Exploring nurses' reactions to a novel technology to support acute health care delivery

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore nurses' reactions to new novel technology for acute health care. BACKGROUND: Past failures of technology developers to deliver products that meet nurses' needs have led to resistance and reluctance in the technology adoption process. Thus, involving nurses in a collaborative process from early conceptualisation serves to inform design reflective upon current clinical practice, facilitating the cementing of 'vision' and expectations of the technology. DESIGN: An exploratory descriptive design to capture nurses' immediate impressions. METHODS: Four focus groups (52 nurses from medical and surgical wards at two hospitals in Australia; one private and one public). RESULTS: Nursing reactions towards the new technology illustrated a variance in barrier and enabler comments across multiple domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework. Most challenging for nurses were the perceived threat to their clinical skill, and the potential capability of the novel technology to capture their clinical workflow. Enabling reactions included visions that this could help integrate care between departments; help management and support of nursing processes; and coordinating their patients care between clinicians. Nurses' reactions differed across hospital sites, influenced by their experiences of using technology. For example, Site 1 nurses reported wide variability in their distribution of barrier and enabling comments and nurses at Site 2, where technology was prevalent, reported mostly positive responses. CONCLUSION: This early involvement offered nursing input and facilitated understanding of the potential capabilities of novel technology to support nursing work, particularly the characteristics seen as potentially beneficial (enabling technology) and those conflicting (barrier technology) with the delivery of both safe and effective patient care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Collaborative involvement of nurses from the early conceptualisation of technology development brings benefits that increase the likelihood of successful use of a tool intended to support the delivery of safe and efficient patient care.

Health-care costs of underweight, overweight and obesity: Australian population-based study

AIM: Child health varies with body mass index (BMI), but it is unknown by what age or how much this attracts additional population health-care costs. We aimed to determine the (1) cross-sectional relationships between BMI and costs across the first decade of life and (2) in longitudinal analyses, whether costs increase with duration of underweight or obesity. METHODS: Participants: Baby (n = 4230) and Kindergarten (n = 4543) cohorts in the nationally representative Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. OUTCOME: Medicare Benefits Scheme (including all general practitioner plus a large proportion of paediatrician visits) plus prescription medication costs to federal government from birth to sixth (Baby cohort) and fourth to tenth (Kindergarten cohort) birthdays. PREDICTOR: biennial BMI measurements over the same period. RESULTS: Among Australian children under 10 years of age, 5-6% were underweight, 11-18% overweight and 5-6% obese. Excess costs with low and high BMI became evident from age 4-5 years, with normal weight accruing the least, obesity the most, and underweight and overweight intermediate costs. Relative to overall between-child variation, these excess costs per child were very modest, with a maximum of $94 per year at age 4-5 years. Nonetheless, this projects to a substantial cost to government of approximately $13 million per annum for all Australian children aged less than 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial excess population costs provide further economic justification for promoting healthy body weight. However, obese children's low individual excess health-care costs mean that effective treatments are likely to increase short-term costs to the public health purse during childhood.

Mental health consumers' perceptions of quality of life and mental health care

Research spanning the past decade consistently reports that people with severe mental illnesses experience lower quality of life than the general population, however, little is known about what "quality of life" means to consumers, or how quality of life can be promoted in mental health care. This study measured the Quality of Life of mental health consumers receiving care from a Mental Health Nurse Incentive Program, and examined consumer perceptions of quality of life. The study used an exploratory design incorporating the WHOQOL-brèf survey and four additional qualitative questions for data collection. Data were analysed using descriptive and correlational statistics. Participants (n = 49) reported lower quality of life scores on all four domains of the WHOQOL-brèf and lower overall ratings for "quality of life" than the general population. Having basic needs met, good relationships with family and friends, regular support, and improved social connectedness were identified by consumers as important to their quality of life.

The impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on mental health care

Some may argue that the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) has benefited only celebrities and asylum-seekers. Others contend that the HRA is a significant piece of legislation that has the potential to promote and protect the rights of the most vulnerable in our society. A few years after the Act's introduction this contribution considers the impact it has had on mental health practice in the UK.

Empirical evidence of recall bias for primary health care visits

BACKGROUND: While it is common for an economic evaluation of health care to rely on trial participants for self-reported health service utilisation, there is variability in the accuracy of this data due to potential recall bias. The aim of this study was to quantify the level of recall bias in self-reported primary health care general practitioner (GP) visits following inpatient rehabilitation over a 12 month period.

METHODS: This report is a secondary analysis from a larger randomised control trial of an economic evaluation of additional Saturday inpatient rehabilitation. Participants were adults who had been discharged into the community following admission to an acute general rehabilitation hospital. Participants were asked to recall primary health care visits, including community GP visits, via a telephone questionnaire which was administered at 6 and 12 months following discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. Participants were asked to recall health service utilisation over each preceding 6 month period. The self-reported data were compared to equivalent claims data from the national insurer, over the same period.

RESULTS: 751 participants (75% of the full trial) with a mean age of 74 years (SD 13) were included in this analysis. Over the 12 month period following discharge from rehabilitation there was an under-reporting of 14% in self-reported health service utilisation for GP visits compared to national insurer claims data over the same period. From 0 to 6 months following discharge from rehabilitation, there was an over-reporting of self-reported GP visits of 35% and from 7 to 12 months there was an under-reporting of self-reported GP visits of 36%, compared to national insurer claims data over the same period. 46% of patients reported the same or one number difference in self-reported GP visits between the 0 to 6 and the 7 to 12 month periods.

CONCLUSION: Based on these findings we recommend that an economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial for an elderly adult rehabilitation population include a sensitivity analysis that inflates self-reported GP visits by 16% over 12 months. However caution is required when utilising self-reported GP visits as the data may contain periods of both over and under reporting. Where general practitioner visits are expected to vary significantly between intervention and control groups we recommend that administrative data be included in the trial to accurately capture resources for an economic evaluation.

Development, implementation and evaluation of a clinical research engagement and leadership capacity building program in a large Australian health care service

BACKGROUND: Health professionals need to be integrated more effectively in clinical research to ensure that research addresses clinical needs and provides practical solutions at the coal face of care. In light of limited evidence on how best to achieve this, evaluation of strategies to introduce, adapt and sustain evidence-based practices across different populations and settings is required. This project aims to address this gap through the co-design, development, implementation, evaluation, refinement and ultimately scale-up of a clinical research engagement and leadership capacity building program in a clinical setting with little to no co-ordinated approach to clinical research engagement and education.

METHODS/DESIGN: The protocol is based on principles of research capacity building and on a six-step framework, which have previously led to successful implementation and long-term sustainability. A mixed methods study design will be used. Methods will include: (1) a review of the literature about strategies that engage health professionals in research through capacity building and/or education in research methods; (2) a review of existing local research education and support elements; (3) a needs assessment in the local clinical setting, including an online cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews; (4) co-design and development of an educational and support program; (5) implementation of the program in the clinical environment; and (6) pre- and post-implementation evaluation and ultimately program scale-up. The evaluation focuses on research activity and knowledge, attitudes and preferences about clinical research, evidence-based practice and leadership and post implementation, about their satisfaction with the program. The investigators will evaluate the feasibility and effect of the program according to capacity building measures and will revise where appropriate prior to scale-up.

DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that this clinical research engagement and leadership capacity building program will enable and enhance clinically relevant research to be led and conducted by health professionals in the health setting. This approach will also encourage identification of areas of clinical uncertainty and need that can be addressed through clinical research within the health setting.

Family physician preceptors' conceptualizations of health advocacy: implications for medical education

PURPOSE: Despite its official acceptance as an important physician responsibility, health advocacy remains difficult to define, teach, role model, and assess. The aim of the current study was to explore physicians' conceptions of health advocacy based on their experience with health-advocacy-related activities. METHOD: In 2012, the authors conducted 11 semistructured interviews with family physician clinical preceptors and analyzed the interviews in the tradition of phenomenography. RESULTS: The authors identified three distinct but related ways of understanding health advocacy: (1) Clinical: Health advocacy as support of individual patients in addressing health care needs related to the immediate clinical problem within the health care system, (2) Paraclinical: Health advocacy as support of individual patients in addressing needs that the physician preceptors viewed as peripheral yet parallel to both the health care system and the immediate clinical problem, and (3) Supraclinical: Health advocacy as population-based activities aimed at practice- and system-level changes that address the social determinants of health. CONCLUSIONS: The qualitatively different understandings of health advocacy shed light on why current approaches to defining, teaching, role modeling, and assessing health advocacy competencies in medical education appear idiosyncratic. The authors suggest the development of an inclusive and extensive conceptual framework that may allow the medical education community to imagine novel ways of understanding and engaging in health advocacy.

A discrete choice experiment to examine the preferences of patients with cancer and their willingness to pay for different types of health care appointments

BACKGROUND: This study sought to understand the preferences of patients with cancer and the trade-offs between appointment attributes using discrete choice experiment (DCE). METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: Patients with cancer at 3 hospitals completed a self-administered DCE. Each scenario described 6 attributes: expertise of health care professionals (HCPs), familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history, waiting time, accompaniment by family/friends, travel time, and out-of-pocket costs. Patient preferences were estimated using logistic regression. Willingness to pay (WTP) estimates were derived from regression coefficients. RESULTS: Of 512 patients contacted, 185 returned the questionnaire. The mean age was 61 years, and 60% of respondents were female. The mean time since cancer diagnosis was 34 months, 90% had received treatment; and 61% had early-stage disease. The most important attributes were expertise and familiarity of doctors with patients' medical history; distance traveled was least likely to influence patient preferences. The WTP analysis estimated that patients were willing to pay $680 (95% CI, 470-891) for an appointment with a specialist, $571 (95% CI, 388-754) for doctors familiar with their history, $422 (95% CI, 262-582) for shorter waiting times, $399 (95% CI, 249-549) to be accompanied by family/friends, and $301 (95% CI, 162-441) for shorter traveling times. Male patients had a stronger preference for accompaniment by family/friends. The expertise of HCP was the most important attribute for patients regardless of geographic remoteness. CONCLUSIONS: Our study can assist the development of patient-centered health care models that improve patient access to experienced HCPs, support the role of primary care providers during the cancer journey, and educate patients about the roles of non-oncology HCPs to cope with increasing demand for cancer care.

A square peg in a round hole? Approaches to incorporating lifestyle counselling into routine primary health care

Few studies have explored how lifestyle counselling can be integrated into routine practice for primary health care (PHC) clinicians working outside general practice. This paper describes the feasibility of models of lifestyle counselling developed for PHC clinicians working in community health services and the congruence with routine practice. Action research methods were used to develop and implement models of lifestyle counselling in three community health teams. Following a six-month implementation period, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of participants (n = 30) to explore the appropriateness of implementing risk factor management models in practice. Models were considered appropriate if they fitted the clinician’s philosophy of practice, were relevant to existing work tasks, could easily be integrated into workflow and were perceived as being acceptable to the client. The approach to service delivery and team priorities were also important in influencing which models suited particular teams. Models of lifestyle counselling for PHC clinicians outside general practice should be tailored to the clinicians’ and teams’ way of working and thus may need to be discipline-specific. Engaging PHC clinicians and teams is important in developing models that are acceptable and feasible in everyday practice.

Child obesity prevention in primary health care: the role of practice nurses

Aim

Overweight and obesity affects approximately 20% of Australian pre-schoolers. The general practice nurse (PN) workforce has increased in recent years; however, little is known of PN capacity and potential to provide routine advice for the prevention of child obesity. This mixed methods pilot study aims to explore the current practices, attitudes, confidence and training needs of Australian PNs surrounding child obesity prevention in the general practice setting.

Methods

PNs from three Divisions of General Practice in New South Wales were invited to complete a questionnaire investigating PN roles, attitudes and practices in preventive care with a focus on child obesity. A total of 59 questionnaires were returned (response rate 22%). Semi-structured qualitative interviews were also conducted with a subsample of PNs (n = 10).

Results

Questionnaire respondent demographics were similar to that of national PN data. PNs described preventive work as enjoyable despite some perceived barriers including lack of confidence. Number of years working in general practice did not appear to strongly influence nurses' perceived barriers. Seventy per cent of PNs were interested in being more involved in conducting child health checks in practice, and 85% expressed an interest in taking part in child obesity prevention training.

Conclusions

Findings from this pilot study suggest that PNs are interested in prevention of child obesity despite barriers to practice and low confidence levels. More research is needed to determine the effect of training on PN confidence and behaviours in providing routine healthy life-style messages for the prevention of child obesity.

Explaining the variation in the management of lifestyle risk factors in primary health care: a multilevel cross sectional study

Background

Despite evidence for the effectiveness of interventions to modify lifestyle behaviours in the primary health care (PHC) setting, assessment and intervention for these behaviours remains low in routine practice. Little is known about the relative importance of various determinants of practice.

This study aimed to examine the relative importance of provider characteristics and attitudes, patient characteristics and consultation factors in determining the rate of assessment and intervention for lifestyle risk factors in PHC.

Methods

A prospective audit of assessment and intervention for lifestyle risk factors was undertaken by PHC nurses and allied health providers (n = 57) for all patients seen (n = 732) over a two week period. Providers completed a survey to assess key attitudes related to addressing lifestyle issues. Multi-level logistic regression analysis of patient audit records was undertaken. Associations between variables from both data sources were examined, together with the variance explained by patient and consultation (level 1) and provider (level 2) factors.

Results

There was significant variance between providers in the assessment and intervention for lifestyle risk factors. The consultation type and reason for the visit were the most important in explaining the variation in assessment practices, however these factors along with patient and provider variables accounted for less than 20% of the variance. In contrast, multi-level models showed that provider factors were most important in explaining the variance in intervention practices, in particular, the location of the team in which providers worked (urban or rural) and provider perceptions of their effectiveness and accessibility of support services. After controlling for provider variables, patients' socio-economic status, the reason for the visit and providers' perceptions of the 'appropriateness' of addressing risk factors in the consultation were all significantly associated with providing optimal intervention. Together, measured patient consultation and provider variables accounted for most (80%) of the variation in intervention practices between providers.

Conclusion

The findings highlight the importance of provider factors such as beliefs and attitudes, team location and work context in understanding variations in the provision of lifestyle intervention in PHC. Further studies of this type are required to identify variables that improve the proportion of variance explained in assessment practices.

Should I and Can I?: a mixed methods study of clinician beliefs and attitudes in the management of lifestyle risk factors in primary health care

Background
Primary health care (PHC) clinicians have an important role to play in addressing lifestyle risk factors for chronic diseases. However they intervene only rarely, despite the opportunities that arise within their routine clinical practice. Beliefs and attitudes have been shown to be associated with risk factor management practices, but little is known about this for PHC clinicians working outside general practice. The aim of this study was to explore the beliefs and attitudes of PHC clinicians about incorporating lifestyle risk factor management into their routine care and to examine whether these varied according to their self reported level of risk factor management.

Methods
A cross sectional survey was undertaken with PHC clinicians (n = 59) in three community health teams. Clinicians' beliefs and attitudes were also explored through qualitative interviews with a purposeful sample of 22 clinicians from the teams. Mixed methods analysis was used to compare beliefs and attitudes for those with high and low levels of self reported risk factor management.

Results
Role congruence, perceived client acceptability, beliefs about capabilities, perceived effectiveness and clinicians' own lifestyle were key themes related to risk factor management practices. Those reporting high levels of risk factor screening and intervention had different beliefs and attitudes to those PHC clinicians who reported lower levels.

Conclusion
PHC clinicians' level of involvement in risk factor management reflects their beliefs and attitudes about it. This provides insights into ways of intervening to improve the integration of behavioural risk factor management into routine practice.

Primary health care nurse perception and men’s expectation of the role of the primary health care nurse in providing men’s health services in the primary care setting in Victoria

 This study adds significantly to the current paucity of knowledge around men's health in Australian primary care and in particular stresses the need for men's health care education to be more reliable and systematic foundation for men's sexual health, mental health and health promotion.

Does self-efficacy mediate the cross-sectional relationship between perceived quality of health care and self-management of diabetes? Results from Diabetes MILES - Australia

OBJECTIVE: Quality of health care (QoC) and self-efficacy may affect self-management of diabetes, but such effects are not well understood. We examined the indirect role of diabetes-specific self-efficacy (DSE) and generalised self-efficacy (GSE) in mediating the cross-sectional relationship between self-reported QoC and diabetes self-management.

DESIGN: Diabetes MILES-Australia was a national survey of 3,338 adults with diabetes. We analysed data from 1,624 respondents (Age: M=52.1, SD=13.9) with type 1 (T1D; n=680) or type 2 diabetes (T2D; n=944), who responded to a version of the survey containing key measures.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported healthy eating, physical activity, self-monitoring of blood glucose frequency, HbA1c, medication/insulin adherence. RESULTS: We used Preacher and Hayes' bootstrapping method, controlling for age, gender and diabetes duration, to test mediation of DSE and GSE on the relationship of QoC with each self-management variable. We found statistically significant but trivial mediation effects of DSE and of GSE on most, but not all, variables (all effect sizes <0.06).

CONCLUSION: Support for mediation was weak, suggesting that relationships amongst these variables are small and that future research might explore other aspects of self-management in diabetes.