Search

Background: Healthcare professionals without specialist training in communication disorders may not know how to identify and support patients with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. To meet this need, a novel communication screening tool was developed and tested as part of a mental capacity assessment support toolkit. Aims: To provide an initial evaluation of the communication screening tool's usability, interrater reliability and criterion validity. Methods & Procedures: A prototype communication screening tool was developed iteratively using co-production and user-centred design principles. A mixed-methods case series design was used to explore how multidisciplinary healthcare professionals used the tool to test patients in acute hospital and intermediate care settings. Usability data were collected in an electronic survey and from a documentary analysis. Screening test outcomes obtained by pairs of professionals were compared to measure the tool's interrater reliability. Outcomes obtained by professionals were compared with the outcomes of a speech and language therapist's communication assessment to measure criterion validity. Quantitative data were analysed using frequency counts and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Outcomes & Results: A total of 21 professionals, including physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and speech and language therapists, and 17 patients with diagnoses of stroke or cognitive impairment took part. Professionals reported they found the tool easy to use, useful and that its use increased their understanding of communication support methods and the speech and language therapist role in relation to mental capacity assessment. However, not all used it consistently or accurately. Professionals reported they chose not to use the tool when they perceived patients' communication to be intact. Four of eight patients with a diagnosis of dementia or memory impairment, who professionals elected not to screen, were found to have significant communication needs. Screening outcome data for nine patients suggest the tool's interrater reliability is currently moderate, whilst its criterion validity is poor. Conclusions & Implications: This study highlights that non-speech and language therapist health professionals have difficulty identifying and screening for communication difficulties. This confirms existing evidence that people with communication disabilities may not receive the decision-making support they require during mental capacity assessments when speech and language therapists are not involved. Greater understanding of health professionals' thought processes regarding communication is required to further develop this unique communication screening tool so that it can effectively enable healthcare professionals to identify and use communicative adaptations to support decision-making.

Introduction: Acquired swallowing impairment is a major public health issue that often leads to increased morbidity and slower recovery. Speech and language therapists (SLTs) have taken the lead in the assessment and treatment of dysphagia, which is reflected in guidelines where early intervention is recommended. This is in addition to the central role that SLTs play in the management of acquired communication impairments since research indicates that patients with communication difficulties benefit from early and intensive therapy by SLTs. This increasing demand for SLTs is expected to cause conflicting pressures in their workload and, therefore, beneficial to consider workforce planning. The aim of this study was to examine real-world data in the UK to investigate this issue regarding changes in referral patterns of patients with dysphagia and/or communication disorders to SLTs over time, to assist with workforce planning. Methods: We interrogated the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists Online Outcome Tool, a national database, in this retrospective cohort study. We included patients evaluated between 2018 and 2022. We performed a subgroup analysis of patients aged ≥40 years who had a primary medical diagnosis of stroke. Data on age, primary diagnosis, time on caseload, primary Therapeutic Outcome Measure (TOM) scale and initial TOM score on impairment were examined. Results: From the database of 44,444 referrals to speech and language therapy, 5,254 referrals were included in the stroke and overall subgroup analyses. Referrals were 55.1% male, with a median age of 71 years. More than half (56.1%) of these referrals were for dysphagia. Referrals decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic but began to recover from 2021 onwards. The time on the SLT caseload has increased over the years from a median of 14 days (interquartile range [IQR] 0–56) in 2018 to 20 days (IQR: 3–81) in 2022. While there were more referrals to SLT services for assessment and management of dysphagia than for communication in the overall population, in the stroke subgroup, referrals for communication disorders outnumbered referrals for dysphagia from 2020 onwards. Additionally, the severity of impairment on referral increased over the years. Conclusion: Real-world data indicates that referrals to SLT services are changing over time to include more complex and severely impaired patients, with a demand for both swallowing and communication disorders. These findings should inform staff allocation and remodelling of education/training for SLTs to better meet clinical and public health needs. The retrospective nature of this study limits the strength and generalisability of these data, and this topic warrants further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Commissioners and providers require information relating to the number of people requiring a service in order to ensure provision is appropriate and equitable for the population they serve. There is little epidemiological evidence available regarding the prevalence of people who could benefit from augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) in the UK. Aim: To determine the prevalence of people who could benefit from AAC in the UK. Methods & Procedures: An epidemiological approach was taken to create a new estimate of need: the prevalence of the main medical conditions and specific symptoms leading to the requirement for AAC were identified from the literature and AAC specialists were consulted to estimate the number of people who may require AAC. Outcomes & Results: A total of 97.8% of the total number of people who could benefit from AAC have nine medical conditions: dementia, Parkinson's disease, autism, learning disability, stroke, cerebral palsy, head injury, multiple sclerosis and motor neurone disease. The total expectation is that 536 people per 100 000 of the UK population (approximately 0.5%) could benefit from AAC. Conclusions & Implications: To provide accurate figures on the potential need for and use of AAC, data need to be consistently and accurately recorded and regularly reviewed at a community level. The existing data suggest an urgent need for more accurate and up to date information to be captured about the need for AAC in the UK to provide better services and ensure access to AAC strategies, equipment and support.

Background: Stroke rehabilitation interventions are routinely personalized to address individuals' needs, goals, and challenges based on evidence from aggregated randomized controlled trials (RCT) data and meta-syntheses. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses may better inform the development of precision rehabilitation approaches, quantifying treatment responses while adjusting for confounders and reducing ecological bias. Aim: We explored associations between speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions frequency (days/week), intensity (h/week), and dosage (total SLT-hours) and language outcomes for different age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity subgroups by undertaking prespecified subgroup network meta-analyses of the RELEASE database. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registrations were systematically searched (inception-Sept2015) for RCTs, including ⩾ 10 IPD on stroke-related aphasia. We extracted demographic, stroke, aphasia, SLT, and risk of bias data. Overall-language ability, auditory comprehension, and functional communication outcomes were standardized. A one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered IPD into a single optimal model, examining SLT regimen and language recovery from baseline to first post-intervention follow-up, adjusting for covariates identified a-priori. Data were dichotomized by age (⩽/> 65 years), aphasia severity (mild–moderate/ moderate–severe based on language outcomes' median value), chronicity (⩽/> 3 months), and sex subgroups. We reported estimates of means and 95% confidence intervals. Where relative variance was high (> 50%), results were reported for completeness. Results: 959 IPD (25 RCTs) were analyzed. For working-age participants, greatest language gains from baseline occurred alongside moderate to high-intensity SLT (functional communication 3-to-4 h/week; overall-language and comprehension > 9 h/week); older participants' greatest gains occurred alongside low-intensity SLT (⩽ 2 h/week) except for auditory comprehension (> 9 h/week). For both age-groups, SLT-frequency and dosage associated with best language gains were similar. Participants ⩽ 3 months post-onset demonstrated greatest overall-language gains for SLT at low intensity/moderate dosage (⩽ 2 SLT-h/week; 20-to-50 h); for those > 3 months, post-stroke greatest gains were associated with moderate-intensity/high-dosage SLT (3–4 SLT-h/week; ⩾ 50 hours). For moderate–severe participants, 4 SLT-days/week conferred the greatest language gains across outcomes, with auditory comprehension gains only observed for ⩾ 4 SLT-days/week; mild–moderate participants' greatest functional communication gains were associated with similar frequency (⩾ 4 SLT-days/week) and greatest overall-language gains with higher frequency SLT (⩾ 6 days/weekly). Males' greatest gains were associated with SLT of moderate (functional communication; 3-to-4 h/weekly) or high intensity (overall-language and auditory comprehension; (> 9 h/weekly) compared to females for whom the greatest gains were associated with lower-intensity SLT (< 2 SLT-h/weekly). Consistencies across subgroups were also evident; greatest overall-language gains were associated with 20-to-50 SLT-h in total; auditory comprehension gains were generally observed when SLT > 9 h over ⩾ 4 days/week. Conclusions: We observed a treatment response in most subgroups' overall-language, auditory comprehension, and functional communication language gains. For some, the maximum treatment response varied in association with different SLT-frequency, intensity, and dosage. Where differences were observed, working-aged, chronic, mild–moderate, and male subgroups experienced their greatest language gains alongside high-frequency/intensity SLT. In contrast, older, moderate–severely impaired, and female subgroups within 3 months of aphasia onset made their greatest gains for lower-intensity SLT. The acceptability, clinical, and cost effectiveness of precision aphasia rehabilitation approaches based on age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity should be evaluated in future clinical RCTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The quality cycle requires clinicians to assess the outcomes of interventions. Benchmarking is an approach that has been advocated to compare current performance across different services to identify commonalities [...]

To evaluate the usability and acceptability of the Mental Capacity Assessment Support Toolkit (MCAST) in healthcare settings and whether its use was associated with increased legal compliance and assessor confidence. A mixed methods convergence triangulation model was used. Multidisciplinary professionals used the MCAST during mental capacity assessments for UK hospital patients with diagnoses of stroke or acute or chronic cognitive impairment. Changes in legal compliance were investigated by comparing scores on case note audits before and after implementation of the MCAST. Changes in assessor confidence and professionals' perceptions of the MCAST's usability and acceptability were explored using surveys. Patients' and family members' views on acceptability were determined using semi-structured interviews. Data were integrated using triangulation. Twenty-one professionals, 17 patients and two family members participated. Use of the MCAST was associated with significant increases in legal compliance and assessor confidence. Most professionals found the MCAST easy to use and beneficial to their practice and patients. Patients and family members found the MCAST materials acceptable. The MCAST is the first toolkit to support the needs of individuals with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. It enables assessors to deliver high quality, legally compliant and confident practice. Mental capacity assessment practice needs to be improved to maximise patient autonomy, safety and well-being. The MCAST is a paper-based toolkit designed to facilitate and improve mental capacity practice in England and Wales. This study suggests the MCAST would be easy and acceptable to use in healthcare settings and could lead to improvements in assessment quality and assessor confidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare professionals without specialist training in communication disorders may not know how to identify and support patients with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. To meet this need, a novel communication screening tool was developed and tested as part of a mental capacity assessment support toolkit. Aims: To provide an initial evaluation of the communication screening tool's usability, interrater reliability and criterion validity. Methods & Procedures: A prototype communication screening tool was developed iteratively using co‐production and user‐centred design principles. A mixed‐methods case series design was used to explore how multidisciplinary healthcare professionals used the tool to test patients in acute hospital and intermediate care settings. Usability data were collected in an electronic survey and from a documentary analysis. Screening test outcomes obtained by pairs of professionals were compared to measure the tool's interrater reliability. Outcomes obtained by professionals were compared with the outcomes of a speech and language therapist's communication assessment to measure criterion validity. Quantitative data were analysed using frequency counts and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis. Outcomes & Results: A total of 21 professionals, including physicians, nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and speech and language therapists, and 17 patients with diagnoses of stroke or cognitive impairment took part. Professionals reported they found the tool easy to use, useful and that its use increased their understanding of communication support methods and the speech and language therapist role in relation to mental capacity assessment. However, not all used it consistently or accurately. Professionals reported they chose not to use the tool when they perceived patients' communication to be intact. Four of eight patients with a diagnosis of dementia or memory impairment, who professionals elected not to screen, were found to have significant communication needs. Screening outcome data for nine patients suggest the tool's interrater reliability is currently moderate, whilst its criterion validity is poor. Conclusions & Implications: This study highlights that non‐speech and language therapist health professionals have difficulty identifying and screening for communication difficulties. This confirms existing evidence that people with communication disabilities may not receive the decision‐making support they require during mental capacity assessments when speech and language therapists are not involved. Greater understanding of health professionals' thought processes regarding communication is required to further develop this unique communication screening tool so that it can effectively enable healthcare professionals to identify and use communicative adaptations to support decision‐making. What this paper addsWhat is already known on this subjectLimited previous research suggests that assessing the mental capacity of people with communication disabilities is complex. Practice needs to be improved to ensure this group is adequately supported to make decisions, in line with legal requirements.What this paper adds to existing knowledgeThis paper describes the development and testing of a novel communication screening tool for use by healthcare professionals preparing to undertake mental capacity assessments. It increases our understanding of how healthcare professionals without specialist training understand communication disability and the role of the speech and language therapist in relation to mental capacity assessment.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?Healthcare professionals without specialist training require support to understand and respond to the needs of people with communication disabilities during mental capacity assessments. With further development and testing, in response to initial evaluation, this novel communication screening tool may be able to provide this support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To review evidence describing how health and social care professionals in England and Wales assess mental capacity, in order to identify ways to improve practice. Methods: A systematised literature review was completed. Electronic databases of published medical, health and social care research and gray literature were searched. Journal articles and research reports published between 2007 and 2018 were included if they met predefined eligibility criteria. Evidence from included studies was synthesized using thematic analysis. Results: 20 studies of variable methodological quality were included. The studies described assessments carried out by a range of multidisciplinary professionals working with different groups of service users in diverse care contexts. Four main themes were identified: preparation for assessment; capacity assessment processes; supported decision-making; interventions to facilitate or improve practice. There was a lack of detailed information describing how professionals provided information to service users and tested their decision-making abilities. Practice reported in studies varied in terms of its conformity to legal requirements. Conclusions: This review synthesized evidence about mental capacity assessment methods and quality in England and Wales and analyzed it to suggest ways in which practice might be improved. Mental capacity assessment practice in England and Wales varies and is not always consistent with legal requirements, risking inconsistent and inaccurate judgements about capacity and exposure to legal action. Interventions have been developed to help professionals to engage in supported decision-making, and improve their mental capacity assessments and documentation in line with legal standards. These interventions include training and practical resources, such as assessment flowcharts, checklists and documentation aids. Such interventions would benefit from robust evaluation before they are implemented more widely. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose:To explore approaches to the assessment of mental capacity within acute hospital and intermediate care settings in England. Methods:Two focus group interviews were conducted with multidisciplinary staff (n = 13) within a large hospital trust. Data were analysed using a Framework approach. Results:Three main themes were identified: (i) the assessment process; (ii) staff experience of assessment; (iii) assessing capacity for patients with communication difficulties. Staff identified the main patient groups, patient decisions and professionals involved in capacity assessment. They described using both formal and informal approaches to assess capacity and specific methods to identify and support the needs of patients with communication difficulties during the assessment process. Most staff reported finding capacity assessment challenging, due to time pressures, a perceived lack of knowledge or skills and encountering practice that is not consistent with legal requirements. Staff stated a need for initiatives to facilitate and improve practice. Conclusions:These findings provide confirmatory evidence that mental capacity assessment is complex and challenging and that staff would benefit from additional support and resources to aid their practice. It provides new evidence about the methods used by staff to assess capacity, particularly for patients with communication difficulties. Implications for RehabilitationThis study contributes to our understanding of how staff assess capacity in hospital and intermediate care settings.Mental capacity assessment is a complex activity and many staff reported finding it challenging.Patients with communication difficulties need additional support during capacity assessments but may not always receive this.Current practice needs to be improved and staff need support and resources to achieve this. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]