15 research outputs found

    A qualitative formative evaluation of a patient facing intervention to improve care transitions for older people moving from hospital to home

    Get PDF
    Background The Partners at Care Transitions (PACTs) intervention was developed to support older people's involvement in hospital to improve outcomes at home. A booklet, question card, record sheet, induction leaflet, and patient‐friendly discharge letter support patients to be more involved in their health and wellbeing, medications, activities of daily living and post‐discharge care. We aimed to assess intervention acceptability, identify implementation tools, and further develop the intervention. Methods This was a qualitative formative evaluation involving three wards from one hospital. We recruited 25 patients aged 75 years and older. Ward staff supported intervention delivery. Data were collected in wards and patients' homes, through semi‐structured interviews, observation, and documentary analysis. Data were analysed inductively and iteratively with findings sorted according to the research aims. Results Patients and staff felt there was a need for, and understood the purpose of, the PACT intervention. Most patients read the booklet but other components were variably used. Implementation challenges included time, awareness, and balancing intervention benefits against risks. Changes to the intervention and implementation included clarifying the booklet's messages, simplifying the discharge letter to reduce staff burden, and using prompts and handouts to promote awareness. Conclusion Patients and staff felt there was a need for, and understood the purpose of, the PACT intervention. Most patients read the booklet but other components were variably used. Implementation challenges included time, awareness, and balancing intervention benefits against risks. Changes to the intervention and implementation included clarifying the booklet's messages, simplifying the discharge letter to reduce staff burden, and using prompts and handouts to promote awareness

    A qualitative formative evaluation of a patient facing intervention to improve care transitions for older people moving from hospital to home

    Get PDF
    Background The Partners at Care Transitions (PACTs) intervention was developed to support older people's involvement in hospital to improve outcomes at home. A booklet, question card, record sheet, induction leaflet, and patient-friendly discharge letter support patients to be more involved in their health and wellbeing, medications, activities of daily living and post-discharge care. We aimed to assess intervention acceptability, identify implementation tools, and further develop the intervention. Methods This was a qualitative formative evaluation involving three wards from one hospital. We recruited 25 patients aged 75 years and older. Ward staff supported intervention delivery. Data were collected in wards and patients' homes, through semi-structured interviews, observation, and documentary analysis. Data were analysed inductively and iteratively with findings sorted according to the research aims. Results Patients and staff felt there was a need for, and understood the purpose of, the PACT intervention. Most patients read the booklet but other components were variably used. Implementation challenges included time, awareness, and balancing intervention benefits against risks. Changes to the intervention and implementation included clarifying the booklet's messages, simplifying the discharge letter to reduce staff burden, and using prompts and handouts to promote awareness. Conclusion The PACT intervention offers a promising new way to improve care transitions for older people by supporting patient involvement in their care. After further development of the intervention and implementation package, it will undergo further testing. Patient or Public Contribution This study regularly consulted a panel representing the local patient community, who supported the development of this intervention and its implementation

    Doing involvement: A qualitative study exploring the 'work' of involvement enacted by older people and their carers during transition from hospital to home

    Get PDF
    CONTEXT: Being involved in one's care is prioritised within UK healthcare policy to improve care quality and safety. However, research suggests that many older people struggle with this. DESIGN: We present focused ethnographic research exploring older peoples' involvement in healthcare from hospital to home. RESULTS: We propose that being involved in care is a dynamic form of labour, which we call 'involvement work' (IW). In hospital, many patients 'entrust' IW to others; indeed, when desired, maintaining control, or being actively involved, was challenging. Patient and professionals' expectations, alongside hospital processes, promoted delegation; staff frequently did IW on patients' behalf. Many people wanted to resume IW postdischarge, but struggled because they were out of practice. DISCUSSION: Preference and capacity for involvement was dynamic, fluctuating over time, according to context and resource accessibility. The challenges of resuming IW were frequently underestimated by patients and care providers, increasing dependence on others post-discharge and negatively affecting peoples' sense and experience of (in)dependence. CONCLUSIONS: A balance needs to be struck between respecting peoples' desire/capacity for non-involvement in hospital while recognising that 'delegating' IW can be detrimental. Increasing involvement will require patient and staff roles to be reframed, though this must be done acknowledging the limits of patient desire, capability,and resources. Hospital work should be (re)organised to maximise involvement where possible and desired. PATIENT/PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Our Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement Panel contributed to research design, especially developing interview guides and patient-facing documentation. Patients were key participants within the study; it is their experiences represented

    Longer-term health and social care strategies for stroke survivors and their carers: the LoTS2Care research programme including cluster feasibility RCT

    Get PDF
    This is the final version. Available on open access from the NIHR Journals Library via the DOI in this recordData-sharing statement Workstreams in this programme grant involved qualitative methodologies; therefore, the data generated are not suitable for sharing beyond those contained in this report. Further information can be obtained from the corresponding author. As WS5 was a feasibility trial to inform a definitive trial, sharing of the trial data set is not anticipated; however, any data requests should be sent to the corresponding author and would be subject to review by a subgroup of the trial team, which will include the data guarantor, Professor Farrin. All data-sharing activities would require a data-sharing agreement.Abstract Background It is reported that the longer-term outcomes for stroke survivors are poor, with a range of unmet needs identified. Objectives The aims were to develop and test a longer-term stroke care strategy focused on improving the quality of life of stroke survivors and their carers by addressing unmet needs, and maintenance and enhancement of participation (i.e. involvement in life situations). Design Five overlapping workstreams were undertaken – (1) refinement of content by semistructured interviews with stroke survivors and their carers and by a review of the literature to inform content and delivery of the care strategy; (2) exploration of service models by national survey and focus groups with purposely selected services; (3) intervention development by interaction with a reference group of stroke survivors, carers, and health and social care professionals; (4) refinement and pilot implementation of the developed intervention in three stroke services (case studies); and (5) a cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial in 10 stroke services across England and Wales. Setting The intervention development work and feasibility trial were in stroke services (inclusive of primary, secondary, community and social care provision) across England and Wales. Participants Participants were stroke survivors resident in the community and their carers, and health and social care professionals in the included stroke services. Data sources Interviews with 28 stroke survivors and their carers at least 9 months post stroke ascertained their needs and the barriers to and facilitators of addressing those needs. Additional literature reviews identified 23 needs. No evidence-based interventions to address these needs were reported; self-management was highlighted as a possible delivery mechanism. In workstream 2, a national survey revealed that the most common model of stroke service provision was care up to 12 months post stroke, reported by 46 (40%) services. Thirty-five (30%) services provided care up to 6 months post stroke and 35 (30%) provided care beyond 12 months, thus identifying 6 months post stroke as an appropriate delivery point for a new intervention. Through focus groups in a range of services, stroke survivors’ perceived unmet needs and the barriers to and enablers of service provision were identified. Intervention Using information obtained in workstreams 1 and 2 and working closely with a stakeholder reference group, we developed an intervention based on the unmet needs prioritised by stroke survivors and their carers (workstream 3). In workstream 4, action groups (clinicians, stroke survivors and researchers) were established in three stroke services that led implementation in their service and contributed to the iterative refinement of the intervention, associated training programme and implementation materials. The intervention (called New Start) was delivered at 6 months post stroke. Key components were problem-solving self-management with survivors and carers, help with obtaining usable information, and helping survivors and their carers build sustainable, flexible support networks. Results A cluster randomised feasibility trial (workstream 5) was successfully implemented in 10 stroke services across England and Wales, with associated process and health economic evaluations. Five services were randomised to provide New Start, while five continued with usual care; 269 participants were recruited. Progression criteria – in terms of our pre-determined (red, amber, green) criteria for progress to a full trial: target stroke survivor recruitment rates were achieved, on average, across sites (24.1 per site over 6 months, green); 216 (80.3%) registered stroke survivors returned follow-up questionnaires at 9 months (84.1% in the intervention arm and 75.8% in the usual care arm, green); according to data reported by sites, overall, 95.2% of registered stroke survivors were offered at least one session of the intervention (green); all five intervention sites had at least two facilitators deemed competent, delivered the New Start intervention and provided it to stroke survivors (green). However, at some sites, there were concerns regarding the number of stroke survivors being offered, accepting and receiving the intervention. Only small differences in outcomes and costs were observed between the New Start and usual care groups, and considerable uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness remains. Conclusions We report a complex programme of work that has described the longer-term needs of stroke survivors and highlighted evidence and service gaps. Working closely with stroke survivors, an intervention was developed that has been refined in three services and feasibility tested in a cluster randomised controlled trial. Further refinement of the target population and optimisation of the intervention materials is required prior to a full randomised controlled trial evaluation. Future work Optimisation of the intervention, and clearer specification of recipients, are required prior to a full trial evaluation. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38920246.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR

    Conference Presentations: Tips, Tricks and Traps

    No full text
    Public speaking is frequently referred to “as the number one fear in life, well ahead of death” (Sawatzky, 2011, p. 37). Most agree that public speaking is daunting. However, in healthcare, sharing research and other initiatives is crucial, and public speaking is central to the dissemination of this new knowledge. Conferences in particular provide a great opportunity for sharing insights, and networking with our professional peers (Sawatzky, 2011). In this paper we discuss how to best navigate and use conferences to gain maximum benefit and exposure for your research activities including the pitfalls and grey areas around presenting research
    corecore