Seeking assistance in later life: how do older people evaluate their need for assistance?

Background: legislation places an onus on local authorities to be aware of care needs in their locality and to prevent and reduce care and support needs. The existing literature overlooks ostensibly 'healthy' and/or non-users of specific services, non-health services and informal assistance and therefore inadequately explains what happens before or instead of individuals seeking services. We sought to address these gaps by exploring older adults' accounts of seeking assistance in later life. Methods: we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 40 adults aged 68-95. We invited participants to discuss any type of support, intervention, or service provision, whether medical, social, family-provided, paid or unpaid. Findings: this paper reports older people's accounts of how they evaluated their need for assistance. We found that the people in our sample engaged in a recursive process, evaluating their needs on an issue-by-issue basis. Participants' progression through this process hinged on four factors: their acknowledgement of decline; the perceived impact of decline on their usual activities and independence; their preparedness to be a recipient of assistance; and, the opportunity to assert their need. In lieu of seeking assistance, participants engaged in self-management, but also received unsolicited or emergency assistance. Conclusions: older people's adaptations to change and attempts to meet their needs without assistance mean that they do not present to services, limiting the local authority's knowledge of their needs and ability to plan appropriate services. Our findings offer four stages for policymakers, service providers and carers to target to address the uptake of assistance.

Carer involvement in compulsory out-patient psychiatric care in England.

BACKGROUND: There is an expectation in current heath care policy that family carers are involved in service delivery. This is also the case with compulsory outpatient mental health care, Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) that were introduced in England in 2008. No study has systematically investigated family involvement through the CTO process. METHOD: We conducted qualitative interviews with 24 family carers to ascertain their views and experiences of involvement in CTOs. The transcripts were subjected to thematic analysis that incorporated both deductive and inductive elements. RESULTS: We found significant variation in both the type and extent of family carer involvement throughout the CTO process (initiation, recall to hospital, renewal, tribunal hearings, discharge). Some were satisfied with their level of involvement while others felt (at least partly) excluded or that they wanted to be more involved. Some wanted less involvement than what they had. From the interviews we identified key factors shaping carers' involvement. These included: perceptions of patient preference; concern over the relationship to the patient; carers' knowledge of the CTO and of the potential for carer involvement; access to and relationships with health professionals; issues of patient confidentiality; opportunities for private discussions, and; health professionals limiting involvement. These factors show that health professionals have many opportunities to facilitate, or hinder, carer involvement. The various roles attributed to carers, such 'proxy' for patient decision, 'gatekeeper' to services, 'mother' or 'expert carer', however, conflict with one another and make the overall role unclear. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for clarification of the expectations of carers in individual care situations, for carers to be equipped with the information they need to in order to be involved, and for services to find flexible and innovative ways of ensuring continuous, open communication. The introduction of CTOs in England has not been successful in its ambition for carer involvement.

Patient, psychiatrist and family carer experiences of community treatment orders: qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Current literature on personal experiences of community treatment orders (CTO) is limited. This paper examines participants' experiences of the mechanisms via which the CTO was designed to work: the conditions that form part of the order and the power of recall. We also report an emergent dimension, legal clout and participants' impressions of CTO effectiveness. This paper will contribute to a fuller picture of how the law is implemented and how CTOs operate in practice. METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 26 patients, 25 psychiatrists and 24 family carers about their experiences and views of CTOs. Data were analysed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: All three sample groups perceived the chief purpose of CTOs to be medication enforcement and that its legal clout was central to achieving medication adherence. Understanding of how the inbuilt mechanisms of the CTO work varied considerably: participants expressed uncertainty regarding the enforceability of discretionary conditions and the criteria for recall. We found mixed evidence regarding whether recall simplified responses to relapse or risk. The range of experiences and views identified within each group suggests that there is no single definitive experience or view of CTOs. CONCLUSIONS: The (perceived) focus of the CTO on medication adherence combined with the variations in understanding within and across groups might not only have consequences for how CTOs are viewed and subsequently experienced, but also for broader goals in patient care and patient and carer involvement.

Trust, deals and authority: community mental health professionals' experiences of influencing reluctant patients.

The emphasis on care in the community in current mental health policy poses challenges for community mental health professionals with responsibility for patients who do not wish to receive services. Previous studies report that professionals employ a range of behaviors to influence reluctant patients. We investigated professionals' own conceptualizations of such influencing behaviors through focus groups with community teams in England. Participants perceived that good, trusting relationships are a prerequisite to the negotiation of reciprocal agreements that, in turn, lead to patient-centred care. They described that although asserting professional authority sometimes is necessary, it can be a potential threat to relationships. Balancing potentially conflicting processes-one based on reciprocity and the other on authority-represents a challenge in clinical practice. By providing descriptive accounts of micro-level dynamics of clinical encounters, our analysis shows how the authoritative aspect of the professional role has the potential to undermine therapeutic interactions with reluctant patients. We argue that such micro-level analyses are necessary to enhance our understanding of how patient-centered mental health policy may be implemented through clinical practice.

An evaluation of a public partnership project between academic institutions and young people with Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage.

BACKGROUND: This project (named Reinvent) aimed to promote Public Involvement (PI) in health research. Academics worked with a community group, the Eloquent Praise & Empowerment Dance Company, to develop a community partnership with young people from Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage communities. The goal of this paper is to evaluate the Reinvent project for key learnings on how to engage and build partnerships with young people from Black African, Asian and Caribbean heritage communities. METHODS: Reinvent developed a steering group which consisted of five young people, one academic, a Race Equality Ambassador and the Director of Eloquent. The steering group co-produced an agenda for two workshops and the evaluation tools used. The content of the workshops included drama exercises, discussions on physical and mental health, nutrition and school-life, short introductions to the concepts of research and PI, and group work to critique and improve a video currently used to promote PI in health research to young people. The evaluation tools included using the 'Cube' evaluation framework, video-blogging and collecting anonymous feedback. Findings The responses to the 'Cube' evaluation framework were positive across all four domains (agenda, voice, contribute change) in both workshops. A few of the young people described having a better understanding of the meaning and practice of PI in a video-blog. The anonymous feedback suggested that the workshops had increased young people's confidence in sharing their thoughts and opinions about health and PI. CONCLUSION: Reinvent has shown that academic institutions and young people from an under-served community can partner to co-design workshops and apply evaluation tools. Working with young people in an environment in which they were comfortable, and by researchers joining in with the activities that the young people enjoyed (such as dance), enabled more informal and open conversations to develop. More work is needed to build upon this project so that young people can feel confident and supported to get involved in PI activities relating to research.

A service-user digital intervention to collect real-time safety information on acute, adult mental health wards: the WardSonar mixed-methods study.

Background: Acute inpatient mental health services report high levels of safety incidents. The application of patient safety theory has been sparse, particularly concerning interventions that proactively seek patient perspectives. Objective(s): Develop and evaluate a theoretically based, digital monitoring tool to collect real-time information from patients on acute adult mental health wards about their perceptions of ward safety. Design: Theory-informed mixed-methods study. A prototype digital monitoring tool was developed from a co-design approach, implemented in hospital settings, and subjected to qualitative and quantitative evaluation. Setting and methods: Phase 1: scoping review of the literature on patient involvement in safety interventions in acute mental health care; evidence scan of digital technology in mental health contexts; qualitative interviews with mental health patients and staff about perspectives on ward safety. This, alongside stakeholder engagement with advisory groups, service users and health professionals, informed the development processes. Most data collection was virtual. Phase 1 resulted in the technical development of a theoretically based digital monitoring tool that collected patient feedback for proactive safety monitoring. Phase 2: implementation of the tool in six adult acute mental health wards across two UK NHS trusts; evaluation via focused ethnography and qualitative interviews. Statistical analysis of WardSonar data and routine ward data involving construction of an hour-by-hour data set per ward, permitting detailed analysis of the use of the WardSonar tool. Participants: A total of 8 patients and 13 mental health professionals participated in Phase 1 interviews; 33 staff and 34 patients participated in Phase 2 interviews. Interventions: Patients could use a web application (the WardSonar tool) to record real-time perceptions of ward safety. Staff could access aggregated, anonymous data to inform timely interventions. Results: Coronavirus disease 2019 restrictions greatly impacted the study. Stakeholder engagement permeated the project. Phase 1 delivered a theory-based, collaboratively designed digital tool for proactive patient safety monitoring. Phase 2 showed that the tool was user friendly and broadly acceptable to patients and staff. The aggregated safety data were infrequently used by staff. Feasibility depended on engaged staff and embedding use of the tool in ward routines. There is strong evidence that an incident leads to increased probability of further incidents within the next 4 hours. This puts a measure on the extent to which social/behavioural contagion persists. There is weak evidence to suggest that an incident leads to a greater use of the WardSonar tool in the following hour, but none to suggest that ward atmosphere predicts future incidents. Therefore, how often patients use the tool seems to send a stronger signal about potential incidents than patients' real-time reports about ward atmosphere. Limitations: Implementation was limited to two NHS trusts. Coronavirus disease 2019 impacted design processes including stakeholder engagement; implementation; and evaluation of the monitoring tool in routine clinical practice. Higher uptake could enhance validity of the results. Conclusions: WardSonar has the potential to provide a valuable route for patients to communicate safety concerns. The WardSonar monitoring tool has a strong patient perspective and uses proactive real-time safety monitoring rather than traditional retrospective data review. Future work: The WardSonar tool can be refined and tested further in a post Coronavirus disease 2019 context. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN14470430. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128070) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 14. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Mental health wards can feel unsafe. We know that patients and staff have different ideas about what makes a hospital ward safe or unsafe. Patients are often the first to know when the atmosphere on a ward becomes tense but, often, no one asks them for input or feedback at the time. We worked with service users and staff to develop new technology to make it easy for patients to tell staff about changes in the ward atmosphere. We put everyone's ideas together and some technical developers then built a digital safety tool to use on a tablet computer. Patients put in anonymous information about the ward atmosphere and staff can read it straight away. We tested it on six adult acute mental health wards for 10 weeks. We asked patients and staff what they thought about the tool and we looked at how it was being used. Patients and staff liked the look of the tool on the tablet computer. Some staff said they did not need it because they could tell how patients were feeling, but patients told us that staff did not talk with them much and did not always know when patients were feeling tense. Coronavirus disease 2019 made life difficult on the wards. Most ward managers said the tool could be helpful, but they had not had time to get used to it on the wards. Occasionally, the tablet computers were out of action. Many staff tried hard to use the tool. Most patient information was gathered when it was calm, perhaps because staff were not too busy to help them. We found that this tool could help staff know about tensions on the ward, but they need to get used to it and bring it into ward routines.

'Trying to battle a very slow version of the system that exists outside': Experiences of waiting for healthcare in English prisons.

Prison has been described as the ultimate form of time-punishment - a place where time is no longer a commodity for individuals to spend, but is ordered by a system which symbolises its power through the control of segments of people's lives. As such, a prison sentence epitomises the experience of waiting. Yet anticipating release is not the only form of waiting within carceral life; waiting for healthcare in its various forms also shapes people's temporal experience. Drawing on interviews with 21 people who have lived in prison, this article describes how experiences of waiting for healthcare are mediated by expectation or hope, perceptions of the relationship between behaviour and healthcare access, and the consequences of waiting for care. Constraints on the autonomy of people in prison mean that waiting for healthcare differs in important ways from waiting for healthcare in the community, and can be perceived as an additional form of punishment. The experience of waiting for prison healthcare can affect physical and psychological well-being, and can in itself be understood as a pain of imprisonment.

"It was really poor prior to the pandemic. It got really bad after": A qualitative study of the impact of COVID-19 on prison healthcare in England.

BACKGROUND: The impact of COVID-19 has been exceptional, particularly on the National Health Service which has juggled COVID affected patients alongside related staff shortages and the existing (and growing) health needs of the population. In prisons too, healthcare teams have been balancing patient needs against staffing shortfalls, but with additional strains unique to the prison population. Such strains include drastic lockdown regimes and prolonged isolation, the need to consider health alongside security, known health inequalities within prisoner groups, and an ageing and ethnically diverse population (both groups disproportionately affected by COVID). The aim of this paper is to contribute to emerging research on the impact of COVID-19 on prison healthcare. METHODS: We conducted 44 in depth interviews (over phone or video) across three groups: prison leavers, healthcare staff and decision makers, between July and December 2021. Framework analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: Three themes were found. First, we found that Covid-19 had a significant impact on prison healthcare which involved reduced access and changes to how healthcare was delivered. This affected the health of prisoners by exacerbating existing conditions, new conditions being undiagnosed and mental health needs increasing. Second, the pandemic impacted on healthcare staff through creation of stress, frustration and exhaustion due to minimal staffing levels in an already under-resourced system. Third, an emerging conflict was witnessed. People in prison felt neglected regarding their healthcare needs but staff reported doing the best they could in an unprecedented situation. Healthcare staff and decision makers felt that prison healthcare was seen as a poor relation when compared with healthcare in the community, with no extra resource or staffing for Covid-19 testing or vaccinations. CONCLUSION: The Covid-19 pandemic has significantly impacted almost all aspects of prison healthcare in the UK. This includes delivery of healthcare by staff, receipt of it by people in prison and the management, planning and commissioning of it by decision makers. These three groups of people were all affected detrimentally but in vastly different ways, with some participants describing a sense of trauma. Health needs that were exacerbated or went unmet during Covid urgently need to be addressed in order to reduce health inequalities. In order for welfare and wellbeing to be maintained, and in some cases repaired, both prisoners and staff need to feel heard and recognised.

Understanding the impact of Covid-19 on the delivery and receipt of prison healthcare: an international scoping review.

BACKGROUND: People being held in prison are particularly vulnerable to Covid-19 infection, as places of detention are high-risk environments for spread of infection. Due to this risk, many prisons across the globe introduced measures to reduce the risk of Covid-19 transmission. The pandemic changed almost all aspects of prison life, including prison healthcare provision. We undertook a scoping review to understand what is known about the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the receipt and delivery of prison healthcare. This scoping review is part of a wider mixed-methods study focusing more specifically on the impact that Covid-19 had on prison healthcare delivery in England. METHODS: We conducted an international scoping review of peer-reviewed articles published between December 2019 and January 2022, across six electronic databases. We also conducted a hand search of key journals and the reference lists of included articles. RESULTS: Twelve articles met our inclusion criteria. The articles focused primarily on prisons in high-income countries and mostly explored the impact that the pandemic had on the provision of drug treatment services. Some aspects of drug treatment services were more impacted than others, with those delivered by external providers and preparations for release particularly hindered. Whilst prison mental health services were purportedly available, there were changes regarding how these were delivered, with group therapies suspended and most consultations taking place using telehealth. The articles reported both digital and non-digital adaptations or innovations to prison healthcare services to ensure continued delivery. Collaboration between different agencies, such as the prison itself, healthcare providers, and non-governmental organisations, was key to facilitating ongoing provision of healthcare to people in prison. CONCLUSIONS: Covid-19 impacted on prison healthcare internationally, but different treatment services were affected in disparate ways, both within and between countries. The published literature concentrates on the impact on drug treatment services. Prison healthcare providers rapidly adapted their processes to attempt to maintain service provision.

Interventions to improve the implementation of evidence-based healthcare in prisons: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There are challenges to delivering high quality primary care within prison settings and well-recognised gaps between evidence and practice. There is a growing body of literature evaluating interventions to implement evidence-based practice in the general population, yet the extent and rigour of such evaluations in incarcerated populations are unknown. We therefore conducted a scoping literature review to identify and describe evaluations of implementation interventions in the prison setting. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, and grey literature up to August 2021, supplemented by hand searching. Search terms included prisons, evidence-based practice, and implementation science with relevant synonyms. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion. Data extraction included study populations, study design, outcomes, and author conclusions. We took a narrative approach to data synthesis. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance for scoping reviews. RESULTS: Fifteen studies reported in 17 papers comprised one randomised controlled trial, one controlled interrupted time series analysis and 13 uncontrolled before and after studies. Eight studies took place in the US and four in the UK. Ten studies evaluated combined (multifaceted) interventions, typically including education for staff or patients. Interventions most commonly targeted communicable diseases, mental health and screening uptake. Thirteen studies reported adherence to processes of care, mainly testing, prescribing and referrals. Fourteen studies concluded that interventions had positive impacts. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of high-quality evidence to inform strategies to implement evidence-based health care in prisons, and an over-reliance on weak evaluation designs which may over-estimate effectiveness. Whilst most evaluations have focused on recognised priorities for the incarcerated population, relatively little attention has been paid to long-term conditions core to primary care delivery. Initiatives to close the gaps between evidence and practice in prison primary care need a stronger evidence base.

Understanding the organisational influences on the quality of and access to primary care in English prisons: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: Primary care for routine healthcare conditions is delivered to thousands of people in the English prison estate every day but the prison environment presents unique challenges to the provision of high-quality health care. Little research has focused on the organisational factors that affect quality of and access to prison health care. AIM: To understand key influences on the quality of primary care in prisons. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a qualitative interview study across the North of England from 2019 to 2021. METHOD: Interviews were undertaken with 43 participants: 21 prison leavers and 22 prison healthcare professionals. Reflexive thematic analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: The overarching organisational issue influencing quality and access was that of chronic understaffing coupled with a workforce in flux and dependence on locum staff. This applied across different prisons, roles, and grades of staff, and was vocally discussed by both patient and staff participants. Intricately related to understaffing (and fuelled by it) was the propensity for a reactive and sometimes crisis-led service to develop that was characterised by continual firefighting. A persistent problem exacerbated by the above issues was unreliable communication about healthcare matters within some prisons, creating frustration. Positive commentary focused on the characteristics and actions of individual healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: This study highlights understaffing and its consequences as the most significant threat to the quality of and access to prison primary care. Strategies to address health care affecting prison populations urgently need to consider staffing. This issue should receive high-profile and mainstream attention to address health inequalities.

The quality of prison primary care: cross-sectional cluster-level analyses of prison healthcare data in the North of England.

Background: Prisoners have significant health needs, are relatively high users of healthcare, and often die prematurely. Strong primary care systems are associated with better population health outcomes. We investigated the quality of primary care delivered to prisoners. Methods: We assessed achievement against 30 quality indicators spanning different domains of care in 13 prisons in the North of England. We conducted repeated cross-sectional analyses of routinely recorded data from electronic health records over 2017-20. Multi-level mixed effects logistic regression models explored associations between indicator achievement and prison and prisoner characteristics. Findings: Achievement varied markedly between indicators, prisons and over time. Achieved processes of care ranged from 1% for annual epilepsy reviews to 94% for blood pressure checks in diabetes. Intermediate outcomes of care ranged from only 0.2% of people with epilepsy being seizure-free in the preceding year to 34% with diabetes having sufficient blood pressure control. Achievement improved over three years for 11 indicators and worsened for six, including declining antipsychotic monitoring and rising opioid prescribing. Achievement varied between prisons, e.g., 1.93-fold for gabapentinoid prescribing without coded neuropathic pain (odds ratio [OR] range 0.67-1.29) and 169-fold for dried blood spot testing (OR range 0.05-8.45). Shorter lengths of stay were frequently associated with lower achievement. Ethnicity was associated with some indicators achievement, although the associations differed (both positive and negative) with indicators. Interpretation: We found substantial scope for improvement and marked variations in quality, which were largely unaltered after adjustment for prison and prisoner characteristics. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research Health and Social Care and Delivery Research Programme: 17/05/26.

Threats and offers in community mental healthcare.

Making threats and offers to patients is a strategy used in community mental healthcare to increase treatment adherence. In this paper, an ethical analysis of these types of proposal is presented. It is argued (1) that the primary ethical consideration is to identify the professional duties of care held by those working in community mental health because the nature of these duties will enable a threat to be differentiated from an offer, (2) that threatening to act in a way that would equate with a failure to uphold the requirements of these duties is wrong, irrespective of the benefit accrued through treatment adherence and (3) that making offers to patients raises a number of secondary ethical considerations that need to be judged on their own merit in the context of individual patient care. The paper concludes by considering the implications of these arguments, setting out a pathway designed to assist community mental healthcare practitioners to determine whether making a specific proposal to a patient is right or wrong.

To what extent are patients involved in researching safety in acute mental healthcare?

BACKGROUND: There is a growing need to involve patients in the development of patient safety interventions. Mental health services, despite their strong history of patient involvement, have been slow to develop patient safety interventions, particularly in inpatient settings. METHODS: A systematic search was undertaken of both academic and grey literature. Whilst no lay member of the team worked directly on the review, they were part of the project steering group which provided oversight throughout the review process. This included people with lived experience of mental health services. From a research perspective the main focus for lay members was in co-producing the digital technology, the key project output. Smits et al.'s (Res Involv Engagem 6:1-30, 2020) Involvement Matrix was used to taxonomise levels of patient involvement. Studies were included if they were set in any inpatient mental health care context regardless of design. The quality of all selected studies was appraised using Mixed Methods Appraisal Methodology (MMAT). RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were classified, synthesised and their levels of patient involvement in the research and development of patient safety interventions were taxonomised. Almost two-thirds of studies (n = 33) researched reducing restrictive practices. Only four studies reported engaging patients in the research process as decision-makers, with the remaining studies divided almost equally between engaging patients in the research process as partners, advisors and co-thinkers. Just under half of all studies engaged patients in just one stage of the research process. CONCLUSION: Involvement of patients in researching patient safety and developing interventions in an inpatient mental health context seems diverse in its nature. Researchers need to both more fully consider and better describe their approaches to involving patients in safety research in inpatient mental health. Doing so will likely lead to the development of higher quality safety interventions.

We know that inpatient mental health settings are not safe. By getting patients to help us research and develop interventions to improve safety they are more likely to work. We searched for articles and papers which described doing this. By using a matrix we were able to understand how many research studies involved patients. We found 52 studies, but few really involved patients in the entire research and intervention development process. Most of the research focus was on helping staff to use less restrictive interventions like restraint and seclusion. Only four studies really treated patients as equals in terms of decision making in the research process, and about half of the studies involved patients in only one of the possible three stages of research. There have been lots of ways patients have been asked to be involved in research but we really need to improve the way we involve patients in order for our knowledge about patient safety and the interventions that follow from this to be truly co-produced.

Quality indicators and performance measures for prison healthcare: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, people in prison should receive a standard of healthcare provision equivalent to people living in the community. Yet efforts to assess the quality of healthcare through the use of quality indicators or performance measures have been much more widely reported in the community than in the prison setting. This review aims to provide an overview of research undertaken to develop quality indicators suitable for prison healthcare. METHODS: An international scoping review of articles published in English was conducted between 2004 and 2021. Searches of six electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, PsycInfo and Criminal Justice Abstracts) were supplemented with journal searches, author searches and forwards and backwards citation tracking. RESULTS: Twelve articles were included in the review, all of which were from the United States. Quality indicator selection processes varied in rigour, and there was no evidence of patient involvement in consultation activities. Selected indicators predominantly measured healthcare processes rather than health outcomes or healthcare structure. Difficulties identified in developing performance measures for the prison setting included resource constraints, data system functionality, and the comparability of the prison population to the non-incarcerated population. CONCLUSIONS: Selecting performance measures for healthcare that are evidence-based, relevant to the population and feasible requires rigorous and transparent processes. Balanced sets of indicators for prison healthcare need to reflect prison population trends, be operable within data systems and be aligned with equivalence principles. More effort needs to be made to meaningfully engage people with lived experience in stakeholder consultations on prison healthcare quality. Monitoring healthcare structure, processes and outcomes in prison settings will provide evidence to improve care quality with the aim of reducing health inequalities experienced by people living in prison.

Mapping review of interventions to reduce the use of restrictive practices in children and young people's institutional settings: The CONTRAST study.

Restrictive practices are often used harmfully with children in institutional settings. Interventions to reduce their use do not appear to have been mapped systematically. Using environmental scanning, we conducted a broad-scope mapping review of English language academic databases, websites and social media, using systematic methods. Included records (N = 121) were mostly from the United States and contained details of 82 different interventions. Children's participation was limited. Reporting quality was inconsistent, which undermined claims of effectiveness. Overall, despite a multitude of interventions, evidence is limited. Leaders should consider the evidence, including children's perspectives, before introducing poorly understood interventions into children's settings.

Researching mental health in minority ethnic communities: reflections on recruitment.

In this article we reflect on the recruitment of research participants to two related studies of experiences of mental health problems in Black and minority ethnic communities in the United Kingdom. A total of 65 people were recruited via three main strategies: the employment of bicultural recruiters, intensive information sharing about the studies, and work through local community groups. Three main issues seemed to affect recruitment: gatekeepers' attitudes, the (non)payment of participants, and reciprocal arrangements with local community groups. The type of strategy employed resulted in recruits with differing characteristics (although our sample was too small to draw generalizable conclusions). We conclude that to ensure that research participation is accessible to all, researchers must employ flexible recruitment methods that permit adaptation to specific needs arising out of health status, level of involvement with services, culture, and socioeconomic status. Systematic research into this part of the research process is needed.

Lay perceptions of the desired role and type of user involvement in clinical governance.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to explore variations in lay perceptions of user involvement in clinical governance. CONTEXT: The English National Health Service has sought to build a dependable health service through enhanced effectiveness, responsiveness and consistency. Clinical governance, a policy for improving service quality, is a key pillar of these reforms. It is a statutory duty of primary care organizations to ensure that users are involved in all service planning and decision making, including clinical governance. Yet surveys indicated that user involvement in clinical governance was underdeveloped and underutilized. DESIGN: Focus groups were conducted with different types of lay people to explore their perceptions around public involvement in different aspects of clinical governance policy. RESULTS: Content analysis of the transcripts reveals that different groups of lay people varied in their desired role perspective and preferred type of involvement in different aspects of clinical governance policy. Drawing upon existing models of user involvement, we identified three role perspectives that lay people could take in user involvement - consumer, advocate and citizen. We compared our findings regarding the desired type of involvement with existing models of user involvement, and identified a new type of involvement, overseeing, that is relevant to clinical governance policy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that to facilitate user involvement in clinical governance, it would be necessary to use different strategies to accommodate the differing role perspectives and types of involvement desired by different groups of lay people.

The relationship between workforce characteristics and perception of quality of care in mental health: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Mental health services worldwide are under strain from a combination of unprecedented demand, workforce reconfigurations, and government austerity measures. There has been relatively little research or policy focus on the impact of staffing and skill mix on safety and quality in mental health services leaving a considerable evidence gap. Given that workforce is the primary therapeutic intervention in secondary mental health care this constitutes a major deficit. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the impact of staffing and skill mix on safety and quality of care in mental health inpatient and community services. DESIGN: Exploratory, qualitative methodology; purposive sampling. SETTINGS: Inpatient and community mental health services in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: 21 staff (including nurses, occupational therapists, psychiatrists, social workers, and care co-ordinators) currently working in mental health services. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with a purposive sample of staff recruited via social media. We asked participants to describe the staffing and skill mix in their service; to reflect on how staffing decisions and/or policy affected safety and patient care; and for their views of what a well-staffed ward/service would look like. We conducted thematic analysis of the interview transcripts. RESULTS: The participants in this study considered safestaffing to require more than having 'enough' staff and offered multiple explanations of how staffing and skill mix can impact on the safety and quality of mental health care. From their accounts, we identified how the problem of 'understaffing' is self-perpetuating and cyclical and how its features interact and culminate in unsafe care. We conceptualised the relationship between staffing and safety as a 'vicious cycle of unsafestaffing' which comprised: (1) understaffing (the depletion of resources for safe care provision); (2) chronic understaffing (conditions resulting from and exacerbating understaffing); and, (3) unsafestaffing (the qualities of staffing that compromise staff capacity to provide safe care). CONCLUSIONS: Continued policy focus on safestaffing is clearly warranted, especially in mental health as staffing constitutes both the principal cost and main therapeutic driver of care. This paper provides compelling reasons to look beyond regulating staff numbers alone, and to consider staff morale, burden and the cyclical nature of attrition to ensure the delivery of high quality, safe and effective services. Future research should investigate other mechanisms via which staffing impacts on safety in mental health settings.