementation. Setting UK primary and secondary care mental health services. Design, participants and methods A national two-phase, multi-method qualitative study was conducted, which was conceptually underpinned by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework. Phase I involved interviews with stakeholders from 40 service providers about current provision of MBCT. Phase II involved 10 purposively sampled case studies to obtain a more detailed understanding of MBCT implementation. Data were analysed using adapted framework analysis, refined through stakeholder consultation. Results Access to MBCT is variable across the UK services. Where available, services have adapted MBCT to fit their context by integrating it into their care pathways. Evidence was often important to implementation but took different forms: the NICE depression guideline, audits, evaluations, first person accounts, experiential taster sessions and pilots. These were used to build a platform from which to develop MBCT services. The most important aspect of facilitation was the central role of the MBCT implementers. These were generally self-designated individuals who ‘championed’ grass-roots implementation. Our explanatory framework mapped out a prototypical implementation journey, often over many years with a balance of bottom-up and top-down factors influencing the fit of MBCT into service pathways. ‘Pivot points’ in the implementation journey provided windows of either challenge or opportunity. Conclusions This is one of the largest systematic studies of the implementation of a psychological therapy. While access to MBCT across the UK is improving, it remains patchy. The resultant explanatory framework about MBCT implementation provides a heuristic that informed an implementation resource

    Identification of Relevant ICF Categories in Vocational Rehabilitation: A Cross Sectional Study Evaluating the Clinical Perspective

    Get PDF
    Introduction Vocational rehabilitation (VR) emphasizes a need for medical support, rehabilitation and biopsychosocial approach to enable individuals to successfully participate in the workforce. Optimal rehabilitation management relies on an in-depth knowledge of the typical spectrum of problems encountered of patients in VR. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) is based on a universal conceptual model and provides a holistic view of functioning of the lived experience of people such as those undergoing VR. The objectives of this study are to describe the functioning and health of persons undergoing VR and to identify the most common problems around work and in VR using the ICF as the reference framework. Methods An empirical cross-sectional multicenter study was conducted using convenience sampling from March 2009 to March 2010. Data were collected using a Case Record Form rated by health professionals which was based on an extended version of the ICF Checklist containing 292 ICF categories and sociodemographic information. Results 152 patients with various health conditions participated. We identified categories from all four ICF components: 24 for body functions, six for body structures, 45 for activities and participation, and 25 for environmental factors. Conclusions Our study identified a multitude of ICF categories that describe functioning domains and which represent the complexity of VR. Such a comprehensive approach in assessing patients in VR may help to understand and customize the process of VR in the clinical setting and to enhance multidisciplinary communicatio
    corecore