Search

The assistive equipment provision process is routinely carried out with patients to mitigate fall risk factors via the fitment of assistive equipment within the home. However, currently, over 50% of assistive equipment is abandoned by the patients due to poor fit between the patient and the assistive equipment. This paper explores clinician perceptions of an early stage three-dimensional measurement aid prototype, which provides enhanced assistive equipment provision process guidance to clinicians. Ten occupational therapists trialled the three-dimensional measurement aid prototype application; think-aloud and semi-structured interview data was collected. Usability was measured with the System Usability Scale. Participants scored three-dimensional measurement aid prototype as 'excellent' and agreed strongly with items relating to the usability and learnability of the application. The qualitative analysis identified opportunities for improving existing practice, including, improved interpretation/recording measurements; enhanced collaborative practice within the assistive equipment provision process. Future research is needed to determine the clinical utility of this application compared with two-dimensional counterpart paper-based guidance leaflets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data sharing of Electronic Health Records from general practices to secondary care in Leeds occurs through the so-called Leeds Care Records, which collects a specific set of codes from primary care, known as 'Active Problems', and presents it to the user. Variability on its content is a known issue. To explore general practitioners' views on their use of 'Active Problems' and on sharing data, so lessons could be learnt on how to homogenise and improve shared data. Assessing Leeds general practitioners' views through two parallel processes (60 online surveys and 17 interviews). General practitioners feel they do not have the time nor the training required for keeping a shared approach to concise and current Problem Lists in electronic patient records. Action is needed to reduce current variability, and to improve the quality of shared information. Some types of codes currently present in Problem Lists have very little support among general practitioners who consider the focus should be on long-term conditions and probably adding current acute diagnoses and life expectancy items and not omitting sensitive information. There is a perceived need of training and time to update Problem Lists if their quality is to improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]