Project description:This study examines how staff pooling can be used to create a higher service level at a predetermined total capacity in the healthcare sector. We develop new empirical knowledge through a systematic empirical study, using a mixed-methods approach, with a preliminary interview study followed by a principal quantitative survey study, with data from a multihospital system. The purpose was to explore practical barriers for a staff pooling strategy in healthcare systems. Three barriers were identified:recruitment difficulties, community view, and specialisation. Significant differences in perceived height among these barriers were found. The results from this study have important managerial implications for healthcare systems when implementing a staff pooling approach. This study contributes to the existing literature since, to the best of our knowledge, no previous research has been done where barriers to staff pools are systematically identified using a holistic approach that includes all healthcare professions in a multihospital system.
Project description:ObjectivesTo examine the understanding and practice of shared decision-making (SDM) within the context of recovery-oriented care across Veterans Health Administration (VHA) inpatient mental healthcare units.DesignVHA inpatient mental health units were scored on the Recovery-Oriented Acute Inpatient Scale (RAIN). Scores on the RAIN item for medication SDM were used to rank each site from lowest to highest. The top 7 and bottom 8 sites (n=15) were selected for additional analyses using a mixed-methods approach, involving qualitative interviews, observation notes and quantitative data.Setting34 VHA inpatient mental health units located in every geographical region of the USA.Participants55 treatment team members.ResultsOur results identified an overarching theme of 'power-sharing' that describes participants' conceptualisation and practice of medication decision-making. Three levels of power sharing emerged from both interview and observational data: (1) No power sharing: patients are excluded from treatment decisions; (2) Limited power sharing: patients are informed of treatment decisions but have limited influence on the decision-making process; and (3) Shared-power: patients and providers work collaboratively and contribute to medication decisions. Comparing interview to observational data, only observational data indicating those themes differentiate top from bottom scoring sites on the RAIN SDM item scores. All but one top scoring sites indicated shared power medication decision processes, whereas bottom sites reflected mostly no power sharing. Additionally, our findings highlight three key factors that facilitate the implementation of SDM: inclusion of veteran in treatment teams, patient education and respect for patient autonomy.ConclusionsImplementation of SDM appears feasible in acute inpatient mental health units. Although most participants were well informed about SDM, that knowledge did not always translate into practice, which supports the need for ongoing implementation support for SDM. Additional contextual factors underscore the value of patients' self-determination as a guiding principle for SDM, highlighting the role of a supporting, empowering and autonomy-generating environment.
Project description:PurposeThe COVID-19 pandemic has potential to disrupt and burden the mental health care system, and to magnify inequalities experienced by mental health service users.MethodsWe investigated staff reports regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in its early weeks on mental health care and mental health service users in the UK using a mixed methods online survey. Recruitment channels included professional associations and networks, charities, and social media. Quantitative findings were reported with descriptive statistics, and content analysis conducted for qualitative data.Results2,180 staff from a range of sectors, professions, and specialties participated. Immediate infection control concerns were highly salient for inpatient staff, new ways of working for community staff. Multiple rapid adaptations and innovations in response to the crisis were described, especially remote working. This was cautiously welcomed but found successful in only some clinical situations. Staff had specific concerns about many groups of service users, including people whose conditions are exacerbated by pandemic anxieties and social disruptions; people experiencing loneliness, domestic abuse and family conflict; those unable to understand and follow social distancing requirements; and those who cannot engage with remote care.ConclusionThis overview of staff concerns and experiences in the early COVID-19 pandemic suggests directions for further research and service development: we suggest that how to combine infection control and a therapeutic environment in hospital, and how to achieve effective and targeted tele-health implementation in the community, should be priorities. The limitations of our convenience sample must be noted.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The Floresco integrated service model was designed to address the fragmentation of community mental health treatment and support services. Floresco was established in Queensland, Australia, by a consortium of non-government organisations that sought to partner with general practitioners (GPs), private mental health providers and public mental health services to operate a 'one-stop' mental health service hub. METHODS:We conducted an independent mixed-methods evaluation of client outcomes following engagement with Floresco (outcome evaluation) and factors influencing service integration (process evaluation). The main data sources were: (1) routinely-collected Recovery Assessment Scale - Domains and Stages (RAS-DS) scores at intake and review (n = 108); (2) RAS-DS scores, mental health inpatient admissions and emergency department (ED) presentations among clients prospectively assessed at intake and six-month follow-up (n = 37); (3) semi-structured interviews with staff from Floresco, consortium partners, private practitioners and the local public mental health service (n = 20); and (4) program documentation. RESULTS:Interviews identified staff commitment, co-location of services, flexibility in problem-solving, and anecdotal evidence of positive client outcomes as important enablers of service integration. Barriers to integration included different organisational practices, difficulties in information-sharing and in attracting and retaining GPs and private practitioners, and systemic constraints on integration with public mental health services. Of 1129 client records, 108 (9.6%) included two RAS-DS measurements, averaging 5 months apart. RAS-DS 'total recovery' scores improved significantly (M = 63.3%, SD = 15.6 vs. M = 69.2%, SD = 16.1; p < 0.001), as did scores on three of the four RAS-DS domains ('Looking forward', p < 0.001; 'Mastering my illness', p < 0.001; and 'Connecting and belonging', p = 0.001). Corresponding improvements, except in 'Connecting and belonging', were seen in the 37 follow-up study participants. Decreases in inpatient admissions (20.9% vs. 7.0%), median length of inpatient stay (8 vs. 3 days), ED presentations (34.8% vs. 6.3%) and median duration of ED visits (187 vs. 147 min) were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:Despite the lack of a control group and small follow-up sample size, Floresco's integrated service model showed potential to improve client outcomes and reduce burden on the public mental health system. Horizontal integration of non-government and private services was achieved, and meaningful progress made towards integration with public mental health services.
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the imperative for meaningful family involvement in long-term care, aligning with policy and safety standards while enhancing outcomes for caregivers, residents, and staff. The objectives of this article are as follows: (1) a case study report on implementing a family involvement intervention designed to facilitate the formal and safe engagement of family caregivers in resident care and (2) the pilot evaluation of the intervention. We used Knapp's six-step implementation science model to guide and describe intervention development to provide insight for others planning family involvement projects. We employed sequential mixed methods, including surveys with quantitative and qualitative questions before and after program implementation for providers, and surveys and interviews with family caregivers a year after. We used the Mann-Whitney U test (p < 0.05) to assess differences in health providers' perceptions pre- and post-education. Families and staff perceived that the Family Involvement Program was important for improving the quality of care, residents' quality of life and family/staff relationships. Providers' perceptions of the program's positive impact on residents' quality of life (p = 0.020) and quality of care (p = 0.010), along with their satisfaction with working relationships with families (p = 0.039), improved significantly after the program. Qualitative data confirmed improvements in family-staff relationships. In conclusion, we documented the design of this family involvement initiative to encourage family caregivers and staff to work together in residents' care. Youville's Family Involvement Program gives families and family caregivers an explicit role as partners in long-term care. The mixed methods pilot evaluation documented improvements in staff and family relationships.
Project description:Schools are an ideal setting to base mental health literacy programs as the learning environment is already established. Mental health literacy represents how to obtain and maintain good mental health and should be incorporated into the school curriculum. Collaboration with key stakeholders in youth mental health, such as school staff and allied health professionals, is critical in ensuring needs are addressed, and programs are sustainable. This study aimed to understand the perspectives of school staff and allied health professionals towards mental health literacy within Australian schools. An exploratory qualitative and quantitative survey was completed by 88 participants across Australia. Results indicated that school staff feel less competent to deliver mental health literacy content and perceive their training did not address mental health education compared to allied health professionals. Most mental health programs reported to be implemented within schools were social and emotional learning programs. School staff viewed mental health programs to strengthen academic performance less than allied health professionals. Thematic analysis of qualitative data identified that participants viewed mental health knowledge, where and how to seek help, and coping skills as vital content to cover in a school-based mental health literacy program. This study reveals that school staff need sufficient training and resources to address youth mental health literacy. Though mental health literacy is lacking in the Australian school system, the perspectives of school staff and allied health professionals in this study provide key ideas and considerations for the future development of school-based mental health literacy programs for youth.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10648-023-09725-5.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Involving mental health service users in planning and reviewing their care can help personalised care focused on recovery, with the aim of developing goals specific to the individual and designed to maximise achievements and social integration. We aimed to ascertain the views of service users, carers and staff in acute inpatient wards on factors that facilitated or acted as barriers to collaborative, recovery-focused care. METHODS:A cross-national comparative mixed-methods study involving 19 mental health wards in six service provider sites in England and Wales. This included a survey using established standardised measures of service users (n?=?301) and staff (n?=?290) and embedded case studies involving interviews with staff, service users and carers (n?=?76). Quantitative and qualitative data were analysed within and across sites using descriptive and inferential statistics, and framework method. RESULTS:For service users, when recovery-oriented focus was high, the quality of care was rated highly, as was the quality of therapeutic relationships. For staff, there was a moderate correlation between recovery orientation and quality of therapeutic relationships, with considerable variability. Staff members rated the quality of therapeutic relationships higher than service users did. Staff accounts of routine collaboration contrasted with a more mixed picture in service user accounts. Definitions and understandings of recovery varied, as did views of hospital care in promoting recovery. Managing risk was a central issue for staff, and service users were aware of measures taken to keep them safe, although their involvement in discussions was less apparent. CONCLUSIONS:There is positive practice within acute inpatient wards, with evidence of commitment to safe, respectful, compassionate care. Recovery ideas were evident but there remained ambivalence on their relevance to inpatient care. Service users were aware of efforts taken to keep them safe, but despite measures described by staff, they did not feel routinely involved in care planning or risk management decisions. Research on increasing therapeutic contact time, shared decision making in risk assessment and using recovery focused tools could further promote personalised and recovery-focused care planning. This paper arises from a larger study published by National Institute for Health Research (Simpson A, et al, Health Serv Deliv Res 5(26), 2017).
Project description:BackgroundThe PRogramme for Improving Mental Health carE (PRIME) evaluated the process and outcomes of the implementation of a mental healthcare plan (MHCP) in Chitwan, Nepal.AimsTo describe the process of implementation, the barriers and facilitating factors, and to evaluate the process indicators of the MHCP.MethodA case study design that combined qualitative and quantitative methods based on a programme theory of change (ToC) was used and included: (a) district-, community- and health-facility profiles; (b) monthly implementation logs; (c) pre- and post-training evaluation; (d) out-patient clinical data and (e) qualitative interviews with patients and caregivers.ResultsThe MHCP was able to achieve most of the indicators outlined by the ToC. Of the total 32 indicators, 21 (66%) were fully achieved, 10 (31%) partially achieved and 1 (3%) were not achieved at all. The proportion of primary care patients that received mental health services increased by 1200% over the 3-year implementation period. Major barriers included frequent transfer of trained health workers, lack of confidential space for consultation, no mental health supervision in the existing system, and stigma. Involvement of Ministry of Health, procurement of new psychotropic medicines through PRIME, motivation of health workers and the development of a new supervision system were key facilitating factors.ConclusionsEffective implementation of mental health services in primary care settings require interventions to increase demand for services and to ensure there is clinical supervision for health workers, private rooms for consultations, a separate cadre of psychosocial workers and a regular supply of psychotropic medicines.
Project description:BackgroundAlmost every patient admitted to hospital will receive medication during their stay. Medication errors are an important cause of patient morbidity and mortality, as well as an economic burden for healthcare institutions. Research suggests that current methods of storing medication on hospital wards are not fit for purpose, contributing to inefficiency and error.AimTo improve medication storage in inpatient areas, by exploring variation and challenges related to medication storage and designing a prototype solution.MethodsSet in four hospitals in an English teaching hospital trust, the study used a mixed methods approach comprising a quantitative descriptive survey of storage facilities and practices followed by mixed methods observations of medication rounds and interviews with patients, nurses and pharmacy staff. Quantitative data were presented descriptively and qualitative data analysed thematically and using a human-centered design approach.ResultsWe identified wide variation in medication storage facilities and practices across 77 wards. Observations and staff interviews in six wards revealed five problem areas: poor management of multiple storage facilities; lack of visibility and organisation of medication within trolleys; inadequate size of storage; lack of ownership and knowledge of standard practice; and use of key locks. Patients were largely satisfied with receiving their medication. Systematic and consistent physical organisation of medication in medication trolleys, and integrating and implementing principles of best practice, were identified as areas for intervention.Discussion and conclusionVariation in medication storage facilities and practices existed both across the organization and on individual wards. Multiple challenges were identified in how medication was stored, which if addressed may improve the efficiency and safety of medication administration and in turn, staff and patient experience. The use of design principles alongside a research approach resulted in a rapid, iterative process for developing and refining potential solutions to improve inpatient medication storage.
Project description:Tobacco smoking is extremely prevalent in people with severe mental illness (SMI) and has been recognised as the main contributor to widening health inequalities in this population. Historically, smoking has been deeply entrenched in the culture of mental health settings in the UK, and until recently, smokefree policies tended to be only partially implemented. However, recent national guidance and the government's tobacco control plan now call for the implementation of complete smokefree policies. Many mental health Trusts across the UK are currently in the process of implementing the new guidance, but little is known about the impact of and experience with policy implementation.This paper reports findings from a mixed-methods evaluation of policy implementation across 12 wards in a large mental health Trust in England. Quantitative data were collected and compared before and after implementation of NICE guidance PH48 and referred to 1) identification and treatment of tobacco dependence, 2) smoking-related incident reporting, and 3) prescribing of psychotropic medication. A qualitative exploration of the experience of inpatients was also carried out. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed, and the feasibility of collecting relevant and complete data for each quantitative component was assessed. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic framework analysis.Following implementation of the complete smokefree policy, increases in the numbers of patients offered smoking cessation advice (72% compared to 38%) were identified. While incident reports demonstrated a decrease in challenging behaviour during the post-PH48 period (6% compared to 23%), incidents relating to the concealment of smoking materials increased (10% compared to 2%). Patients reported encouraging changes in smoking behaviour and motivation to maintain change after discharge. However, implementation issues challenging full policy implementation, including covert facilitation of smoking by staff, were reported, and difficulties in collecting relevant and complete data for comprehensive evaluation purposes identified.Overall, the implementation of complete smokefree policies in mental health settings may currently be undermined by partial support. Strategies to enhance support and the establishment of suitable data collection pathways to monitor progress are required.