Reality Therapy with Deaf Rehabilitation Clients

Non

Cost-effectiveness of counselling, graded-exercise and usual care for chronic fatigue: evidence from a randomised trial in primary care

Fatigue is common and has been shown to result in high economic costs to society. The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of two active therapies, graded-exercise (GET) and counselling (COUN) with usual care plus a self-help booklet (BUC) for people presenting with chronic fatigue

A National Pilot Study of Psychological Evaluation Services to Deaf Vocational Rehabilitation Clients

Non

The cost-effectiveness implications of suboptimal treatment for different severities of Alzheimer's disease in the UK.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of suboptimal treatment, defined in terms of lower population coverage (percentage of total patient population receiving optimal treatment) and delay to treatment on the cost-effectiveness of pharmacological therapies approved for the treatment of different severities of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the UK. METHODS: A 5-year Markov model was used to simulate transition to full-time care, as delay and coverage were varied for AD patients with mild-to-moderate and moderate-to-severe dementia. The time-varying predictive equations, resource use, utilities, treatment effects and mortality were derived using published sources. RESULTS: For the cohort with moderate-to-severe dementia, cost-effectiveness was optimised when delay was minimised and coverage maximised. For mild-to-moderate dementia, results were similar but varied widely depending on the inputted cost of acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: The average cost-effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for AD is sensitive to delays to treatment and population coverage. The results of this study can inform future healthcare policy in order to maximise cost-effectiveness of pharmacological therapies for AD

National Deafness Rehabilitation Priorities of the ADARA Membership

Non

A Statutory Remedy for Negligent Hiring in Deafness Rehabilitation

Given the modest gains in hiring well qualified deafness rehabilitation personnel in Vocational Rehabilitation, is it time to recognize that negligent hiring in deafness rehabilitation is a subtle form of discrimination against deaf and multiply handicapped deaf VR applicants? Amendments to the Rehabilitation Act are recommended to remedy the negligent hiring practices of some VR Rehabilitation of Deaf Clients (Schein, 1980) agencies that further disable deaf clients by hiring rehabilitation personnel who lack the skills to work effectively with deaf and multiply handicapped people

Effective patient–clinician interaction to improve treatment outcomes for patients with psychosis: a mixed-methods design

BACKGROUND:At least 100,000 patients with schizophrenia receive care from community mental health teams (CMHTs) in England. These patients have regular meetings with clinicians, who assess them, engage them in treatment and co-ordinate care. As these routine meetings are not commonly guided by research evidence, a new intervention, DIALOG, was previously designed to structure consultations. Using a hand-held computer, clinicians asked patients to rate their satisfaction with eight life domains and three treatment aspects, and to indicate whether or not additional help was needed in each area, with responses being graphically displayed and compared with previous ratings. In a European multicentre trial, the intervention improved patients’ quality of life over a 1-year period. The current programme builds on this research by further developing DIALOG in the UK. RESEARCH QUESTIONS:(1) How can the practical procedure of the intervention be improved, including the software used and the design of the user interface? (2) How can elements of resource-oriented interventions be incorporated into a clinician manual and training programme for a new, more extensive ‘DIALOG+’ intervention? (3) How effective and cost-effective is the new DIALOG+ intervention in improving treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia or a related disorder? (4) What are the views of patients and clinicians regarding the new DIALOG+ intervention? METHODS:We produced new software on a tablet computer for CMHTs in the NHS, informed by analysis of videos of DIALOG sessions from the original trial and six focus groups with 18 patients with psychosis. We developed the new ‘DIALOG+’ intervention in consultation with experts, incorporating principles of solution-focused therapy when responding to patients’ ratings and specifying the procedure in a manual and training programme for clinicians. We conducted an exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial with 49 clinicians and 179 patients with psychosis in East London NHS Foundation Trust, comparing DIALOG+ with an active control. Clinicians working as care co-ordinators in CMHTs (along with their patients) were cluster randomised 1 : 1 to either DIALOG+ or treatment as usual plus an active control, to prevent contamination. Intervention and control were to be administered monthly for 6 months, with data collected at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months following randomisation. The primary outcome was subjective quality of life as measured on the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life; secondary outcomes were also measured. We also established the cost-effectiveness of the DIALOG intervention using data from the Client Service Receipt Inventory, which records patients’ retrospective reports of using health- and social-care services, including hospital services, outpatient services and medication, in the 3 months prior to each time point. Data were supplemented by the clinical notes in patients’ medical records to improve accuracy. We conducted an exploratory thematic analysis of 16 video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions and measured adherence in these videos using a specially developed adherence scale. We conducted focus groups with patients (n = 19) and clinicians (n = 19) about their experiences of the intervention, and conducted thematic analyses. We disseminated the findings and made the application (app), manual and training freely available, as well as producing a protocol for a definitive trial. RESULTS:Patients receiving the new intervention showed more favourable quality of life in the DIALOG+ group after 3 months (effect size: Cohen’s d = 0.34), after 6 months (Cohen’s d = 0.29) and after 12 months (Cohen’s d = 0.34). An analysis of video-recorded DIALOG+ sessions showed inconsistent implementation, with adherence to the intervention being a little over half of the possible score. Patients and clinicians from the DIALOG+ arm of the trial reported many positive experiences with the intervention, including better self-expression and improved efficiency of meetings. Difficulties reported with the intervention were addressed by further refining the DIALOG+ manual and training. Cost-effectiveness analyses found a 72% likelihood that the intervention both improved outcomes and saved costs. LIMITATIONS:The research was conducted solely in urban east London, meaning that the results may not be broadly generalisable to other settings. CONCLUSIONS:(1) Although services might consider adopting DIALOG+ based on the existing evidence, a definitive trial appears warranted; (2) applying DIALOG+ to patient groups with other mental disorders may be considered, and to groups with physical health problems; (3) a more flexible use with variable intervals might help to make the intervention even more acceptable and effective; (4) more process evaluation is required to identify what mechanisms precisely are involved in the improvements seen in the intervention group in the trial; and (5) what appears to make DIALOG+ effective is that it is not a separate treatment and not a technology that is administered by a specialist; rather, it changes and utilises the existing therapeutic relationship between patients and clinicians in CMHTs to initiate positive change, helping the patients to improve their quality of life. FUTURE RESEARCH:Future studies should include a definitive trial on DIALOG+ and test the effectiveness of the intervention with other populations, such as people with depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN34757603. FUNDING:The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme

Essays by Deaf Youth: Implications for Counselors and Teachers

For several years, Gallaudet University\u27s School of Education and Human Services and Pre-College National Mission Programs (now Clerc Center) have co-sponsored an annual national essay contest for deaf and hard of hearing students in schools across the United States. In 1998, an unusually high number of essays -235- were received for review. During the process of serving as members of the judges’ panel for this national contest, the co-authors noted potentially important trends and patterns across the corpus of essays

The design and relevance of a computerised therapy program for indigenous Māori adolescents.

Background: Depression is a major health issue among Māori indigenous adolescents, yet there has been little investigation into the relevance or effectiveness of psychological treatments for them. Further, consumer views are critical for engagement and adherence to therapy. However, there is little research regarding indigenous communities’ opinions about psychological interventions for depression. Objective: The objective of this study was to conduct semistructured interviews with Māori (indigenous New Zealand) young people (taitamariki) and their families to find out their opinions of a prototype computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (cCBT) program called Smart, Positive, Active, Realistic, X-factor thoughts (SPARX), a free online computer game intended to help young persons with mild to moderate depression, feeling down, stress or anxiety. The program will teach them how to resolve their issues on their own using Cognitive Behavioural Therapy as psychotherapeutic approach. Methods: There were seven focus groups on the subject of the design and cultural relevance of SPARX that were held, with a total of 26 participants (19 taitamarki, 7 parents/caregivers, all Māori). There were five of the groups that were with whānau (family groups) (n=14), one group was with Māori teenage mothers (n=4), and one group was with taitamariki (n=8). The general inductive approach was used to analyze focus group data. Results: SPARX computerized therapy has good face validity and is seen as potentially effective and appealing for Māori people. Cultural relevance was viewed as being important for the engagement of Māori young people with SPARX. Whānau are important for young peoples’ well-being. Participants generated ideas for improving SPARX for Māori and for the inclusion of whānau in its delivery. Conclusions: SPARX computerized therapy had good face validity for indigenous young people and families. In general, Māori participants were positive about the SPARX prototype and considered it both appealing and applicable to them. The results of this study were used to refine SPARX prior to it being delivered to taitamariki and non-Māori young people