Provider diversity in the English NHS: a study of recent developments in four local health economies

Objectives: The overall objective of the research was to assess the impact of provider diversity on quality and innovation in the English NHS. The aims were to map the extent of diverse provider activity, identify the differences in performance between Third Sector Organisations (TSOs), for-profit private enterprises, and incumbent organisations within the NHS, and the factors that affect the entry and growth of new private and TSOs. Methods: Case studies of four Local Health Economies (LHEs). Data included: semi-structured interviews with 48 managerial and clinical staff from NHS organizations and providers from the private and Third Sector; some documentary evidence; a focus group with service users; and routine data from the Care Quality Commission and Companies House. Data collection was mainly between November 2008 and November 2009. Results: Involvement of diverse providers in the NHS is limited. Commissioners’ local strategies influence degrees of diversity. Barriers to the entry for TSOs include lack of economies of scale in the bidding process. Private providers have greater concern to improve patient pathways and patient experience, whereas TSOs deliver quality improvements by using a more holistic approach and a greater degree of community involvement. Entry of new providers drives NHS Trusts to respond by making improvements. Information sharing diminishes as competition intensifies. Conclusions: There is scope to increase the participation of diverse providers in the NHS, but care must be taken not to damage public accountability, overall productivity, equity and NHS providers (especially acute hospitals, which are likely to remain in the NHS) in the process

Patient and nurse preferences for nurse handover - using preferences to inform policy: a discrete choice experiment protocol

Introduction Nursing bedside handover in hospital has been identified as an opportunity to involve patients and promote patient-centred care. It is important to consider the preferences of both patients and nurses when implementing bedside handover to maximise the successful uptake of this policy. We outline a study which aims to (1) identify, compare and contrast the preferences for various aspects of handover common to nurses and patients while accounting for other factors, such as the time constraints of nurses that may influence these preferences.; (2) identify opportunities for nurses to better involve patients in bedside handover and (3) identify patient and nurse preferences that may challenge the full implementation of bedside handover in the acute medical setting. Methods and analysis We outline the protocol for a discrete choice experiment (DCE) which uses a survey design common to both patients and nurses. We describe the qualitative and pilot work undertaken to design the DCE. We use a D-efficient design which is informed by prior coefficients collected during the pilot phase. We also discuss the face-to-face administration of this survey in a population of acutely unwell, hospitalised patients and describe how data collection challenges have been informed by our pilot phase. Mixed multinomial logit regression analysis will be used to estimate the final results. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by a university ethics committee as well as two participating hospital ethics committees. Results will be used within a knowledge translation framework to inform any strategies that can be used by nursing staff to improve the uptake of bedside handover. Results will also be disseminated via peer-reviewed journal articles and will be presented at national and international conferences

Manual restraint of adult psychiatric inpatients: a literature review

Relatively little is known about the prevalence of manual restraint to manage violent or challenging behaviour in hospital psychiatric services or the circumstances of its use. This review identified 45 empirical studies of manual restraint of adult psychiatric inpatients, mostly from the UK. On average, up to five episodes per month of manual restraint might be expected on an average 20 bed ward. Episodes last around ten minutes, with about half involving the restraint of patients on the floor, usually in the prone position. Manually restrained patients tend to be younger, male and detained under mental health legislation. Staff value restraint related training but its impact on nursing practice has not been evaluated. Research has tended to focus on official reports of violent incidents rather than manual restraint per se. Larger and more complex studies are needed to examine how manual restraint is used in response to different types of incident and in different service settings

Environmental risk factors in hospital suicide.

Suicide of hospitalized patients is the most common sentinel event reviewed by The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Shorter lengths of stay, sicker patients, and higher patient to staff ratios challenge the ability of the hospital to maintain safety. Risk factors associated with the physical environment of the inpatient psychiatric unit, cited as the most common root cause of inpatient suicide, may be neglected because evaluation of these factors is generally not included in medical education and training. Minimization of fixtures that can facilitate strangulation and other high risk aspects within the hospital environment is an important element in the prevention of suicide on psychiatric units

Parent escalation of care for the deteriorating child in hospital: A health-care improvement study

Objective: To evaluate the implementation of an intervention for parents to escalate care if concerned about their child's clinical condition. Design: Mixed-methods health-care improvement approach guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework. Methods: Implementation of the ‘Calling for Help’ (C4H) intervention was informed by previously identified barriers and facilitators. Evaluation involved audit, review of clinical deterioration incidents, interviews and focus groups. Setting: Australian specialist paediatric hospital. Participants: Convenience sample of 75 parents from inpatient areas during the audit, interviews with ten parents who had expressed concern about their child's clinical condition; five focus groups with 35 ward nurses. Main outcome measures: Parent awareness and utilization of C4H, parent and nurse views of factors influencing implementation. Results: Parent awareness of C4H improved to 35% (25/75). Parent concern was documented prior to 21/174 (12%) clinical deterioration events. All interviewed parents and nurses who participated in focus groups were positive about C4H. Parents preferred to be informed about C4H by nurses, but nurses described this as time-consuming and selectively chose parents who they believed would benefit most. Parents and nurses described frustrations with and trepidation in escalating care. Nurses had used C4H to expedite urgent medical review. Conclusions: There was an improvement in the level of parent awareness of C4H, which was viewed positively by parents and nurses alike. To achieve a high level of parent awareness in a sustainable way, a multifaceted approach is required. Further strategies will be required for parents to feel confident enough to use C4H and to address interprofessional communication barriers

The National Adult Inpatient Survey conducted in the English National Health Service from 2002 to 2009: how have the data been used and what do we know as a result?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>When it was initiated in 2001, England's national patient survey programme was one of the first in the world and has now been widely emulated in other healthcare systems. The aim of the survey programme was to make the National Health Service (NHS) more "patient centred" and more responsive to patient feedback. The national inpatient survey has now been running in England annually since 2002 gathering data from over 600,000 patients. The aim of this study is to investigate how the data have been used and to summarise what has been learned about patients' evaluation of care as a result.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Two independent researchers systematically gathered all research that included analyses of the English national adult inpatient survey data. Journals, databases and relevant websites were searched. Publications prior to 2002 were excluded. Articles were also identified following consultation with experts. All documents were then critically appraised by two co-authors both of whom have a background in statistical analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that the majority of the studies identified were reports produced by organisations contracted to gather the data or co-ordinate the data collection and used mainly descriptive statistics. A few articles used the survey data for evidence based reporting or linked the survey to other healthcare data. The patient's socio-demographic characteristics appeared to influence their evaluation of their care but characteristics of the workforce and the. At a national level, the results of the survey have been remarkably stable over time. Only in those areas where there have been co-ordinated government-led campaigns, targets and incentives, have improvements been shown. The main findings of the review are that while the survey data have been used for different purposes they seem to have incited little academic interest.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The national inpatient survey has been a useful resource for many authors and organisations but the full potential inherent in this large, longitudinal publicly available dataset about patients' experiences has not as yet been fully exploited.</p> <p>This review suggests that the presence of survey results alone is not enough to improve patients' experiences and further research is required to understand whether and how the survey can be best used to improve standards of care in the NHS.</p

The meaning and importance of dignified care: Findings from a survey of health and social care professionals

This article is available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. Copyright © 2013 Cairns et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.There are well established national and local policies championing the need to provide dignity in care for older people. We have evidence as to what older people and their relatives understand by the term 'dignified care' but less insight into the perspectives of staff regarding their understanding of this key policy objective.This research was supported by the Dunhill Medical Trust [grant number: R93/1108]

Modeling the Impact of Medicare Advantage Payment Cuts on Ambulatory Care Sensitive and Elective Hospitalizations

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/86929/1/j.1475-6773.2011.01275.x.pd

The “Spirit of New Orleans” : translating a model of intervention with maltreated children and their families for the Glasgow context

Peer reviewedPreprin

Patient and nurse preferences for implementation of bedside handover: Do they agree? Findings from a discrete choice experiment

Objective: To describe and compare patients' and nurses' preferences for the implementation of bedside handover. Design: Discrete choice experiment describing handover choices using six characteristics: whether the patient is invited to participate; whether a family member/carer/friend is invited; the number of nurses present; the level of patient involvement; the information content; and privacy. Setting: Two Australian hospitals. Participants: Adult patients (n=401) and nurses (n=200) recruited from medical wards. Main outcome measures: Mean importance scores for handover characteristics estimated using mixed multinomial logit regression of the choice data. Results: Both patient and nurse participants preferred handover at the bedside rather than elsewhere (P<.05). Being invited to participate, supporting strong two-way communication, having a family member/carer/friend present and having two nurses rather than the nursing team present were most important for patients. Patients being invited to participate and supporting strong two-way communication were most important for nurses. However, contrary to patient preferences, having a family member/carer/friend present was not considered important by nurses. Further, while patients expressed a weak preference to have sensitive information handed over quietly at the bedside, nurses expressed a relatively strong preference for handover of sensitive information verbally away from the bedside. Conclusions: All participants strongly support handover at the bedside and want patients to participate although patient and nurse preferences for various aspects of bedside handover differ. An understanding of these preferences is expected to support recommendations for improving the patient hospital experience and the consistent implementation of bedside handover as a safety initiative