Understanding Afghan healthcare providers: a qualitative study of the culture of care in a Kabul maternity hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the culture of a Kabul maternity hospital to understand the perspectives of healthcare providers on their roles, experiences, values and motivations and the impact of these determinants on the care of perinatal women and their babies. DESIGN: Qualitative ethnographic study. SETTING: A maternity hospital, Afghanistan. POPULATION: Doctors, midwives and care assistants. METHODS: Six weeks of observation followed by 22 semi-structured interviews and four informal group discussions with staff, two focus group discussions with women and 41 background interviews with Afghan and non-Afghan medical and cultural experts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The culture of care in an Afghan maternity hospital. RESULTS: A large workload, high proportion of complicated cases and poor staff organisation affected the quality of care. Cultural values, social and family pressures influenced the motivation and priorities of healthcare providers. Nepotism and cronyism created inequality in clinical training and support and undermined the authority of management to improve standards of care. Staff without powerful connections were vulnerable in a punitive inequitable environment-fearing humiliation, blame and the loss of employment. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal care put the lives of women and babies at risk and was, in part, the result of conflicting priorities. The underlying motivation of staff appeared to be the socio-economic survival of their own families. The hospital culture closely mirrored the culture and core values of Afghan society. In setting priorities for women's health post-2015 Millennium Development Goals, understanding the context-specific pressures on staff is key to more effective programme interventions and sustainability.

Quality assessment of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery.

We evaluated the quality of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery by examining how they adhere to validated methodological standards in their development. A structured review was performed for guidelines that were published between January 2005 and April 2013 in medical journals or on the Internet. A pre-defined computerised search was used in MEDLINE, Scopus and Google to identify the guidelines. The AGREE II assessment tool was used to evaluate the quality of the guidelines in the study. Seven international and national guidelines were identified. The overall methodological quality of the individual guidelines was good. 'Scope and Purpose' (median score 98% interquartile range (IQR)) 86% to 98%) and 'Clarity of Presentation' (median score 90%, IQR 90% to 95%) were the two domains that received the highest scores. 'Applicability' (median score 68%, IQR 45% to 75%) and 'Editorial Independence' (median score 71%, IQR 68% to 75%) had the lowest scores. These findings reveal that although the overall methodological quality of guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in orthopaedic surgery is good, domains within their development, such as 'Applicability' and 'Editorial Independence', need to be improved. Application of the AGREE II instrument by the authors of guidelines may improve the quality of future guidelines and provide increased focus on aspects of methodology used in their development that are not robust.

A cluster randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of a structured training programme for caregivers of inpatients after stroke: the TRACS trial.

BACKGROUND: The majority of stroke patients are discharged home dependent on informal caregivers, usually family members, to provide assistance with activities of daily living (ADL), including bathing, dressing and toileting. Many caregivers feel unprepared for this role and this may have a detrimental effect on both the patient and caregiver. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether or not a structured, competency-based training programme for caregivers [the London Stroke Carer Training Course (LSCTC)] improved physical and psychological outcomes for patients and their caregivers after disabling stroke, and to determine if such a training programme is cost-effective. DESIGN: A pragmatic, multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Stratified randomisation of 36 stroke rehabilitation units (SRUs) to the intervention or control group by geographical region and quality of care. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 930 stroke patient and caregiver dyads were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had a confirmed diagnosis of stroke, were medically stable, were likely to return home with residual disability at the time of discharge and had a caregiver available, willing and able to provide support after discharge. The caregiver was defined as the main person--other than health, social or voluntary care provider--helping with ADL and/or advocating on behalf of the patient. INTERVENTION: The intervention (the LSCTC) comprised a number of caregiver training sessions and competency assessment delivered by SRU staff while the patient was in the SRU and one recommended follow-up session after discharge. The control group continued to provide usual care according to national guidelines. Recruitment was completed by independent researchers and participants were unaware of the SRUs' allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were self-reported extended ADL for the patient and caregiver burden measured at 6 months after recruitment. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, mood and cost-effectiveness, with final follow-up at 12 months. RESULTS: No differences in primary outcomes were found between the groups at 6 months. Adjusted mean differences were -0.2 points [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.0 to 2.5 points; p = 0.866; intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.027] for the patient Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living score and 0.5 points (95% CI -1.7 to 2.7 points; p = 0.660; ICC = 0.013) for the Caregiver Burden Scale. Furthermore, no differences were detected in any of the secondary outcomes. Intervention compliance varied across the units. Half of the participating centres had a compliance rating of > 60%. Analysis showed no evidence of higher levels of patient independence or lower levels of caregiver burden in the SRUs with better levels of intervention compliance. The economic evaluation suggests that from a patient and caregiver perspective, health and social care costs, societal costs and outcomes are similar for the intervention and control groups at 6 months, 12 months and over 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: We have conducted a robust multicentre, cluster randomised trial, demonstrating for the first time that this methodology is feasible in stroke rehabilitation research. There was no difference between the LSCTC and usual care with respect to improving stroke patients' recovery, reducing caregivers' burden, or improving other physical and psychological outcomes, nor was it cost-effective compared with usual care. Compliance with the intervention varied, but analysis indicated that a dose effect was unlikely. It is possible that the immediate post-stroke period may not be the ideal time for the delivery of structured training. The intervention approach might be more relevant if delivered after discharge by community-based teams. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49208824. FUNDING: This project was funded by the MRC and is managed by the NIHR (project number 09/800/10) on behalf of the MRC-NIHR partnership, and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 17, No. 46. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The impact of recent primary care reforms in the UK on interprofessional working in primary care centres.

This study comprises the perspectives of professionals in primary care regarding the impact of the changes in its organisation and interprofessional collaboration in the UK. General practitioners (GPs), nurses and practice managers were interviewed in three primary cares located within a 20-mile radius and in the same health authority. Interviews were analysed using the grounded theory approach of Glaser & Strauss (1967) as developed by Strauss & Corbin (1998). The separate ideologies and subcultures of GPs, nurses and managers influenced their perceptions of reforms in primary care. Professional identities and the traditional power structure generated some conflict between the three groups which affected collaboration in implementing the reforms. Based on the findings of the study, it seems probable that it will take a new generation of health professionals to bring about an interprofessional culture in the NHS.