‘Stakeholders’ views of legal and advice services for people admitted to psychiatric hospital’

This paper describes a study that used a mixed method approach to elicit the views of a range of stakeholders about experiences of compulsory admission to psychiatric hospital, and the use of the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT). The paper begins with an introduction to the background of the study, one that took place in Northern Ireland, a region in the UK with its own mental health legislation and policy. A review of literature is then presented. This highlights some of the disadvantages that service users and carers face when dealing with professionals during and following compulsory admission to hospital. This section concludes with an overview of literature on the MHRT in the UK. A range of methods was used to gather data from the following stakeholders: five service user and carer focus group interviews (n = 44); interviews with four lawyers experienced in Tribunal work; an interview with a legal member of the Tribunal; a survey of solicitors who identified themselves as equipped to carry out Tribunal work; interviews with three managers of organisations that provided patient advocacy services; letters to hospital managers requesting information provided to patients and carers. The findings reveal a number of themes associated with these experiences of compulsory admission to hospital and subsequent use of the Tribunal. Service users and carers generally found it difficult to access relevant information about rights, information provided by hospital managers was uneven and lawyers were often not familiar with processes associated with compulsory admission. There was a range of views about the Tribunal. Most respondents felt that the Tribunal was necessary and mostly satisfactory in the way it carried out its functions, but stakeholders raised a number of issues. Carers in particular felt that they should be more involved in decision-making processes, whereas lawyers tended to be focused on more technical, legal issues. Problems of regrading prior to the Tribunal and in examining medical evidence were highlighted by lawyers. There was an appeal for better information and advice by service users and carers, and recognition of the need for better training and education for lawyers. The paper concludes with a brief discussion about current mental health law in the UK, arguing that, in this context, professionals should more proactively use information and advice that can enable service users and carers to defend their rights. Keywords: compulsory mental health; law; legal and advice services

Stroke presentation and hospital management: comparison of neighbouring healthcare systems with differing health policies.

Background: Acute stroke care is shaped by healthcare policies. Differing policies in similar populations allow for assessment of policy impact on health and healthcare outcomes. Aims: To compare stroke presentation and hospital care in two adjacent healthcare systems with differing healthcare policies. Methods: Interviews and chart review of consecutive acute stroke admissions in Northern Ireland (n=103) and the Republic of Ireland (n=100). Results: Marked regional contrasts were evident for key aspects of hospital care. Northern Ireland performed significantly better on 15 of 16 quality of care (Sentinel Audit) items. Delivery on standards was significantly better in Northern Ireland for early assessment (Northern Ireland 72%; Republic of Ireland 54%, p

TRARESA: a tissue microarray-based hospital system for biomarker validation and discovery

Formalin fixed and paraffin embedded tissue (FFPE) collections in pathology departments are the largest resource for retrospective biomedical research studies. Based on the literature analysis of FFPE related research, as well as our own technical validation, we present the Translational Research Arrays (TRARESA), a tissue microarray centred, hospital based, translational research conceptual framework for both validation and/or discovery of novel biomarkers. TRARESA incorporates the analysis of protein, DNA and RNA in the same samples, correlating with clinical and pathological parameters from each case, and allowing (a) the confirmation of new biomarkers, disease hypotheses and drug targets, and (b) the postulation of novel hypotheses on disease mechanisms and drug targets based on known biomarkers. While presenting TRARESA, we illustrate the use of such a comprehensive approach. The conceptualisation of the role of FFPE-based studies in translational research allows the utilisation of this commodity, and adds to the hypothesis-generating armamentarium of existing high-throughput technologies.

'Murder or Mercy?' an innovative module helping UK medical students to articulate their own ethical standpoints regarding end-of-life decisions

Objectives This student selected component (SSC) was designed to equip United Kingdom (UK) medical students to respond ethically and with sensitivity to requests they might receive as qualified doctors in regard to euthanasia and assisted dying. The aim was to expose students to relevant opinions and experiences and to provide opportunities to explore and justify their own views and rehearse ethical decision making in a safe learning environment. Method The module is delivered by specialists from a number of disciplines including law, theology, medicine and nursing, each providing students with a working knowledge allowing them to actively discuss cases, articulate their own views and practise ethical reasoning through group and individual study. Visits to local intensive care units, palliative care wards and hospices are integrated effectively with theory. Student assessment comprises a dissertation, student-led debate and reflective commentary. Module impact was evaluated by analysis of student coursework and a questionnaire. Results Students found the content stimulating and relevant to their future career and agreed that the module was well-structured and that learning outcomes were achieved. They greatly appreciated the clinical context provided by the visits and opportunities to apply ethical reasoning to real cases and to debate ethical issues with peers. Students reported an increased discernment of the ethical and legal position and practical considerations and a greater awareness of the range of professional and lay viewpoints held. Student perceptions were confirmed on analysis of their submitted coursework. Many participants were less strongly in favour of euthanasia and assisted dying on module completion than at the outset but all felt better equipped to justify their own viewpoint and to respond appropriately to patient requests. Conclusions The multi-disciplinary nature of this course is helpful in preparing students to deal effectively and sensitively with ethical dilemmas they will encounter in their medical career. Use of an integrated, learner-centred approach equips students to actively engage with their peers in discussion of such issues and to formulate and defend their own position.