Review of the Viability Audit process: analysis of post-primary school data

This paper provides an analysis of the post-primary school data provided in the viability audit report published in February 2012 and complements a paper already prepared with an analysis of primary school data. The Viability Audit has been led by the Education and Library Boards, working in close conjunction with CCMS. The Area Planning process was led by the Department of Education, working with the Education and Library Boards and CCMS.

Review of the Viability Audit process: analysis of primary school data

This paper provides an analysis of the primary school data provided in the viability audit report published in February 2012. The Viability Audit has been led by the Education and Library Boards, working in close conjunction with CCMS. The Area Planning process was led by the Department of Education, working with the Education and Library Boards and CCMS. Draft area planning reports, and revised reports following consultation, have been published for post primary schools; draft area planning reports for primary schools have been published and are not out for consultation. It should be noted that the draft area plan reports for primary schools used updated data available to the ELBs so some of the patterns will differ slightly from those reported in the analysis below.

Pre-Radiotherapy Dental Assessment of Head and Neck Oncology Patients: An Audit.

Objectives: Approximately 300 people are diagnosed with Head and Neck cancer annually in Northern Ireland. The management may include treatment by surgery or by chemotherapy and radiotherapy,
or a combination of modalities. Patients whose oral cavity, teeth, salivary glands and jaws that
will be affected by treatment, particularly radiotherapy should have a pre-treatment assessment. This should be done as early as possible to maximise the time available for dental management. However, this can be challenging owing to the complexities of cancer diagnosis, treatment planning and multidisciplinary management. At the Belfast Dental Hospital, a number of patients were referred post- radiotherapy with complications after not having received a pre-treatment assessment. The referrals for pre- treatment dental assessment were also late in patients’ multidisciplinary journey, limiting the time period
for dental input. The purpose of this audit was to examine the time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy and whether this was an adequate time frame for dental management. This audit will also examine the dental diseases present and the treatments required pre-radiotherapy. Methods: Data for this audit was collected over 4 months in 2012
by analysing the dental charts and referrals of new patients who were referred to and attended the dental head and neck oncology clinic. A standardised referral pro-forma was introduced from September 2013 to improve the referral process.
A re-audit was conducted over 4 months in 2014. Data was collected similarly as previous. The time period between dental assessment and commencement of radiotherapy was examined. The presence of dental disease and subsequent treatments required were also noted.
Results: 63 new patients were examined in the dental head and neck oncology clinic over 4 months in 2012. 48 (76.2%) were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 11 days. A new standardised referral pro-forma was introduced in 2013. In the re-audit, 65 new patients were seen over 4 months in 2014.
60 (92.3%) patients were examined pre-radiotherapy. The average length of time between dental assessment and radiotherapy commencement was 18 days.
Conclusion: Given the high prevalence of pre-existing dental disease amongst head and neck cancer patients, prompt dental assessment and treatment is vital. Efforts aimed at improving the care pathway are on-going through the implementation of a mandatory referral pro-forma and a dedicated assessment clinic.

Mentoring the nursing student with dyslexia

Conference Contribution

Realistic evaluation of EWS and ALERT: factors enabling and constraining implementation.

Realistic Evaluation of EWS and ALERT: factors enabling and constraining implementation Background The implementation of EWS and ALERT in practice is essential to the success of Rapid Response Systems but is dependent upon nurses utilising EWS protocols and applying ALERT best practice guidelines. To date there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of EWS or ALERT as research has primarily focused on measuring patient outcomes (cardiac arrests, ICU admissions) following the implementation of a Rapid Response Team. Complex interventions in healthcare aimed at changing service delivery and related behaviour of health professionals require a different research approach to evaluate the evidence. To understand how and why EWS and ALERT work, or might not work, research needs to consider the social, cultural and organisational influences that will impact on successful implementation in practice. This requires a research approach that considers both the processes and outcomes of complex interventions, such as EWS and ALERT, implemented in practice. Realistic Evaluation is such an approach and was used to explain the factors that enable and constrain the implementation of EWS and ALERT in practice [1]. Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that enabled and constrained the implementation and service delivery of early warnings systems (EWS) and ALERT in practice in order to provide direction for enabling their success and sustainability. Methods The research design was a multiple case study approach of four wards in two hospitals in Northern Ireland. It followed the principles of realist evaluation research which allowed empirical data to be gathered to test and refine RRS programme theory. This approach used a variety of mixed methods to test the programme theories including individual and focus group interviews, observation and documentary analysis in a two stage process. A purposive sample of 75 key informants participated in individual and focus group interviews. Observation and documentary analysis of EWS compliance data and ALERT training records provided further evidence to support or refute the interview findings. Data was analysed using NVIVO8 to categorise interview findings and SPSS for ALERT documentary data. These findings were further synthesised by undertaking a within and cross case comparison to explain the factors enabling and constraining EWS and ALERT. Results A cross case analysis highlighted similarities, differences and factors enabling or constraining successful implementation across the case study sites. Findings showed that personal (confidence; clinical judgement; personality), social (ward leadership; communication), organisational (workload and staffing issues; pressure from managers to complete EWS audit and targets), educational (constraints on training; no clinical educator on ward) and cultural (routine task delegated) influences impact on EWS and acute care training outcomes. There were also differences noted between medical and surgical wards across both case sites. Conclusions Realist Evaluation allows refinement and development of the RRS programme theory to explain the realities of practice. These refined RRS programme theories are capable of informing the planning of future service provision and provide direction for enabling their success and sustainability. References: 1. McGaughey J, Blackwood B, O’Halloran P, Trinder T. J. & Porter S. (2010) A realistic evaluation of Track and Trigger systems and acute care training for early recognition and management of deteriorating ward–based patients. Journal of Advanced Nursing 66 (4), 923-932. Type of submission: Concurrent session Source of funding: Sandra Ryan Fellowship funded by the School of Nursing & Midwifery, Queen’s University of Belfast

A realistic evaluation of track and trigger systems and acute care training for early recognition and treatment of deteriorating ward-based patients: research protocol.

Aim The aim of the study is to evaluate factors that enable or constrain the implementation and service delivery of early warnings systems or acute care training in practice. Background To date there is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of acute care initiatives (early warning systems, acute care training, outreach) in reducing the number of adverse events (cardiac arrest, death, unanticipated Intensive Care admission) through increased recognition and management of deteriorating ward based patients in hospital [1-3]. The reasons posited are that previous research primarily focused on measuring patient outcomes following the implementation of an intervention or programme without considering the social factors (the organisation, the people, external influences) which may have affected the process of implementation and hence measured end-points. Further research which considers the social processes is required in order to understand why a programme works, or does not work, in particular circumstances [4]. Method The design is a multiple case study approach of four general wards in two acute hospitals where Early Warning Systems (EWS) and Acute Life-threatening Events Recognition and Treatment (ALERT) course have been implemented. Various methods are being used to collect data about individual capacities, interpersonal relationships and institutional balance and infrastructures in order to understand the intended and unintended process outcomes of implementing EWS and ALERT in practice. This information will be gathered from individual and focus group interviews with key participants (ALERT facilitators, nursing and medical ALERT instructors, ward managers, doctors, ward nurses and health care assistants from each hospital); non-participant observation of ward organisation and structure; audit of patients' EWS charts and audit of the medical notes of patients who deteriorated during the study period to ascertain whether ALERT principles were followed. Discussion & progress to date This study commenced in January 2007. Ethical approval has been granted and data collection is ongoing with interviews being conducted with key stakeholders. The findings from this study will provide evidence for policy-makers to make informed decisions regarding the direction for strategic and service planning of acute care services to improve the level of care provided to acutely ill patients in hospital. References 1. Esmonde L, McDonnell A, Ball C, Waskett C, Morgan R, Rashidain A et al. Investigating the effectiveness of Critical Care Outreach Services: A systematic review. Intensive Care Medicine 2006; 32: 1713-1721 2. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Mayhew A, Moutray M. Outreach and Early Warning Systems for the prevention of Intensive Care admission and death of critically ill patients on general hospital wards. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 3. www.thecochranelibrary.com 3. Winters BD, Pham JC, Hunt EA, Guallar E, Berenholtz S, Pronovost PJ (2007) Rapid Response Systems: A systematic review. Critical Care Medicine 2007; 35 (5): 1238-43 4. Pawson R and Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London; Sage: 1997

The role of complexity metrics in a multi-institutional dosimetry audit of VMAT

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the benefit of complexity metrics such as the modulation complexity score (MCS) and monitor units (MUs) in multi-institutional audits of volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery.

METHODS: 39 VMAT treatment plans were analysed using MCS and MU. A virtual phantom planning exercise was planned and independently measured using the PTW Octavius(®) phantom and seven29(®) 2D array (PTW-Freiburg GmbH, Freiburg, Germany). MCS and MU were compared with the median gamma index pass rates (2%/2 and 3%/3 mm) and plan quality. The treatment planning systems (TPS) were grouped by VMAT modelling being specifically designed for the linear accelerator manufacturer's own treatment delivery system (Type 1) or independent of vendor for VMAT delivery (Type 2). Differences in plan complexity (MCS and MU) between TPS types were compared.

RESULTS: For Varian(®) linear accelerators (Varian(®) Medical Systems, Inc., Palo Alto, CA), MCS and MU were significantly correlated with gamma pass rates. Type 2 TPS created poorer quality, more complex plans with significantly higher MUs and MCS than Type 1 TPS. Plan quality was significantly correlated with MU for Type 2 plans. A statistically significant correlation was observed between MU and MCS for all plans (R = -0.84, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: MU and MCS have a role in assessing plan complexity in audits along with plan quality metrics. Plan complexity metrics give some indication of plan deliverability but should be analysed with plan quality.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Complexity metrics were investigated for a national rotational audit involving 34 institutions and they showed value. The metrics found that more complex plans were created for planning systems which were independent of vendor for VMAT delivery.

Nursing Revalidation

This article details the Nursing and Midwifery Council revalidation requirements essential for all registered nurses and midwives in the United Kingdom. Nursing revalidation is effective from April 2016 and is built on the pre-existing Post-registration education and practice. Unlike the previous process, revalidation provides a more robust system which is clearly linked to the Code and should assist towards the delivery of quality and safe effective care