Dataset Information

Assessing Digital Risk in Psychiatric Patients: Mixed Methods Study of Psychiatry Trainees' Experiences, Views, and Understanding.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The use of digital technology can help people access information and provide support for their mental health problems, but it can also expose them to risk, such as bullying or prosuicide websites. It may be important to consider internet-related risk behavior (digital risk) within a generic psychiatric risk assessment, but no studies have explored the practice or acceptability of this among psychiatrists. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to explore psychiatry trainees' experiences, views, and understanding of digital risk in psychiatry. We predicted that clinician awareness would be highest among trainees who work in child and adolescent mental health services. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of psychiatry trainees attending a UK regional trainees' conference to investigate how they routinely assess patients' internet use and related risk of harm and their experience and confidence in assessing these risks. We conducted focus groups to further explore trainees' understandings and experiences of digital risk assessment. Descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests were used to present the quantitative data. A thematic analysis was used to identify the key themes in the qualitative data set. RESULTS:The cross-sectional survey was completed by 113 out of 312 psychiatry trainees (response rate 36.2%), from a range of subspecialties and experience levels. Half of the trainees (57/113, 50.4%) reported treating patients exposed to digital risk, particularly trainees subspecializing in child and adolescent psychiatry (17/22, 77% vs 40/91, 44%;P=.02). However, 67.3% (76/113) reported not feeling competent to assess digital risk. Child and adolescent psychiatrists were more likely than others to ask patients routinely about specific digital risk domains, including reckless web-based behavior (18/20, 90% vs 54/82, 66%; P=.03), prosuicide websites (20/21, 95% vs 57/81, 70%; P=.01), and online sexual behavior (17/21, 81% vs 44/81, 54%; P=.02). Although 84.1% (95/113) of the participants reported using a proforma to record general risk assessment, only 5% (5/95) of these participants prompted an assessment of internet use. Only 9.7% (11/113) of the trainees had received digital risk training, and 73.5% (83/113) reported that they would value this. Our thematic analysis of transcripts from 3 focus groups (comprising 11 trainees) identified 2 main themes: barriers to assessment and management of digital risk, and the double-edged sword of web use. Barriers reported included the novelty and complexity of the internet, a lack of confidence and guidance in addressing internet use directly, and ongoing tension between assessment and privacy. CONCLUSIONS:Although it is common for psychiatrists to encounter patients subject to digital risk, trainee psychiatrists lack competence and confidence in their assessment. Training in digital risk and the inclusion of prompts in standardized risk proformas would promote good clinical practice and prevent a potential blind spot in general risk assessment.

SUBMITTER: Aref-Adib G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7424482 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Assessing Digital Risk in Psychiatric Patients: Mixed Methods Study of Psychiatry Trainees' Experiences, Views, and Understanding.

Aref-Adib Golnar G Landy Gabriella G Eskinazi Michelle M Sommerlad Andrew A Morant Nicola N Johnson Sonia S Graham Richard R Osborn David D Pitman Alexandra A

JMIR mental health 20200729 7

<h4>Background</h4>The use of digital technology can help people access information and provide support for their mental health problems, but it can also expose them to risk, such as bullying or prosuicide websites. It may be important to consider internet-related risk behavior (digital risk) within a generic psychiatric risk assessment, but no studies have explored the practice or acceptability of this among psychiatrists.<h4>Objective</h4>This study aimed to explore psychiatry trainees' experi ...[more]

PMID: 32726288

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction ?In the United Kingdom, work-based assessments (WBAs) including procedure-based assessments (PBAs), case-based discussions (CBDs), clinical evaluation exercises (CEXs), and direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) have been used in Higher General Surgical Training Program (HGSTP) since the introduction of Modernising Medical Careers. Although the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Project states that they should be used for the formative development of trainees using feedback and reflection, there is no study to look at the perception of their usefulness and barriers in using them, particularly in HGSTP. The aim of this study is to investigate trainer's and trainee's perception of their usefulness, barriers in using them, and way forward for their improvement in HGSTP. Methods ?This was a mixed method study. In phase I, after ethics committee approval, an online survey was sent to 83 trainers and 104 trainees, with a response rate of 33 and 37%, respectively, using Online Surveys (formerly Bristol Online Survey) from July 2018 to December 2018. After analysis of this result, in phase II, semistructured interviews were conducted with five trainees and five trainers who had volunteered to take part from phase I. Thematic analysis was performed to develop overarching themes. Results ?For professional formative development, 15% of the trainers and 53% of the trainees felt that WBAs had a low value. Among 4 WBAs-CEX, CBD, PBA, and DOPS-PBA was thought to be the most useful WBA by 52% trainers and 74% trainees. More trainers than trainees felt that it was being used as a formative tool (33 vs. 16%). The total number of WBAs thought to be required was between 20 and 40 per year, with 46% of the trainers and 53% of the trainees preferring these numbers. The thematic analysis generated four themes with subthemes in each: theme 1, "factors affecting usefulness," including the mode of validation, trainer/trainee engagement, and time spent in validating; theme 2, "doubt on utility" due to doubt on validity and being used as a tick-box exercise; theme 3, "pitfalls/difficulties" due to lack of time to validate, late validation, e-mail rather than face-to-face validation, trainer and trainee behavior, variability in feedback given, and emphasis on number than quality; and theme 4, "improvement strategies." Conclusions ?The WBAs are not being used in a way they are supposed to be used. The perception of educational impact (Kirkpatrick levels 1 and 2) by trainers was more optimistic than by trainees. Improvements can be made by giving/finding more time, trainer training, more face-to-face validation, and better trainer trainee interactions.

Project description:BackgroundDigital peer support is an increasingly used form of mental health support for young people. However, there is a need for more research on the impact of digital peer support and why it has an impact.ObjectiveThe aim of this research is to examine young people's experiences of using a digital peer support tool: MeeToo. After the time of writing, MeeToo has changed their name to Tellmi. MeeToo is an anonymous, fully moderated peer support tool for young people aged 11-25 years. There were two research questions: (1) What impacts did using MeeToo have on young people? (2) Why did using MeeToo have these impacts on young people?MethodsA mixed methods study was conducted. It involved secondary analysis of routinely collected feedback questionnaires, which were completed at two time points (T1 and T2) 2-3 months apart. Questionnaires asked about young people's (N=876) experience of using MeeToo, mental health empowerment, and well-being. Primary data were collected from semistructured interviews with 10 young people.ResultsOverall, 398 (45.4%) of 876 young people completed the T1 questionnaire, 559 (63.8%) completed the T2 questionnaire, and 81 (9.2%) completed both. Descriptive statistics from the cross-sectional analysis of the questionnaires identified a range of positive impacts of using MeeToo, which included making it easier to talk about difficult things, being part of a supportive community, providing new ways to help oneself, feeling better, and feeling less alone. Subgroup analysis (paired-sample t test) of 58 young females who had completed both T1 and T2 questionnaires showed a small but statistically significant increase in levels of patient activation, one of the subscales of the mental health empowerment scale: time 1 mean=1.83 (95% CI 1.72-1.95), time 2 mean=2.00 (95% CI 1.89-2.11), t59=2.15, and P=.04. Anonymity and the MeeToo sense of community were identified from interviews as possible reasons for why using MeeToo had these impacts. Anonymity helped to create a safe space in which users could express their feelings, thoughts, and experiences freely without the fear of being judged by others. The MeeToo sense of community was described as a valuable form of social connectedness, which in turn had a positive impact on young people's mental health and made them feel less isolated and alone.ConclusionsThe findings of this research showed a range of positive impacts and possible processes for young people using MeeToo. Future research is needed to examine how these impacts and processes can be sustained.

Project description:BackgroundVirtual care was rapidly integrated into pediatric health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. While virtual care offers many benefits, it is necessary to better understand the experiences of those who receive, deliver, and coordinate virtual care in order to support sustainable, high-quality, and patient-centered health care. To date, methods implemented to evaluate users' experiences of virtual care have been highly variable, making comparison and data synthesis difficult.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe evaluation strategies currently used to understand personal experiences with pediatric virtual care in Canada.MethodsIn this mixed methods environmental scan, we first distributed a web-based questionnaire to clinical, research, and operational leaders delivering and evaluating pediatric virtual care in Canada. The questionnaire collected information about how experiences with virtual care have been or are currently being evaluated and whether these evaluations included the perspectives of children or youth, families, providers, or support staff. Second, respondents were asked to share the questions they used in their evaluations, and a content analysis was performed to identify common question categories. Third, we conducted semistructured interviews to further explore our respondents' evaluation experiences across 4 domains-evaluation approaches, distribution methods, response rates, and lessons learned-and interest in a core set of questions for future evaluations.ResultsThere were 72 respondents to the web-based questionnaire; among those who had conducted an evaluation, we identified 15 unique evaluations, and 14 of those provided a copy of the tools used to evaluate virtual care. These evaluations measured the virtual care experiences of parents or caregivers (n=15, 100%), children or youth (n=11, 73%), health care providers (n=11, 73%), and support staff (n=4, 27%). The most common data collection method used was electronic questionnaires distributed by email. Two respondents used validated tools; the remainder modified existing tools or developed new tools. Content analysis of the 14 submitted questionnaires revealed that the most common questions were about overall participant satisfaction, the comparison of virtual care to in-person care, and whether participants would choose virtual care options in the future. Interview findings indicate respondents frequently relied on methods used by peers and that a standardized, core set of questions to evaluate experiences with virtual care would be helpful to improve evaluation practices and support pediatric health care delivery.ConclusionsAt our institution and elsewhere in Canada, experiences with pediatric virtual care have been evaluated using a variety of methods. A more consistent evaluation approach using standardized tools may enable more regular comparisons of experiences with virtual care and the synthesis of findings across health care settings. In turn, this may better inform our approach to virtual care, improve its integration into health systems, and facilitate sustainable, high-quality, patient-centered care.

Project description:BACKGROUND:When certain complications arise during the second stage of labour, assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), a vaginal birth with forceps or vacuum extractor, can effectively improve outcomes by ending prolonged labour or by ensuring rapid birth in response to maternal or fetal compromise. In recent decades, the use of AVD has decreased in many settings in favour of caesarean section (CS). This review aimed to improve understanding of experiences, barriers and facilitators for AVD use. METHODS:Systematic searches of eight databases using predefined search terms to identify studies reporting views and experiences of maternity service users, their partners, health care providers, policymakers, and funders in relation to AVD. Relevant studies were assessed for methodological quality. Qualitative findings were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach. Confidence in review findings was assessed using GRADE CERQual. Findings from quantitative studies were synthesised narratively and assessed using an adaptation of CERQual. Qualitative and quantitative review findings were triangulated using a convergence coding matrix. RESULTS:Forty-two studies (published 1985-2019) were included: six qualitative, one mixed-method and 35 quantitative. Thirty-five were from high-income countries, and seven from LMIC settings. Confidence in the findings was moderate or low. Spontaneous vaginal birth was most likely to be associated with positive short and long-term outcomes, and emergency CS least likely. Views and experiences of AVD tended to fall somewhere between these two extremes. Where indicated, AVD can be an effective, acceptable alternative to caesarean section. There was agreement or partial agreement across qualitative studies and surveys that the experience of AVD is impacted by the unexpected nature of events and, particularly in high-income settings, unmet expectations. Positive relationships, good communication, involvement in decision-making, and (believing in) the reason for intervention were important mediators of birth experience. Professional attitudes and skills (development) were simultaneously barriers and facilitators of AVD in quantitative studies. CONCLUSIONS:Information, positive interaction and communication with providers and respectful care are facilitators for acceptance of AVD. Barriers include lack of training and skills for decision-making and use of instruments.

Dataset Information

Assessing Digital Risk in Psychiatric Patients: Mixed Methods Study of Psychiatry Trainees' Experiences, Views, and Understanding.

Publications

Assessing Digital Risk in Psychiatric Patients: Mixed Methods Study of Psychiatry Trainees' Experiences, Views, and Understanding.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets