Search

Aim: To identify the research on childhood disability service adaptations and their impact on children and young people with long‐term disability during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Method: A mapping review was undertaken. We searched the World Health Organization Global COVID‐19 database using the search terms 'children', 'chronic/disabling conditions', and 'services/therapies'. Eligible papers reported service changes for children (0–19 years) with long‐term disability in any geographical or clinical setting between 1st January 2020 and 26th January 2022. Papers were charted across the effective practice and organization of care taxonomy of health system interventions and were narratively synthesized; an interactive map was produced. Results: Reduction of face‐to‐face care and usual provision had a huge impact on children and families. Adoption of telehealth provided continuity for the care and management of some conditions. There was limited evidence of changes to mental health services, transitions of care, social care, or child‐reported satisfaction or acceptability of service changes. Interpretation: The long‐term impacts of service change during the pandemic need full evaluation. However, widespread disruption seems to have had a profound impact on child and carer health and well‐being. Service recovery needs to be specific to the individual needs of children with a disability and their families. This should be done through coproduction to ensure that service changes meet needs and are accessible and equitable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background With current policy in healthcare research, in the United Kingdom and internationally, focused on development of research excellence in individuals and teams, building capacity for implementation and translation of research is paramount among the professionals who use that research in daily practice. The judicious use of research outcomes and evaluation of best evidence and practice in healthcare is integrally linked to the research capacity and capabilities of the workforce. In addition to promoting high quality research, mechanisms for actively enhancing research capacity more generally must be in place to address the complexities that both undermine and facilitate this activity. Methods A comprehensive collaborative model for building research capacity in one health professional group, speech and language therapy, was developed in a region within the UK and is presented here. The North East of England and the strong research ethos of this profession in addressing complex interventions offered a fertile context for developing and implementing a model which integrated the healthcare and university sectors. Two key frameworks underpin this model. The first addresses the individual participants’ potential trajectory from research consciousness to research participative to research active. The second embeds a model developed for general practitioners into a broader framework of practice-academic partnership and knowledge and skills exchange, and considers external drivers and impacts on practice and patient outcomes as key elements. Results and discussion The integration of practice and academia has been successful in building a culture of research activity within one healthcare profession in a region in the UK and has resulted, to date, in a series of research related outcomes. Understanding the key components of this partnership and the explicit strategies used has driven the implementation of the model and are discussed here. Conclusions A strong, equitable collaboration between clinical and academic partners working towards a common outcome can enhance the use of research within the healthcare workforce and contribute actively to the research process. A set of propositions are specified to facilitate both transferability of this partnership model to other professional groups and clinical teams and evaluation of the model components.

Background: Our practice in Northumberland has offered patients copies of their clinical referral letters for almost 3 years. However, many patients declined this offer and this qualitative study was conducted to determine why almost 80% of patients offered a copy of their referral letter opted not to receive one., Aim: To discover why some patients accepted and others declined a copy of the letter written from GP to specialist., Design of Study: A qualitative focus-group study., Setting: General practice in Northumberland., Method: Three focus groups of referred patients were created, and discussions were taped, transcribed and analysed for major themes., Results: The patients chose to accept or decline a copy of their referral letter for diverse reasons. However, most felt that the ability to choose for themselves whether to have a copy or not was essential., Conclusions: The concept of trust in their GP was a major theme that patients related was often behind their decision to decline a copy of their letter. These results, if transferable, may have implications for the application of this policy.