Improving MS patients' understanding of treatment risks and benefits in clinical consultations: A randomised crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) patients find it difficult to understand the complex risk-benefit profiles of disease-modifying drugs. An evidence-based protocol was designed to improve patient's understanding of treatment information: Benefit and Risk Information for Medication in Multiple Sclerosis (BRIMMS). OBJECTIVE: A feasibility study to evaluate whether the BRIMMS protocol can improve MS patients' treatment understanding and reduce conflict in treatment decisions compared to consultation as usual. DESIGN: Single-blind 4-condition 4-period randomised crossover trial. Hypothetical treatment information was presented to MS patients in a faux 20 minute consultation session using the BRIMMS protocol (aural and visual) or as a usual consultation (aural and visual). Patients were randomised to the order in which they received the four consultation styles. PARTICIPANTS: 24 patients diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS. MEASURES: Patients were assessed on their comprehension of treatment information, decisional conflict and feedback on consultation styles. Disease and demographic information was also collected. RESULTS: Treatment understanding was greater for both BRIMMS visual and BRIMMS aural, compared to usual consultations in visual or aural format. Similarly, BRIMMS visual and BRIMMS aural reduced decisional conflict compared to usual consultations in visual or aural formats. All comparisons were p<0.001. Cognitive status was not related to understanding in the BRIMMS protocol, but was negatively related with usual consultation. Conversely, mood influenced understanding on the BRIMMS protocol but not for usual consultation. CONCLUSIONS: BRIMMS protocol offers an effective, evidence-based tool for presenting treatment information in consultations with MS patients and is not influenced by cognition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17318966.

Environmental changes to reduce self-harm on an adolescent inpatient psychiatric ward: an interrupted time series analysis.

Existing interventions to reduce self-harm in adolescents admitted to psychiatric wards are usually focused on individual psychological treatments. However, the immediate ward environment in which treatment takes place is an important factor in the success of the treatment and can also influence the likelihood of self-harming behaviours. The aim of the current study was to evaluate changes made to a psychiatric ward environment on incidence of self-harm in adolescents. A quasi-experimental interrupted time series study was conducted on one child and adolescent psychiatric ward. An intervention was developed alongside staff and patients to address the high incidence of self-harm on weekday evenings on the ward. The intervention components involved adding a regular twilight shift (3-11 pm) for nursing staff and introducing a structured evening activity programme on the ward. A segmented regression analysis of an interrupted time series found that the rate of self-harm per 100 bed days was already declining at baseline and continued to decline post-intervention, but the rate of decline was not significant (p = 0.415). However, the proportion of patients self-harming was increasing at baseline and significantly reduced post-intervention (p = 0.001), and this reduction was significantly larger in the evenings (p = 0.004) compared to other times of day (p = 0.09). A tailored intervention targeting the psychiatric ward environment helped to reduce the proportion of adolescents self-harming on the ward. An interrupted time series analysis should be considered for future interventions making changes to health systems over time.

Building improvement capability in frontline staff: a UK perspective.

This paper gives a narrative account of how the Oxford Healthcare Improvement Centre has embedded continuous quality improvement (CQI) across both mental health and community services in Oxford, UK. The aim of the centre is to develop capability across healthcare services, with frontline staff leading CQI independently. The paper discusses the various methods employed to achieve this aim, including the provision of training, mentoring and support to those undertaking improvement work, alongside developing the required governance for CQI.

Systematic review of interventions to improve constant observation on adult inpatient psychiatric wards.

Constant observation is frequently conducted on inpatient psychiatric units to manage patients at risk of harming themselves or others. Despite its widespread use, there is little evidence of the efficacy of the practice or of its impact on patients and nursing staff. Unnecessary use of this practice can be restrictive and distressing for all involved and can cause considerable strain on healthcare resources. We sought to review interventions aiming to improve the quality and safety of constant observation or to reduce unnecessary use of this restrictive practice on adult inpatient psychiatric wards. A systematic search conducted in December 2018 using PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Google Scholar identified 24 studies with interventions related to constant observation. Only 16 studies evaluated a total of 13 interventions. The most common intervention components were changes to team, education and training for staff, changes to record keeping and assessment, and involving patients in care. A range of outcome measures were used to evaluate interventions. Over half of the interventions showed some positive impact on constant observation. One study recorded patient feedback. All interventions were targeted towards mental health nurses. Overall, there is no consensus on how best to improve the safety and quality of constant observations or reduce its unnecessary use. Studies vary widely in design, intervention and outcome measures. Existing research does however suggest that teamwork interventions can improve the patient experience of constant observation and safely reduce their degree and frequency. Priorities for future research on constant observations are highlighted.

Best Methods of Communicating Clinical Trial Data to Improve Understanding of Treatments for Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Patients' understanding of treatment risks and benefits is a prerequisite for shared decision making. Yet, patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) do not accurately understand treatment information provided in regular clinical consultations. OBJECTIVES: To identify the best methods of communicating clinical trial data to improve the understanding of treatments among patients with MS and to also examine the relationship between patients' understanding with decisional conflict, individual traits, and MS symptoms. METHODS: A repeated-measures study was used. A sample of relapsing-remitting patients with MS was recruited from National Health Service sites in the United Kingdom. Patients were presented with hypothetical treatment risks and benefits from faux clinical trials. Treatments were communicated using absolute terms, relative terms, and numbers needed to treat/harm. The presence of baseline information with each method was also manipulated. Patients' understanding and conflict in treatment decisions were assessed. Individual traits and MS symptoms were also recorded. RESULTS: Understanding was better when treatments were communicated in absolute terms (mean 3.99 ± 0.93) compared with relative terms (mean 2.93 ± 0.91; P < 0.001) and numbers needed to treat/harm (mean 2.89 ± 0.88; P < 0.001). Adding baseline information to all methods significantly improved understanding (mean 5.04 ± 0.96) compared with no baseline information (mean 1.50 ± 0.74; P < 0.001). Understanding was not related to conflict in treatment decisions (r = -0.131; P = 0.391). Numeracy, IQ, and cognitive impairments were significantly related to patients' understanding of treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment risks and benefits should ideally be communicated using absolute terms, alongside baseline information. Patients with MS with low numeracy, low IQ, and reduced cognitive skills should be supported during treatment education.

Multiple sclerosis patients' understanding and preferences for risks and benefits of disease-modifying drugs: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) patients are faced with complex risk-benefit profiles of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) when making treatment decisions. For effective shared decision-making, MS patients should understand the risks and benefits of DMDs and make treatment decisions based on personal preferences. METHODS: This is an inclusive systematic review to primarily assess current understanding of MS patients for information about DMDs provided during the standard healthcare system. The secondary aim assesses MS patients' preferences for specific risks and benefits of treatments. A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar. A total of 22 studies were reviewed across both aims. Relevant quantitative and qualitative data was extracted by two authors. A narrative synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity of research findings. RESULTS: There was a trend for DMD risks to be generally underestimated and DMD benefits to be generally overestimated by MS patients. Treatments that could potentially offer substantial symptom improvement, delay in disease progression, or reduction in relapses were preferred even at the expense of higher risks. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients' experience of information during the standard healthcare system does not provide satisfactory understanding of the risks and benefits of DMDs. Effective ways to communicate risk and benefit DMD information when making shared treatment decisions needs to be identified. Patient preferences of DMD risks and benefits should also be taken into account.

Interventions to support risk and benefit understanding of disease-modifying drugs in Multiple Sclerosis patients: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The present review evaluates interventions that have been designed to improve understanding of the complex risk-benefit profiles of disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) in patients with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). METHODS: A systematic search conducted using PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and PsycINFO identified 15 studies. Interventions which provided treatment information were present across a range of study designs. A narrative synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity of research findings. RESULTS: Interventions providing treatment information ranged from comprehensive education programmes to booklets of a few pages. MS patients favoured the interventions they received. Understanding of overall treatment information and treatment risks specifically, generally improved following interventions. Yet overestimation of treatment benefits persisted. There was no conclusive effect on DMD decisions. No superior intervention was identified. CONCLUSION: Interventions designed to improve understanding of DMD risk and benefit information are moderately successful. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Additional support provided to MS patients beyond routine healthcare can generally improve understanding of the complex risk-benefit profiles of DMDs. Future interventions need to ensure that patients with symptoms that may confound understanding can also benefit from this additional information.