Following the Francis report: investigating patient experience of mental health in-patient care

BACKGROUND: The Francis report highlights perceptions of care that are affected by different factors including ward structures. AIMS: To assess patient and staff perceptions of psychiatric in-patient wards over time. METHOD: Patient and staff perceptions of in-patient psychiatric wards were assessed over 18 months. We also investigated whether the type of ward or service structure affected these perceptions. We included triage and routine care. The goal was to include at least 50% of eligible patients and staff. RESULTS: The most dramatic change was a significant deterioration in all experiences over the courseof the study. Systems of care or specific wards did not affect patient experience but staff were more dissatisfied in the triage system. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of deterioration in perceptions of the therapeutic in-patient environment that has been captured in a rigorous way. It may reflect contemporaneous experiences across the National Health Service of budget reductions and increased throughput. The ward systems we investigated did not improve patient experience and triage may have been detrimental to staff

Clinical- and cost-effectiveness of a nurse led self-management intervention to reduce emergency visits by people with epilepsy

People with chronic epilepsy (PWE) often make costly, and clinically unnecessary emergency department (ED) visits. Some do it frequently. No studies have examined interventions to reduce them. An intervention delivered by an epilepsy nurse specialist (ENS) might reduce visits. The rationale is it may optimize patients' self-management skills and knowledge of appropriate ED use. We examined such an intervention's clinical- and cost-effectiveness. Eighty-five adults with epilepsy were recruited from three London EDs with similar catchment populations. Forty-one PWE recruited from two EDs received treatment-as-usual (TAU) and formed the comparison group. The remaining 44 PWE were recruited from the ED of a hospital that had implemented a new ENS service for PWE attending ED. These participants formed the intervention group. They were offered 2 one-to-one sessions with an ENS, plus TAU. Participants completed questionnaires on health service use and psychosocial well-being at baseline, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Covariates were identified and adjustments made. Sixty-nine (81%) participants were retained at follow-up. No significant effect of the intervention on ED visits at 12 months or on other outcomes was found. However, due to less time as inpatients, the average service cost for intervention participants over follow-up was less than for TAU participants' (adjusted difference £558, 95% CI, −£2409, £648). Covariates most predictive of subsequent ED visits were patients' baseline feelings of stigmatization due to epilepsy and low confidence in managing epilepsy. The intervention did not lead to a reduction in ED use, but did not cost more, partly because those receiving the intervention had shorter hospital admissions. Our findings on long-term ED predictors clarifies what causes ED use, and suggests that future interventions might focus more on patients' perceptions of stigma and on their confidence in managing epilepsy. If addressed, ED visits might be reduced and efficiency-savings generated

Graded Exercise Therapy Guided Self-Help Trial for Patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (GETSET): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial and Interview Study

Background: Chronic fatigue syndrome, also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME), is characterized by chronic disabling fatigue and other symptoms, which are not explained by an alternative diagnosis. Previous trials have suggested that graded exercise therapy (GET) is an effective and safe treatment. GET itself is therapist-intensive with limited availability. Objective: While guided self-help based on cognitive behavior therapy appears helpful to patients, Guided graded Exercise Self-help (GES) is yet to be tested. Methods: This pragmatic randomized controlled trial is set within 2 specialist CFS/ME services in the South of England. Adults attending secondary care clinics with National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)-defined CFS/ME (N=218) will be randomly allocated to specialist medical care (SMC) or SMC plus GES while on a waiting list for therapist-delivered rehabilitation. GES will consist of a structured booklet describing a 6-step graded exercise program, supported by up to 4 face-to-face/telephone/Skype™ consultations with a GES-trained physiotherapist (no more than 90 minutes in total) over 8 weeks. The primary outcomes at 12-weeks after randomization will be physical function (SF-36 physical functioning subscale) and fatigue (Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes will include healthcare costs, adverse outcomes, and self-rated global impression change scores. We will follow up all participants until 1 year after randomization. We will also undertake qualitative interviews of a sample of participants who received GES, looking at perceptions and experiences of those who improved and worsened. Results: The project was funded in 2011 and enrolment was completed in December 2014, with follow-up completed in March 2016. Data analysis is currently underway and the first results are expected to be submitted soon. Conclusions: This study will indicate whether adding GES to SMC will benefit patients who often spend many months waiting for rehabilitative therapy with little or no improvement being made during that time. The study will indicate whether this type of guided self-management is cost-effective and safe. If this trial shows GES to be acceptable, safe, and comparatively effective, the GES booklet could be made available on the Internet as a practitioner and therapist resource for clinics to recommend, with the caveat that patients also be supported with guidance from a trained physiotherapist. The pragmatic approach in this trial means that GES findings will be generalizable to usual National Health Service (NHS) practice

Changing nurses' views of the therapeutic environment: randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Although patients value evidence-based therapeutic activities, little is known about nurses' perceptions.AimsTo investigate whether implementing an activities training programme would positively alter staff perceptions of the ward or be detrimental through the increased workload (trial registration: ISRCTN 06545047). METHOD: We conducted a stepped wedge cluster randomised trial involving 16 wards with psychology-led nurse training as the intervention. The main outcome was a staff self-report measure of perceptions of the ward (VOTE) and secondary outcomes measuring potential deterioration were the Index of Work Satisfaction (IWS) and the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Data were analysed using mixed-effects regression models, with repeated assessments from staff over time. RESULTS: There were 1075 valid outcome measurements from 539 nursing staff. VOTE scores did not change over time (standardised effect size 0.04, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.18, P = 0.54), neither did IWS or MBI scores (IWS, standardised effect size 0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.16, P = 0.74; MBI standardised effect size -0.09, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.06, P = 0.24). There was a mean increase of 1.5 activities per ward (95% CI -0.4 to 3.4, P = 0.12) and on average 6.3 more patients attended groups (95% CI -4.1 to 16.6, P = 0.23) following training. Staff feedback on training was positive. CONCLUSIONS: Our training programme did not change nurses' perceptions of the ward, job satisfaction or burnout. During the study period many service changes occurred, most having a negative impact through increased pressure on staffing, patient mix and management so it is perhaps unsurprising that we found no benefits or reduction in staff skill.Declaration of interestNone

Effectiveness of structured patient-clinician communication with a solution focused approach (DIALOG+) in community treatment of patients with psychosis - a cluster randomised controlled trial

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Cost of post-deployment screening for mental illness in the UK military: findings from a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background: Little is known about the economic impact of military mental health screening. Aims: To investigate (1) whether post-deployment screening of military personnel affects use and cost of services and (2) the impact of psychiatric morbidity on costs. Methods: Participants were recruited from UK Royal Marine and Army platoons and randomised to an intervention group (which received tailored advice predicated upon mental health status) or a control group (which received general advice following assessment of mental health status). The intervention costs were calculated while service use and associated costs were assessed at 12 month follow-up. Results: Data were available for 6,323 participants. Mean screening cost was £34. Service costs were slightly higher in the control group compared to the intervention group (£1,197 vs. £1,147) which was not statistically significant (bootstrapped 95% CI, -£363 to £434. In both groups, screening and control, costs were significantly higher for those who screened positive for mental health problems. Conclusion: Costs were not affected by screening. In countries which have already implemented post-deployment screening, the political cost of disinvestment needs careful consideration. Those who develop psychiatric morbidity have substantially higher care costs than those who do not