Healthcare professionals' views on discussing fertility preservation with young cancer patients: a mixed method systematic review of the literature

Objective: In spite of efforts to guarantee patients are adequately informed about their risk of fertility loss and offered treatment for fertility preservation (FP), previous studies have reported that this topic is not routinely discussed with patients, especially with younger patient populations. A mixed method systematic review was undertaken to explore the factors shaping the discussion of FP with children (0-15 years) and adolescents/young adults (16-24 years) with cancer. Methods: Six databases were searched independently using a combination of keywords and controlled vocabulary/subject headings relating to cancer and fertility. Inclusion criteria consisted of: 1) being published in a peer-reviewed journal; 2) a focus on HCPs’ beliefs, attitudes or practices on fertility issues in cancer patients; 3) primary data collection from HCPs; and 4) a focus on HCPs who provide services to young patients. Of the 6276 articles identified in the search, 16 articles presenting the results of 14 studies were included in the final review. Results: Common themes reported across studies indicate that five main factors influence HCPs’ discussion of FP with young cancer patients: 1) HCPs’ knowledge; 2) HCPs’ sense of comfort; 3) Patient factors (i.e., sexual maturity, prognosis, partnership status, and whether or not they initiate the conversation); 4) Parent factors (i.e., HCPs’ perception of the extent of their involvement); and 5) Availability of educational materials. Conclusions: Future work should ensure that HCPs possess knowledge on cancer-related FP and that they receive adequate training on how to consent and discuss information with young patients and their parents

Rapid evaluation of service innovations in health and social care: key considerations

Background: The Children and Young People’s Mental Health Trailblazer programme is funding the creation of new mental health support teams to work in schools and further education colleges. Mental health support teams directly support children and young people with ‘mild to moderate’ mental health problems and work with school and college staff to promote well-being for all. A new workforce of education mental health practitioners is being trained for the teams. / Objective(s): The National Institute for Health and Care Research Birmingham, RAND and Cambridge Evaluation Rapid Evaluation Centre and Policy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit undertook an early evaluation of the Trailblazer programme to examine the development, implementation and early progress of mental health support teams in the programme’s first 25 ‘Trailblazer’ sites. / Design: A mixed-methods evaluation, comprising three work packages: 1. Establishing the baseline and understanding the development and early impacts of the Trailblazer sites, including two rounds of surveys with key informants and participating education settings in all 25 sites. 2. More detailed research in five purposively selected Trailblazer sites, including interviews with a range of stakeholders and focus groups with children and young people. 3. Scoping and developing options for a longer-term assessment of the programme’s outcomes and impacts. Fieldwork was undertaken between November 2020 and February 2022. The University of Birmingham Institute for Mental Health Youth Advisory Group was involved throughout the study, including co-producing the focus groups with children and young people. / Results: Substantial progress had been made implementing the programme, in challenging circumstances, and there was optimism about what it had the potential to achieve. The education mental health practitioner role had proven popular, but sites reported challenges in retaining education mental health practitioners, and turnover left mental health support teams short-staffed and needing to re-recruit. Education settings welcomed additional mental health support and reported positive early outcomes, including staff feeling more confident and having faster access to advice about mental health issues. At the same time, there were concerns about children who had mental health problems that were more serious than ‘mild to moderate’ but not serious enough to be accepted for specialist help, and that the interventions offered were not working well for some young people. Mental health support teams were generally spending more time supporting children with mental health problems than working with education settings to develop ‘whole school’ approaches to mental health and well-being, and service models in some sites appeared to be more clinically oriented, with a strong focus on mental health support teams’ therapeutic functions. / Limitations: Despite efforts to maximise participation, survey response rates were relatively low and some groups were less well represented than others. We were not able to gather sufficiently detailed data to develop a typology of Trailblazer sites, as was planned. / Conclusions: Key lessons for future programme implementation include: – Whether mental health support teams should expand support to children and young people with more complex and serious mental health problems. – How to keep the twin aims of prevention and early intervention in balance. – How to retain education mental health practitioners once trained. / Future work: The findings have important implications for the design of a longer-term impact evaluation of the programme, which is due to commence in summer 2023. / Study registration: Ethical approval from the University of Birmingham (ERN_19-1400 – RG_19-190) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (Ref: 18040) and Health Research Authority approval (IRAS 270760). / Funding: The Birmingham, RAND and Cambridge Evaluation Rapid Evaluation Centre is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme (HSDR 16/138/31). The Policy Innovation and Evaluation Research Unit is funded by the NIHR Policy Research Programme (PR-PRU-1217-20602)

The Special Measures for Quality and Challenged Provider Regimes in the English NHS: A Rapid Evaluation of a National Improvement Initiative for Failing Healthcare Organisations

BACKGROUND: There is limited knowledge about interventions used for the improvement of low-performing healthcare organisations and their unintended consequences. Our evaluation sought to understand how healthcare organisations in the National Health Service (NHS) in England responded to a national improvement initiative (the Special Measures for Quality [SMQ] and challenged provider [CP] regimes) and its perceived impact on achieving quality improvements (QIs). METHODS: Our evaluation included national-level interviews with key stakeholders involved in the delivery of SMQ (n=6); documentary analysis (n=20); and a qualitative study based on interviews (n=60), observations (n=8) and documentary analysis (n=291) in eight NHS case study sites. The analysis was informed by literature on failure, turnaround and QI in organisations in the public sector. RESULTS: At the policy level, SMQ/CP regimes were intended to be "support" programmes, but perceptions of the interventions at hospital level were mixed. The SMQ/CP regimes tended to consider failure at an organisational level and turnaround was visualised as a linear process. There was a negative emotional impact reported by staff, especially in the short-term. Key drivers of change included: engaged senior leadership teams, strong clinical input and supportive external partnerships within local health systems. Trusts focused efforts to improve across multiple domains with particular investment in improving overall staff engagement, developing an open, listening organisational culture and better governance to ensure clinical safety and reporting. CONCLUSION: Organisational improvement in healthcare requires substantial time to embed and requires investment in staff to drive change and cultivate QI capabilities at different tiers. The time this takes may be underestimated by external 'turn-around' interventions and performance regimes designed to improve quality in the short-term and which come at an emotional cost for staff. Shifting an improvement focus to the health system or regional level may promote sustainable improvement across multiple organisations over the long-term

Public Sentiment and Discourse on Domestic Violence During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: Analysis of Social Media Posts.

Background: Measuring public response during COVID-19 is an important way of ensuring the suitability and effectiveness of epidemic response efforts. An analysis of social media provides an approximation of public sentiment during an emergency like the current pandemic. The measures introduced across the globe to help curtail the spread of the coronavirus have led to the development of a situation labeled as a “perfect storm,” triggering a wave of domestic violence. As people use social media to communicate their experiences, analyzing public discourse and sentiment on social platforms offers a way to understand concerns and issues related to domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: This study was based on an analysis of public discourse and sentiment related to domestic violence during the stay-at-home periods of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia in 2020. It aimed to understand the more personal self-reported experiences, emotions, and reactions toward domestic violence that were not always classified or collected by official public bodies during the pandemic. Methods: We searched social media and news posts in Australia using key terms related to domestic violence and COVID-19 during 2020 via digital analytics tools to determine sentiments related to domestic violence during this period. Results: The study showed that the use of sentiment and discourse analysis to assess social media data is useful in measuring the public expression of feelings and sharing of resources in relation to the otherwise personal experience of domestic violence. There were a total of 63,800 posts across social media and news media. Within these posts, our analysis found that domestic violence was mentioned an average of 179 times a day. There were 30,100 tweets, 31,700 news reports, 1500 blog posts, 548 forum posts, and 7 comments (posted on news and blog websites). Negative or neutral sentiment centered on the sharp rise in domestic violence during different lockdown periods of the 2020 pandemic, and neutral and positive sentiments centered on praise for efforts that raised awareness of domestic violence as well as the positive actions of domestic violence charities and support groups in their campaigns. There were calls for a positive and proactive handling (rather than a mishandling) of the pandemic, and results indicated a high level of public discontent related to the rising rates of domestic violence and the lack of services during the pandemic. Conclusions: This study provided a timely understanding of public sentiment related to domestic violence during the COVID-19 lockdown periods in Australia using social media analysis. Social media represents an important avenue for the dissemination of information; posts can be widely dispersed and easily accessed by a range of different communities who are often difficult to reach. An improved understanding of these issues is important for future policy direction. Heightened awareness of this could help agencies tailor and target messaging to maximize impact

The impact of COVID-19 on anaesthesia and critical care services in the UK: a serial service evaluation

Between October 2020 and January 2021, we conducted three national surveys to track anaesthetic, surgical and critical care activity during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave in the UK. We surveyed all NHS hospitals where surgery is undertaken. Response rates, by round, were 64%, 56% and 51%. Despite important regional variations, the surveys showed increasing systemic pressure on anaesthetic and peri-operative services due to the need to support critical care pandemic demands. During Rounds 1 and 2, approximately one in eight anaesthetic staff were not available for anaesthetic work. Approximately one in five operating theatres were closed and activity fell in those that were open. Some mitigation was achieved by relocation of surgical activity to other locations. Approximately one-quarter of all surgical activity was lost, with paediatric and non-cancer surgery most impacted. During January 2021, the system was largely overwhelmed. Almost one-third of anaesthesia staff were unavailable, 42% of operating theatres were closed, national surgical activity reduced to less than half, including reduced cancer and emergency surgery. Redeployed anaesthesia staff increased the critical care workforce by 125%. Three-quarters of critical care units were so expanded that planned surgery could not be safely resumed. At all times, the greatest resource limitation was staff. Due to lower response rates from the most pressed regions and hospitals, these results may underestimate the true impact. These findings have important implications for understanding what has happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, planning recovery and building a system that will better respond to future waves or new epidemics

Inter-organisational collaboration enabling care delivery in a specialist cancer surgery provider network: A qualitative study

Objective: To explore the processes, challenges and strategies used to govern and maintain inter-organisational collaboration between professionals in a provider network in London, United Kingdom, which implemented major system change focused on the centralisation of specialist cancer surgery. Methods: We used a qualitative design involving interviews with stakeholders (n = 117), non-participant observations (n = 163) and documentary analysis (n = 100). We drew on an existing model of collaboration in healthcare organisations and expanded this framework by applying it to the analysis of collaboration in the context of major system change. Results: Network provider organisations established shared goals, maintained central figures who could create and sustain collaboration, and promoted distributed forms of leadership. Still, organisations continued to encounter barriers or challenges in relation to developing opportunities for mutual acquaintanceship across all professional groups; the active sharing of knowledge, expertise and good practice across the network; the fostering of trust; and creation of information exchange infrastructures fit for collaborative purposes. Conclusion: Collaborative relationships changed over time, becoming stronger post-implementation in some areas, but continued to be negotiated where resistance to the centralisation remained. Future research should explore the sustainability of these relationships and further unpack how hierarchies and power relationships shape inter-organisational collaboration

The implementation of remote home monitoring models during the COVID-19 pandemic in England.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence for the implementation of remote home monitoring for COVID-19 infection. The aims of this study were to identify the key characteristics of remote home monitoring models for COVID-19 infection, explore the experiences of staff implementing these models, understand the use of data for monitoring progress against outcomes, and document variability in staffing and resource allocation. METHODS: This was a multi-site mixed methods study conducted between July and August 2020 that combined qualitative and quantitative approaches to analyse the implementation and impact of remote home monitoring models developed during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in England. The study combined interviews (n = 22) with staff delivering these models across eight sites in England with the collection and analysis of data on staffing models and resource allocation. FINDINGS: The models varied in relation to the healthcare settings and mechanisms used for patient triage, monitoring and escalation. Implementation was embedded in existing staff workloads and budgets. Good communication within clinical teams, culturally-appropriate information for patients/carers and the combination of multiple approaches for patient monitoring (app and paper-based) were considered facilitators in implementation. The mean cost per monitored patient varied from £400 to £553, depending on the model. INTERPRETATION: It is necessary to provide the means for evaluating the effectiveness of these models, for example, by establishing comparator data. Future research should also focus on the sustainability of the models and patient experience (considering the extent to which some of the models exacerbate existing inequalities in access to care)

“Attending to History” in Major System Change in Healthcare in England: Specialist Cancer Surgery Service Reconfiguration

BACKGROUND: The reconfiguration of specialist hospital services, with service provision concentrated in a reduced number of sites, is one example of major system change (MSC) for which there is evidence of improved patient outcomes. This paper explores the reconfiguration of specialist oesophago-gastric (OG) cancer surgery services in a large urban area of England (Greater Manchester, GM), with a focus on the role of history in this change process and how reconfiguration was achieved after previous failed attempts. METHODS: This study draws on qualitative research from a mixed-methods evaluation of the reconfiguration of specialist cancer surgery services in GM. Forty-six interviews with relevant stakeholders were carried out, along with ~160 hours of observations at meetings and the acquisition of ~300 pertinent documents. Thematic analysis using deductive and inductive approaches was undertaken, guided by a framework of 'simple rules' for MSC. RESULTS: Through an awareness of, and attention to, history, leaders developed a change process which took into account previous unsuccessful reconfiguration attempts, enabling them to reduce the impact of potentially challenging issues. Interviewees described attending to issues involving competition between provider sites, change leadership, engagement with stakeholders, and the need for a process of change resilient to challenge. CONCLUSION: Recognition of, and response to, history, using a range of perspectives, enabled this reconfiguration. Particularly important was the way in which history influenced and informed other aspects of the change process and the influence of stakeholder power. This study provides further learning about MSC and the need for a range of perspectives to enable understanding. It shows how learning from history can be used to enable successful change