Challenges to improve inter-professional care and service collaboration for people living with psychiatric disabilities in ordinary housing

The aim of this study was to describe health care- and social service professionals' experiences of a quality-improvement program implemented in the south of Sweden. The focus of the program was to develop inter-professional collaboration to improve care and service to people with psychiatric disabilities in ordinary housing. Focus group interviews and a thematic analysis were used. The result was captured as themes along steps in process. (I) Entering the quality-improvement program: Lack of information about the program, The challenge of getting started, and Approaching the resources reluctantly. (II) Doing the practice-based improvement work: Facing unprepared workplaces, and Doing twice the work. (III) Looking backevaluation over 1 year: Balancing theoretical knowledge with practical training, and Considering profound knowledge as an integral part of work. The improvement process in clinical practice was found to be both time and energy consuming, yet worth the effort. The findings also indicate that collaboration across organizational boundaries was broadened, and the care and service delivery were improved.

Mobility and satisfaction with lower-limb prostheses and orthoses among users in Sierra Leone: A cross-sectional study

Objectives: To investigate patients' mobility and satisfaction with their lower-limb prosthetic or orthotic device and related service delivery in Sierra Leone; to compare groups of patients regarding type and level of assistive device, gender, area of residence, income; and to identify factors associated with satisfaction with the assistive device and service. Methods: A total of 139 patients answered questionnaires, including the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology questionnaire (QUEST 2.0). Results: Eighty-six percent of assistive devices were in use, but half needed repair. Thirty-three percent of patients reported pain when using their assistive device. Patients had difficulties or could not walk at all on: uneven ground (65%); hills (75%); and stairs (66%). Patients were quite satisfied with their assistive device and the service (mean 3.7 out of 5 in QUEST), but reported 886 problems. Approximately half of the patients could not access services. In relation to mobility and service delivery, women, orthotic patients and patients using above-knee assistive devices had the poorest results. The general condition of the assistive device and patients' ability to walk on uneven ground were associated with satisfaction with the assistive devices and service. Conclusion: Patients reported high levels of mobility while using their device although they experienced pain and difficulties walking on challenging surfaces. Limitations in the effectiveness of assistive devices and limited access to follow-up services and repairs were issues desired to be addressed.