Exploring decision making in intellectual disability nursing practice : a qualitative study

Due to the dearth of relevant research, intellectual disability nurses may have difficulty identifying sources of evidence on which they can base their clinical decisions. The aim of the present research was to explore how intellectual disability nurses make decisions and how their decisions are influenced by evidence. The method was guided by interpretative phenomenology and the analysis adopted an idiographic approach. Twelve National Health Service intellectual disability nurses in Wales participated in semi-structured interviews. Four key themes were identified: getting to know the person; working as a team; evidence to support decision making; and understanding of evidence-based practice. In the context of the myriad of other professionals involved in caregiving, the nurses conveyed a commitment towards ensuring that the person with intellectual disability is at the centre of decision making. Although using empirical evidence to support practice was acknowledged, these nurses considered person centred decision making to be paramount

Investigating preferences for support with life after stroke: a discrete choice experiment

Background There is little evidence of service user preferences to guide the commissioning and improvement of services that support life after stroke. We report the first investigation of patients’ and family carers’ preferences for community services after stroke using a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Methods Two workshops with patients and family carers (n = 8) explored stroke experiences, identifying attributes important in shaping views about service design, and piloted data collection strategies. Attributes were group versus individual support; service provider; additional support for social and leisure activities; and the total time required to access services. Patients and family carers were recruited six months post stroke-onset (mean 331 days) from four stroke services, and invited to participate in the DCE. Patients’ general health (EQ5D) and functional dependence (Barthel Index) were also assessed. Of 474 eligible patients, 144 (30%) expressed an interest in the study, and 80 (56%) of these completed the survey questionnaire. 34 of 74 (46%) family carers recruited through patients completed the DCE. Results All four attributes were significant in shaping patients preferences for stroke support service delivery (p < 0.05), confirming the interpretation of workshop findings. Patients prefer help and support for emotional needs, communication problems and physical difficulties to be provided on an individual basis; and to be offered additional social and leisure activities that they are able to attend on their own. Patients would appear to prefer that voluntary organisations do not provide these services, although this may be linked to lack of experience of these services. Family carers would prefer help and support in their caring role on a one-to-one basis. Whilst health related quality of life is associated with preference for format of service, results were relatively consistent across sub-groups, with the exception of time since stroke, where social and leisure activities had a greater impact on preferences of established service users. Conclusions The data provide unique insights into how preferences for community services that support life after stroke are shaped. This information can be used to inform both service re-design, and barriers to implementation that will need to be accounted for in policy shifts towards a more mixed economy of service provision