The overlap between randomised evaluations of recruitment and retention interventions: An updated review of recruitment (Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls) and retention (Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls) literature.

BACKGROUND: The Online Resource for Recruitment in Clinical triAls (ORRCA) and the Online Resource for Retention in Clinical triAls (ORRCA2) were established to organise and map the literature addressing participant recruitment and retention within clinical research. The two databases are updated on an ongoing basis using separate but parallel systematic reviews. However, recruitment and retention of research participants is widely acknowledged to be interconnected. While interventions aimed at addressing recruitment challenges can impact retention and vice versa, it is not clear how well they are simultaneously considered within methodological research. This study aims to report the recent update of ORRCA and ORRCA2 with a special emphasis on assessing crossover of the databases and how frequently randomised studies of methodological interventions measure the impact on both recruitment and retention outcomes. METHODS: Two parallel systematic reviews were conducted in line with previously reported methods updating ORRCA (recruitment) and ORRCA2 (retention) with publications from 2018 and 2019. Articles were categorised according to their evidence type (randomised evaluation, non-randomised evaluation, application and observation) and against the recruitment and retention domain frameworks. Articles categorised as randomised evaluations were compared to identify studies appearing in both databases. For randomised studies that were only in one database, domain categories were used to assess whether the methodological intervention was likely to impact on the alternate construct. For example, whether a recruitment intervention might also impact retention. RESULTS: In total, 806 of 17,767 articles screened for the recruitment database and 175 of 18,656 articles screened for the retention database were added as result of the update. Of these, 89 articles were classified as 'randomised evaluation', of which 6 were systematic reviews and 83 were randomised evaluations of methodological interventions. Ten of the randomised studies assessed recruitment and retention and were included in both databases. Of the randomised studies only in the recruitment database, 48/55 (87%) assessed the content or format of participant information which could have an impact on retention. Of the randomised studies only in the retention database, 6/18 (33%) assessed monetary incentives, 4/18 (22%) assessed data collection location and methods and 3/18 (17%) assessed non-monetary incentives, all of which could have an impact on recruitment. CONCLUSION: Only a small proportion of randomised studies of methodological interventions assessed the impact on both recruitment and retention despite having a potential impact on both outcomes. Where possible, an integrated approach analysing both constructs should be the new standard for these types of evaluations to ensure that improvements to recruitment are not at the expense of retention and vice versa.

A co-created multimethod evaluation of recovery education in Ireland.

BACKGROUND: This paper aims to explore the impact of recovery education on recovery knowledge, attitudes and the quality of life of students undertaking recovery education, contributing to the evidence base in relation to the impact of recovery education. It also explores the experiences of all stakeholders involved in the co-facilitation, delivery and participation in recovery education. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study evaluates the experiences of stakeholders involved in the co-facilitation, delivery and participation in recovery education across four recovery colleges in Ireland. Participants included students undertaking recovery education, peer educators, education facilitators, recovery college coordinators and practitioner/service providers. DISCUSSION: Findings from the quantitative survey when compared with extant literature suggest that students had a good understanding of recovery education. The social aspect of empowerment for growth and wellbeing was identified through themes relating to co-production and facilitating student learning. Support for equitable access to recovery education, including co-production for both the public and staff, was identified as a challenge for the future. CONCLUSION: The findings from both the qualitative and quantitative components of the study show the positive impact of recovery education on stakeholders while acknowledging the need for ongoing support for people working in recovery education and the development of services. In particular, there was a high level of recovery knowledge found in students undertaking recovery education. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study utilised a co-created study design. From inception a steering group comprising stakeholders (peer educators, recovery education facilitators including past recovery college students and nonpeer staff involved in the co-production of recovery education) directed the conduct of the evaluation. This steering group participated in an iterative process of information sharing, suggestions for evaluation process and language.

The establishment and value of peer group clinical supervision: A qualitative study of stakeholders' perspectives.

AIMS: Explore perspectives of steering group members and external clinical supervision facilitators of developing and establishing peer group clinical supervision. BACKGROUND: The climate of healthcare is complex which can lead to staff burnout and challenges to practice. Clinical supervision is suggested as an approach to managing and leadership of such complexities. DESIGN: Qualitative descriptive. METHODS: Focus group interviews with 19 members of the peer group clinical supervision steering groups and individual interviews with five external clinical supervision facilitators from the Western region of Ireland were conducted. Data analysis followed Elo and Kyngäs' content analysis method, involving preparation, organising and reporting, to extract meaning and identify patterns from the qualitative data collected. RESULTS: Developing peer group clinical supervision practice requires, clarity of purpose and function that address the pros and cons of clinical supervision. Organisational leadership is required to support and release staff for peer group clinical supervision and peer group clinical supervisors need to be credible and have a level of expertise in practice. When prepared and supported, the aspects of confidence, leadership, personal development and resilience develop. CONCLUSION: Peer group clinical supervisors need training and ongoing continual professional development for their role, scope of practice and responsibilities. Sustainability rests on staff awareness and familiarity with the purpose and format of peer group clinical supervision and the regularity of sessions. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Peer group clinical supervision is a means of supporting improvement of patient care delivery while in parallel supporting personal and professional development of staff, building resilience in the workplace. IMPACT: This study explored the implementation of peer group clinical supervision for staff across nursing and midwifery disciplines. It found that implementing peer group clinical supervision had a positive impact on staff well-being and morality and on patient care delivery. These findings influence healthcare service providers in implementing peer group clinical supervision in a sustainable way enabling nurses to continue working in complex healthcare environments delivering safe person-centred care. REPORTING METHOD: The qualitative reporting guidelines Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) were followed. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient/public involvement was addressed in this study by staff, managers, planners, directors, leaders and educationalists being involved at all stages of the study (concept, design, analysis and reporting).

Cardiovascular disease risk assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A scoping review.

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Identification of at-risk patients is paramount to initiate preventive care and tailor treatments accordingly. Despite international guidelines recommending all patients with RA undergo CVD risk assessment, rates remain suboptimal. The objectives of this review were to map the strategies used to conduct CVD risk assessments in patients with RA in routine care, determine who delivers CVD risk assessments, and identify what composite measures are used. The Joanna Briggs Institute methodological guidelines were used. A literature search was conducted in electronic and grey literature databases, trial registries, medical clearing houses, and professional rheumatology organisations. Findings were synthesised narratively. A total of 12 studies were included. Strategies reported in this review used various system-based interventions to support delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA, operationalised in different ways, adopting two approaches: (a) multidisciplinary collaboration, and (b) education. Various composite measures were cited in use, with and without adjustment for RA. Results from this review demonstrate that although several strategies to support CVD risk assessments in patients with RA are cited in the literature, there is limited evidence to suggest a standardised model has been applied to routine care. Furthermore, extensive evidence to map how health care professionals conduct CVD risk assessments in practice is lacking. Research needs to be undertaken to establish the extent to which healthcare professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA in routine care. Key Points • A limited number of system-based interventions are in use to support the delivery of CVD risk assessments in patients with RA. • Multidisciplinary team collaboration, and education are used to operationalise interventions to support Health Care Professionals in conducting CVD risk assessments in practice. • The extent to which Health Care Professionals are CVD risk assessing their patients with RA needs to be established.

Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicin is associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting.

Aim: To compare all-cause and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients receiving inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) and blinatumomab (Blina) for ALL in the first relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Patients & methods: We studied retrospective claims for adult commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees with ALL receiving InO (n = 29) or Blina (n = 23) from 1 January 2015 to 16 February 2021. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) HCRU and total costs were described and multivariable-adjusted PPPM total all-cause and ALL-related predicted costs were calculated. Results: Mean monthly ALL-related hospitalizations were the same for patients receiving InO and Blina (PPPM = 0.8 stays); however, the length of ALL-related hospital stay was almost twice as long among patients receiving Blina versus InO (ALL-related: InO = 7.6 days; Blina = 14.1 days; p = 0.346). In multivariable models, total ALL-related costs were 43% lower for InO compared with Blina (PPPM costs: InO = $93,767; Blina = $163,470; p = 0.021). Conclusion: In the first R/R setting, patients who used InO had significantly lower all-cause and ALL-related costs compared with patients who used Blina, in part driven by hospitalization patterns.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of a video-based educational intervention on perinatal mental health related stigma reduction strategies for healthcare professionals: A single group pre-test-post-test pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare professionals have a role to play in reducing perinatal mental health related stigma. AIM: To assess the effectiveness of a video-based educational intervention developed to provide guidance to healthcare professionals on perinatal mental health related stigma reduction strategies. DESIGN: A single group pre-test-post-test pilot study with no control group. SETTING(S): A university affiliated maternity hospital in Ireland PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of registered midwives, nurses and doctors (n = 60) recruited from October 2020-January 2021. INTERVENTION: A twenty-minute video-based educational intervention. METHODS: Respondents (n = 60) completed a pre-test (time point one) and post-test (time point-two) questionnaire, and a three-month follow-up post-test questionnaire (time point-three) (n = 39). The questionnaire included the Mental Illness Clinicians' Attitudes Scale, Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale, Reynolds Empathy Scale and open-ended questions. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was selected to evaluate the pre-test post-test scores. RESULTS: The difference in mean Mental Illness: Clinicians' Attitudes-4 scores were statistically significant between time points one and three (z = 3.27, df=36, P = 0.0007) suggesting more positive attitudes towards people with mental health conditions after the intervention. The mean total score for the Reported and Intended Behaviour Scale increased from 18.7 (SD 1.87) at time point one to 19.2 (SD 1.60) at time point two (z= -3.368, df=59, P = 0.0004) suggesting an increase in positive intended behaviours towards those with mental health issues immediately following the intervention. These findings were also corroborated by responses to open-ended survey questions. CONCLUSIONS: Further research with a larger sample of healthcare professionals evaluated over a longer period would provide further evidence for the sustainability of the intervention. TWEETABLEABSTRACT: A video-based intervention can increase healthcare professionals' knowledge of perinatal #mentalhealth related stigma reduction strategies @Journal. Link to article.