Worth a try or a last resort: Healthcare professionals' experiences and opinions of above cuff vocalisation.

BACKGROUND: Above cuff vocalisation (ACV) involves the application of an external flow of air via the subglottic port of a tracheostomy. ACV can facilitate vocalisation and may improve swallowing and quality of life for patients with a tracheostomy. A recent systematic review highlighted the limited evidence available for the acceptability, effectiveness, safety or optimal implementation of ACV. AIMS: To explore the experience of healthcare professionals (HCPs) using ACV and their perceptions of best practice. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a range of HCPs with experience using ACV. Topics included: experiences with ACV, management of ACV, opinions about ACV, impact of COVID-19, future directions for ACV and impact on length of stay. Interviews were conducted online from December 2020 to March 2022. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Twenty-four HCPs were interviewed from seven countries and five professional groups. Four interconnected themes were developed: (1) moral distress amplifying the need to fix patients; (2) subjectivity and uncertainty leading to variations in practice and purpose; (3) knowledge and experience leading to control and caution; and (4) worth a try or a last resort. Theme four contained three sub-themes: (a) part of the toolbox; (b) useful but limited tool; and (c) following the patient's lead. The moral distress experienced by HCPs and their essential 'need to fix' patients seems to underpin the varied opinions of ACV. These opinions appear to be formed primarily on the basis of experience, because of the underlying subjectivities and uncertainties. As knowledge and experience with ACV increased, and adverse events were experienced, most HCPs became more cautious in their approach to ACV. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: More research is needed to reduce the subjectivities and uncertainties surrounding ACV. The implementation of standardised procedures, processes, and competencies may help to reduce the frequency of adverse events and support a more controlled approach. Widening the focus of the purpose of ACV to include swallowing may help to maximise the potential benefits. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject There is limited and low-quality evidence for above cuff vocalisation (ACV) and clinical application and practice varies substantially. However, the reasons for this variation in practice and healthcare professionals' (HCPs') opinions of ACV were unclear. What this study adds HCPs' experiences and opinions of ACV vary as a result of the uncertainty and subjectivity surrounding ACV compounded by their personal experiences with it. A need for caution also appears to emerge as HCPs become more familiar and experienced with using ACV. What are the clinical implications of this work? Implementing standardised procedures, safety processes and competencies may help to compensate for the uncertainty and subjectivity surrounding ACV and may reduce the frequency of adverse events. Widening the focus of purpose of ACV, including swallowing in addition to communication, may increase the number of potential candidates and increase the potential benefits of ACV. Using multidisciplinary team (MDT) simulation training for ACV competency development might help to improve MDT working and ACV implementation.

What helps people to reduce or stop self-harm? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of first-hand accounts.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is an important public health problem but therapeutic interventions, particularly for people who have a history of multiple repetition, are not always taken up or effective when they are. The aim of this review is to explore first-hand accounts of what helps outside therapy and identify actions and processes, which can support the reduction or cessation of self-harm. METHODS: A systematic review and thematic meta-synthesis of the first-person accounts of what has helped to reduce or stop self-harm reported in primary studies. RESULTS: The meta-synthesis combined 546 participant excerpts from 56 studies. Two over-arching themes were identified: (i) breaking the chain incorporated actions taken to break the link between a person's current psychological or social state and the act of self-harm and (ii) building a new foundation for change captured actions over the longer-term, focusing on practical changes in relationships and in a person's way of life, such as work or living arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: The results emphasize the importance of interpersonal change in reducing or stopping self-harm. While interpersonal factors are acknowledged as important reasons behind self-harm, they are often under-represented in self-management advice and therapeutic interventions that focus on individual psychopathology.

Determining the Prevalence, Implementation Approaches, and Opinions of Above Cuff Vocalization: A Survey of Health Care Professionals.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an international survey to investigate the use of above cuff vocalization (ACV) and how practice and opinion differs. DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: Critical care, acute, rehabilitation, long-term care, and community. PARTICIPANTS: Health care professionals involved in tracheostomy care or weaning (N=243). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tracheostomy management, prevalence, personal experiences and opinions, and barriers to use. Quantitative data were reported descriptively, and content analysis was conducted with qualitative data. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 243 health care professionals from 9 professional groups and 25 countries, with most responses from the United Kingdom (54%) and speech and language therapists (55%). ACV was used in 39% of services (n=93). Sixty percent (n=50/83) of health care professionals with direct experience of ACV had used it with <10 people. Implementation of ACV varied widely concerning procedures, contraindications, safety processes, professionals involved, competencies, staff training, delivery, and outcome measures. The top benefits were communication (n=76/93; 82%), mood (n=62/93; 67%), and laryngeal sensation (n=49/93; 53%). Complications included discomfort (n=54/93; 58%) and strained vocal quality (n=39/93; 42%). Barriers to ACV implementation included lack of knowledgeable staff (n=92/238; 39%) and lack of access to training (n=73/238; 31%). CONCLUSIONS: ACV uptake varies internationally with no standardized approach to ACV delivery. Diversity of opinions on approaches and benefits exist. Serious complications are infrequent, but minor complications are common. Future research is needed to establish optimal ACV implementation to maximize benefits and minimize risks.

Evidence for Above Cuff Vocalization in Patients With a Tracheostomy: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To determine how above cuff vocalization (ACV) is implemented in clinical practice, to identify what evidence exists on the effectiveness and safety of ACV, and to evaluate the acceptability of ACV. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in eight databases (MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) in May 2019 and updated in June 2020. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Study quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools and a narrative synthesis was conducted. Systematic review registration number: CRD42019133942. RESULTS: The searches identified 1327 records. The 13 eligible studies included four case studies, three case series, four observational studies without a control group, one quasi-experimental study, and one randomized controlled trial. Study quality was low, with most studies having high risk of bias. There was a high level of heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures used. Detailed information on ACV application and dose-delivered was lacking in 12 studies. Positive effects were reported for communication (n = 7), swallowing (n = 4), cough response (n = 2), and quality-of-life (n = 2), but with inconsistent use of objective outcome measures. There is limited quantitative or qualitative evidence for acceptability. Adverse events and complications were reported in nine studies, and four highlighted the importance of involving an experienced speech and language therapist. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence for the acceptability, effectiveness, safety, or optimal implementation of ACV. The evidence is insufficient to provide recommendations regarding optimal intervention delivery. Future research should ensure detailed recording of ACV delivery and utilize a core outcome set. Laryngoscope, 132:600-611, 2022.

Non-suicidal reasons for self-harm: A systematic review of self-reported accounts.

BACKGROUND: Self-harm is a major public health problem yet current healthcare provision is widely regarded as inadequate. One of the barriers to effective healthcare is the lack of a clear understanding of the functions self-harm may serve for the individual. The aim of this review is to identify first-hand accounts of the reasons for self-harm from the individual's perspective. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature reporting first-hand accounts of the reasons for self-harm other than intent to die. A thematic analysis and 'best fit' framework synthesis was undertaken to classify the responses. RESULTS: The most widely researched non-suicidal reasons for self-harm were dealing with distress and exerting interpersonal influence. However, many first-hand accounts included reasons such as self-validation, and self-harm to achieve a personal sense of mastery, which suggests individuals thought there were positive or adaptive functions of the act not based only on its social effects. LIMITATIONS: Associations with different sub-population characteristics or with the method of harm were not available from most studies included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identified a number of themes that are relatively neglected in discussions about self-harm, which we summarised as self-harm as a positiveexperience and defining the self. These self-reported "positive" reasons may be important in understanding and responding especially to repeated acts of self-harm.

Management of diagnostic uncertainty in children with possible meningitis: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Neisseria meningitidis serogroup B is the most common cause of bacterial meningitis in children and young adults. Early recognition and prompt intervention with antibiotics are thought to be key to preventing serious complications. AIM: Explore how general practitioners evaluate and manage febrile children with possible meningitis or meningococcal septicaemia. DESIGN OF THE STUDY: Qualitative study using one-to-one, semi-structured interviews. SETTING: General practices in the Avon Health Authority district. METHOD: Twenty-six general practitioners were purposefully sampled, using a sampling frame to ensure a range of experience and practices in a variety of settings Data management and analysis were conducted using a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Key themes to emerge were the effect that fear of meningitis has upon parents and general practitioners; the difficulties associated with reaching a diagnosis; and the existence of barriers to the use of guidelines and pre-hospital penicillin. When assessing a febrile child, participating general practitioners rarely thought that meningitis or meningococcal septicaemia were likely, but were aware that this was frequently the principal parental concern. They relied upon intuitive rather than systematic methods to distinguish serious from self-limiting conditions, rarely making a definitive diagnosis. Although concerned about 'missed cases', interviewees doubted that current management could be improved. They questioned the assumption that guidelines could be sufficiently discriminating to be helpful and thought it unlikely that they would be followed in everyday clinical practice. Pre-hospital penicillin was only given if the diagnosis of meningitis or septicaemia was thought to be certain. CONCLUSIONS: There is a substantial gap in perception between primary and secondary care in the diagnostic and management approach to children who may have meningitis or meningococcal septicaemia. Until this is addressed, further attempts to improve early intervention in primary care are unlikely to succeed.