Search

The main aim of this paper is to explore and discuss the interesting juxtaposition of patient involvement within a standardised Enhanced Recovery After Surgery care programme (ERAS). We address our aim by examining the work and strategies of nursing staff caring for patients during postoperative recovery from surgery, exploring how these two potentially competing priorities might effectively co‐exist within a hospital ward. This was a qualitative exploratory study, with data generated through 42 semi‐structured interviews with patients and nurses who had taken part in an ERAS programme in one of three hospital wards in the United Kingdom, adopting a reflexive thematic approach to data analysis. We shine a light on the work undertaken by patients and nurses during the navigation of postoperative recovery, identifying strategies of collaboration and negotiation during this journey. Furthermore, we also identify and consider patients engaged in peer‐peer support during postoperative recovery. This paper adds to the existing literature and current ways of thinking in relation to the quest for standardised, clinically effective care balanced with the aspirations for individualised, patient‐centred care. This paper also helps inform thinking about the use of care pathways in relation to service delivery, considering how best to initiate and deploy best practice aimed at safe and effective postoperative recovery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Communication and cognitive impairments are known barriers to shared decision‐making. Most people diagnosed with motor neurone disease (MND) will develop a motor speech impairment over the disease course. Some will develop cognitive, linguistic or behavioural disturbance. Despite this, the impact of communication and cognitive impairment on personal healthcare decision‐making in MND is not well known. Aims: This exploratory, longitudinal study aimed to capture the perspectives of people living with MND (plwMND) and family members on managing their healthcare with, or in anticipation of, a communication impairment. Methods & Procedures: Semi‐structured interviews and functional assessments were conducted with plwMND and family members over one to three time points between December 2017 and January 2020. Participants were recruited from a specialist MND clinic using a maximum variation sampling approach. Interview transcripts were analysed using trajectory data analysis: a matrix‐based approach for thematic analysis of longitudinal data. The study was underpinned by interpretive descriptive methodology. Outcomes & Results: A total of 19 plwMND with a range of MND phenotypes and 15 family members were recruited. Disease progression and participant withdrawal resulted in attrition, however 12 plwMND and seven family members participated at all three time points. Consistent cognitive screening was not feasible, which limited the opportunity to explore the impact of cognitive change. An overarching theme 'Communicating takes effort' was identified and illustrates the efforts required to compensate for, or circumnavigate, impairments to maintain involvement in healthcare. Assistance from family and accommodation from healthcare professionals (HCPs) was needed for ongoing engagement. Where plwMND were dependent on alternative communication devices, this assistance was essential and primarily carried out by family members. Despite these efforts, the quality, quantity and accuracy of communication were sometimes compromised. Participants equated good communication with receiving good healthcare, and some expressed anxiety in the anticipation of being unable to express their needs to healthcare workers. Conclusion & Implications: Communication impairment has a direct impact on healthcare involvement. This study demonstrates the effort required by plwMND and their carers to maintain or maximize ongoing involvement. This effort may not always be visible to HCPs. This information may prompt clinicians to consider the best ways to conduct clinical consultations to accommodate patients' abilities. Compromised communication experiences can be moderated by accommodations and support from HCPs and appropriate adjustments in the health system. Asking patients about their communication preferences and needs, allowing extra time and conducting multidisciplinary sessions are examples of such support. What this paper adds: What is already known on this subject?: Communication and cognitive impairments are known contributors to negative health outcomes and barriers to shared decision‐making generally. The existing literature in decision‐making in MND does not address the specific impact of these impairments on personal healthcare involvement for plwMND and their carers. What this paper adds to existing knowledge?: This paper reports the findings of a research project that interviewed 19 plwMND and 15 carers on one to three occasions over a 26‐month period to obtain their perspectives of the impact of communication on healthcare involvement. Whilst a priori the intention was to look at both communicative and cognitive decline, only the former was achieved. The effort and often 'invisible' activity undertaken to manage or maintain involvement in healthcare is identified. Communication impairment requires support and accommodation, otherwise healthcare involvement can be compromised. Results show participants may associate effective communication with good healthcare. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of the work?: Clinicians may wish to use these insights from plwMND and their carers to guide adjustments to their professional practice to maximize healthcare involvement for their patients. Tailored education for different healthcare groups is needed to improve understanding of MND‐related communication impairments and supportive strategies so that involvement in healthcare is not compromised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public involvement in health services research is encouraged. Descriptions of public involvement across the whole research cycle of a major study are uncommon and its effects on research conduct are poorly understood. Aim: This study aimed to describe how we implemented public involvement, reflect on process and effects in a large‐scale multi‐site research study and present learning for future involvement practice. Method: We recorded public involvement roles and activities throughout the study and compared these to our original public involvement plan included in our project proposal. We held a group interview with study co‐applicants to explore their experiences, transcribed the recorded discussion and conducted thematic analysis. We synthesized the findings to develop recommendations for future practice. Results: Public contributors' activities went beyond strategic study planning and management to include active involvement in data collection, analysis and dissemination. They attended management, scrutiny, planning and task meetings. They also facilitated public involvement through annual planning and review sessions, conducted a Public Involvement audit and coordinated public and patient input to stakeholder discussions at key study stages. Group interview respondents said that involvement exceeded their expectations. They identified effects such as changes to patient recruitment, terminology clarification and extra dissemination activities. They identified factors enabling effective involvement including team and leader commitment, named support contact, building relationships and demonstrating equality and public contributors being confident to challenge and flexible to meet researchers' timescales and work patterns. There were challenges matching resources to roles and questions about the risk of over‐professionalizing public contributors. Conclusion: We extended our planned approach to public involvement and identified benefits to the research process that were both specific and general. We identified good practice to support effective public involvement in health services research that study teams should consider in planning and undertaking research. Public Contribution: This paper was co‐conceived, co‐planned and co‐authored by public contributors to contribute research evidence, based on their experiences of active involvement in the design, implementation and dissemination of a major health services research study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient and Public involvement (PPI) has rapidly evolved into a key component in shaping the delivery of health services. However, little is known about what it is like to participate in involvement procedures that include representatives of multiple groups and in the context of developing new interventions for Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS). Objective: This study explored participants' experiences of PPI, following attending a 'consensus conference', during which their views were sought in relation to the development of a proposed staff‐based intervention and key questions about its design and implementation. Design: Qualitative, semi‐structured interview study. Setting and Participants: Six participants, including service users and various frontline clinical staff team members, who had experience of CAMHS were present at the consensus conference and then asked about their experiences of being involved via semi‐structured interviews. The data were analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Young people, carers and frontline staff have been involved in the design and implementation throughout the broader programme of work of which this study forms part, although these groups were not directly involved in the design and implementation of this paper. Results: Three key narratives were present: (a) Previous Experiences Driving Expectations, (b) 'We are all in the same boat' and (c) The Realization of Multiple Identities. The results suggest that PPI involvement is a complex process that may be driven by positive/negative expectations, but that individuals value learning about others and recognizing different perspectives while reaching shared goals in improving services. Discussion and Conclusion: This study demonstrates the complexity of experience that service users and clinical staff face when engaging in involvement activities in CAMHS. The findings demonstrate the value in engaging multiple stakeholder groups while also highlighting the importance of proper consideration of the procedures involved and facilitators of engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective: End‐stage renal disease (ESRD) affects a multitude of aspects in the patient's daily life, often entailing their own involvement in various aspects of the treatment. Although patient participation is a core health‐care value, what the concept signifies is not yet fully known. The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize patient participation in dialysis care, depicting patients' and health‐care professionals' perspectives. Design: This explorative study employed qualitative interviews and content analysis. Setting and participants: Seven focus group discussions engaging 42 key informants were performed, including patients, staff and managers with experience of dialysis care. Results: In dialysis care, patient participation connotes a sharing of information and knowledge, the learning of and planning of care, including partaking in shared decisions with regards to treatment and management, and being involved in the management of one's own health‐care treatment and/or self‐care activities. Although these attributes were illustrated by all stakeholders, their significance varied: patients suggested that their preferences regarding primary aspects of participation vary, while staff considered patients' performance of dialysis to be the ultimate form of participation. Further, while patients considered multiple ways to execute participation, staff suggested that aspects such as sharing information were a route to, rather than actual, involvement. Conclusions: Without a common understanding to denote the idea of patient participation, staff and patients are exposed to a potential deficit in terms of facilitating patient participation in everyday encounters of dialysis treatment. Further studies and means to serve a mutual understanding are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ever-growing number of out-of-home children in Italy over the last decade has urged an assessment of the available care services. Although foster care is spreading rapidly, many young people are still housed in residential facilities. Reflection on residential care quality has intensified at both a national and an international level. This paper presents the results of a study on residential care facilities for children and young people in the region of Northern Italy ( Lombardy). Four dimensions of 'quality' are considered: efficiency, effectiveness, participation in planning and intervention, and empowerment of children and their family relationships. The combined effects of these dimensions are defined as 'relational quality'. The results show that residential care facilities are generally good, while Social Services resources often appear inadequate for interventions aimed at birth families (efficiency). The well-being of children in residential care facilities is high, even if they tend to move from one facility to another, rarely returning to their birth family (effectiveness). The involvement of children and their families at different stages of the care path is limited (participative approach). Finally, the most critical element is the failure to properly involve birth families (empowerment). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]