FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

What are the views of adults with an intellectual disability (AWID), carers and healthcare professionals on a community falls management programme for AWID: a qualitative interview study in the UK

Por: Robinson · K. · Logan · P. · Tucker · C. · Finlayson · J. · van der Wardt · V. · Kilby · A. · Knowles · S. · Vanhegan · S. · Hodgson · S. · Lidstone · N.
Objectives

The aim of this study was to refine a draft of the ACTiON FALLS LD programme based on the views of adults with an intellectual disability (AWID), carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

Design, setting and participants

The semistructured interview study included HCP as well as AWID and carers supporting AWID living in the community. Community settings included sheltered living, supported living, AWID living at home with family carers or independently. The interview study explored the first draft of the ACTiON FALLS LD programme as well as the wider falls management for AWID. Interviews with AWID were developed to include a range of approaches (eg, case studies, pictures) to support inclusive participation. Individual interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed. Researcher notes were used during interviews with AWID. All data were analysed using the principles of framework analysis.

Results

14 HCP, 8 carers and 13 AWID took part in the interview process. Five key themes were identified: programme components, programme design, programme approach, who would use the programme and programme delivery.

Conclusions

The views of AWID, HCP and carers showed the need to consider the impact of risk perception, anxiety and fear of falling in the adaption of the ACTiON FALLS programme. The programme needs to be accessible and support the inclusion of AWID in managing falls and ultimately fulfil the requirement for a proactive and educational tool by all.

What factors facilitate partnerships between higher education and local mental health services for students? A case study collective

Por: Broglia · E. · Nisbet · K. · Bone · C. · Simmonds-Buckley · M. · Knowles · L. · Hardy · G. · Gibbon · L. · Barkham · M.
Background

Higher education institutions face challenges in providing effective mental health services for diverse student needs. In the UK, discrepancies between healthcare and education service provision create barriers for students and require stronger alignment through partnerships.

Objectives

This study aimed to identify risks, barriers and enablers to developing service partnerships between universities and the National Health Service (NHS) in England. It investigated existing partnerships and strategies that facilitate effective collaborative working.

Design and setting

A case study approach was employed, including coproduction and stakeholder involvement with staff and service users, to gather information from eight English universities developing regional student mental health hubs. This research received appropriate ethical approval.

Participants

In total, 27 professional staff from counselling, mental health, disability and well-being services participated and represented their respective services.

Outcome measures

Descriptive information was collected from service websites, handbooks, reports and 11 focus groups using a standardised data collection template. Inter-rater reliability was used to determine the agreement between coders and finalise focus group themes. EQUATOR (Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research) Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research were adopted.

Results

Using inductive thematic analysis, five themes were identified for developing partnerships: building blocks, facing barriers, achieving positive outcomes, shaping student services and developing coordinated care. Fleiss’ kappa showed strong agreement between raters regarding the partnership factors (k=0.84 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.87), p

Conclusions

Stronger partnerships between universities and NHS are needed to meet increasing student mental health demands. Addressing barriers and implementing strategies to develop partnerships can enhance student services.

Preregistration

https://osf.io/u54qk/

Experience of an NIHR Clinical Lectureship (medical/dental) and the determining factors for a clinical academic career post lectureship: a mixed-method evaluation

Por: Stevenson · C. J. · Harris-Joseph · H. · Harper · L. · Hewison · J. · Mulvey · M. R. · Heuvelman · H. · McVicker · C. · Razalan · M. M. · Knowles · E. · Ebanks · B. · Lee · K. · Fenton · J. · Thompson · P. · Cotterill · L. A.
Objectives

The objective of this study is to investigate early-to-late postdoctoral clinical academic progression and the experiences of NIHR Clinical Lectureship (CL) fellows, considering enablers and barriers to success, and identifying the factors associated with immediate progression to a clinical academic role following completion of the award.

Setting

Datasets of CL awardees across the UK.

Participants

For semistructured interviews, n=40 CL awardees that had finished their award within the previous 5 years. For quantitative analysis, n=1226 completed or currently active CL awardees.

Outcome measures

The responses from the semistructured interviews to the defined questions on experiences during the award, postaward progression, and enablers and barriers to academic progression. Other primary outcome measures were quantitative data on first destinations postaward, demographic data, and whether an awardee had previously held an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship (ACF) or was a recipient of the Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS) Starter Grant.

Results

CL awardees identified numerous benefits to the award, with the majority achieving their aims. Most awardees progressed to a clinical academic role; however, some returned to a clinical only position, citing concerns around the time pressure associated with balancing clinical and academic responsibilities, and the competition to attain further postdoctoral awards. The region of the award partnership, year of award end and success in applying for an AMS Starter Grant were associated with progression to a clinical academic role. Gender, holding an ACF and having a craft or non-craft specialty had no independent statistical association with clinical academic progression.

Conclusions

The CL is a valued element of the Integrated Academic Pathway. By addressing issues around later postdoctoral progression opportunities, responding to challenges experienced by CLs, and by understanding the factors identified in this study associated with clinical academic progression, it should be possible to increase the proportion of CLs that become fully independent clinical academic research leaders.

Participants

1226 NIHR CLs active or completed on the award between 2006 and 2020.

REVISE: Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions in the ICU: a randomised trial protocol

Por: Deane · A. M. · Alhazzani · W. · Guyatt · G. · Finfer · S. · Marshall · J. C. · Myburgh · J. · Zytaruk · N. · Hardie · M. · Saunders · L. · Knowles · S. · Lauzier · F. · Chapman · M. J. · English · S. · Muscedere · J. · Arabi · Y. · Ostermann · M. · Venkatesh · B. · Young · P. · Thabane · L
Introduction

The Re-Evaluating the Inhibition of Stress Erosions (REVISE) Trial aims to determine the impact of the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole compared with placebo on clinically important upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in the intensive care unit (ICU), 90-day mortality and other endpoints in critically ill adults. The objective of this report is to describe the rationale, methodology, ethics and management of REVISE.

Methods and analysis

REVISE is an international, randomised, concealed, stratified, blinded parallel-group individual patient trial being conducted in ICUs in Canada, Australia, Saudi Arabia, UK, US, Kuwait, Pakistan and Brazil. Patients≥18 years old expected to remain invasively mechanically ventilated beyond the calendar day after enrolment are being randomised to either 40 mg pantoprazole intravenously or an identical placebo daily while mechanically ventilated in the ICU. The primary efficacy outcome is clinically important upper GI bleeding within 90 days of randomisation. The primary safety outcome is 90-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes include rates of ventilator-associated pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, new renal replacement therapy, ICU and hospital mortality, and patient-important GI bleeding. Tertiary outcomes are total red blood cells transfused, peak serum creatinine level in the ICU, and duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital stay. The sample size is 4800 patients; one interim analysis was conducted after 2400 patients had complete 90-day follow-up; the Data Monitoring Committee recommended continuing the trial.

Ethics and dissemination

All participating centres receive research ethics approval before initiation by hospital, region or country, including, but not limited to – Australia: Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee and Mater Misericordiae Ltd Human Research Ethics Committee; Brazil: Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa; Canada: Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board; Kuwait: Ministry of Health Standing Committee for Coordination of Health and Medical Research; Pakistan: Maroof Institutional Review Board; Saudi Arabia: Ministry of National Guard Health Affairs Institutional Review Board: United Kingdom: Hampshire B Research Ethics Committee; United States: Institutional Review Board of the Nebraska Medical Centre. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice and guidelines worldwide.

Trial registration number

NCT03374800.

❌