Search

Accessible summary Comparing three bespoke practice development (PD) projects reveals similarities in the principles of person-centred practice and cathartic personal growth, as relevant concepts to mental health., PD offers a collaborative approach to practice-driven quality improvement initiatives suitable to the psychologically informed mental health context., Creating a workplace culture that allows all involved to contribute to service improvement can be achieved through embracing a PD-driven change management strategy that aims to stimulate culturally sensitive care delivery., Abstract Practice development ( PD) in mental health nursing has been progressing over the last decade; however, the level and impact of PD activity in the field of mental health remains poorly understood outside localized project impact. More specific reporting and comparative analysis of PD outcomes will improve this situation. In response, this paper presents three case scenarios from work taking place in Australia and New Zealand, as working examples of how PD methodologies have been applied within mental health practice settings. Using a comparative framework that captures the contributing assumptions, practices, processes and conditions imperative to effective PD work within a mental health-care context, three case vignettes are reviewed. The critical question driving this paper is 'what mental health-care services does PD offer in terms of transformational change approaches and the promotion of effective workplace cultures?' Conditions considered necessary for successful PD initiatives within mental health contexts are explored such as how PD converges and diverges with mental health-related theories, plus where and how PD activity best integrates with the specific elements associated with mental health-care provision. The findings are further reviewed in line with reports of PD outcomes from other fields of health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Waiting lists for treatment are common in outpatient and community services, Existing methods for managing access and triage to these services can lead to inequities in service delivery, inefficiencies and divert resources from frontline care. Evidence from two controlled studies indicates that an alternative to the traditional "waitlist and triage" model known as STAT (Specific Timely Appointments for Triage) may be successful in reducing waiting times without adversely affecting other aspects of patient care. This trial aims to test whether the model is cost effective in reducing waiting time across multiple services, and to measure the impact on service provision, health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction.Methods/design: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial has been designed to evaluate the impact of the STAT model in 8 community health and outpatient services. The primary outcome will be waiting time from referral to first appointment. Secondary outcomes will be nature and quantity of service received (collected from all patients attending the service during the study period and health-related quality of life (AQOL-8D), patient satisfaction, health care utilisation and cost data (collected from a subgroup of patients at initial assessment and after 12 weeks). Data will be analysed with a multiple multi-level random-effects regression model that allows for cluster effects. An economic evaluation will be undertaken alongside the clinical trial.Discussion: This paper outlines the study protocol for a fully powered prospective stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) to establish whether the STAT model of access and triage can reduce waiting times applied across multiple settings, without increasing health service costs or adversely impacting on other aspects of patient care. If successful, it will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a practical model of access that can substantially reduce waiting time for outpatient and community services with subsequent benefits for both efficiency of health systems and patient care.Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615001016527 . Approved 15/9/2015. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]