Support workers in intermediate care

Despite the proliferation of support worker roles in the UK, little is known about their actual numbers, employment conditions or levels of training. Intermediate care services appear to be an important employer of support workers, but the diversity of intermediate care services makes the task of understanding support worker roles even more complex. This paper presents data from 33 services which were involved in an NHS Modernisation Agency’s Changing Workforce Programme project, the Accelerated Development Programme for Support Workers in Intermediate Care in England. Within this project, the main employers of support workers were primary care trusts and/or social services. Participating intermediate care teams were involved in admission avoidance, assisted discharge and re-ablement, or combinations of these services, and the majority of care was provided in the patient’s own home. The 33 services employed 794 support workers and 368 professionally qualified staff. The mean ratio of professionally qualified staff to support workers was 0.95 (range = 0–4.9, SD = 1.05). Support worker roles included multidisciplinary working, meeting rehabilitation needs, providing personal care and enablement. Team leaders included nurses, social workers, physiotherapists, professional managers, home carers and support workers. The most commonly reported sources of support worker training were National Vocational Qualifications and in-house training. In 80% of the services, at least half of the support workers had a qualification. Three models of supervision emerged across the services: the allocation of a mentor; team supervision; and formal and informal line management. These findings illustrate the diversity of employment of support workers in intermediate care. The variations in training, supervision and skill mix have implications for clinical governance and support worker regulation. The employment of support worker staff jointly across health and social care raises cross-boundary issues around employment contracts and pay

Multi-center evaluation of baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (NLR) ratio as an independent predictor of mortality and clinical risk stratifier in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosisResearch in context

Summary: Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive, fatal disorder with a variable disease trajectory. The aim of this study was to assess the potential of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) to predict outcomes in IPF. Methods: We adopted a two-stage discovery (n = 71) and validation (n = 134) design using patients from the UCL partners (UCLp) cohort. We then combined discovery and validation cohorts and included an additional 794 people with IPF, using real-life data from 5 other UK centers, to give a combined cohort of 999 patients. Data were collected from patients presenting over a 13-year period (2006–2019) with mean follow up of 3.7 years (censoring: 2018–2020). Findings: In the discovery analysis, we showed that high values of NLR (>/ = 2.9 vs < 2.9) were associated with increased risk of mortality in IPF (HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.09–3.81, n = 71, p = 0.025). This was confirmed in the validation (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.15–3.18, n = 134, p = 0.0114) and combined cohorts (HR 1.65, n = 999, 95% CI 1.39–1.95; p < 0·0001). NLR correlated with GAP stage and GAP index (p < 0.0001). Stratifying patients by NLR category (low/high) showed significant differences in survival for GAP stage 2 (p < 0.0001), however not for GAP stage 1 or 3. In a multivariate analysis, a high NLR was an independent predictor of mortality/progression after adjustment for individual GAP components and steroid/anti-fibrotic use (p < 0·03). Furthermore, incorporation of baseline NLR in a modified GAP-stage/index, GAP–index/stage-plus, refined prognostic ability as measured by concordance (C)-index. Interpretation: We have identified NLR as a widely available test that significantly correlates with lung function, can predict outcomes in IPF and refines cohort staging with GAP. NLR may allow timely prioritisation of at-risk patients, even in the absence of lung function. Funding: Breathing Matters, GSK, CF Trust, BLF-Asthma, MRC, NIHR Alpha-1 Foundation

Dynamic professional boundaries in the healthcare workforce

The healthcare professions have never been static in terms of their own disciplinary boundaries, nor in their role or status in society. Healthcare provision has been defined by changing societal expectations and beliefs, new ways of perceiving health and illness, the introduction of a range of technologies and, more recently, the formal recognition of particular groups through the introduction of education and regulation. It has also been shaped by both interprofessional and profession-state relationships forged over time. A number of factors have converged that place new pressures on workforce boundaries, including an unmet demand for some healthcare services; neo-liberal management philosophies and a greater emphasis on consumer preferences than professional-led services. To date, however, there has been little analysis of the evolution of the workforce as a whole. The discussion of workforce change that has taken place has largely been from the perspective of individual disciplines. Yet the dynamic boundaries of each discipline mean that there is an interrelationship between the components of the workforce that cannot be ignored. The purpose of this paper is to describe four directions in which the existing workforce can change: diversification; specialisation and vertical and horizontal substitution, and to discuss the implications of these changes for the workforce