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.

Contrasting socio-economic influences on colorectal cancer incidence and survival in England and Wales.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world and second most common cause of cancer death. The relationship between socio-economic deprivation and CRC incidence is unclear and previous findings have been inconsistent. There is stronger evidence of an association between area-level deprivation and CRC survival; however, few studies have investigated the association between individual-level socio-economic status (SES) and CRC survival. Data from the Office for National Statistics Longitudinal Study (LS) in England and Wales was used. LS members aged 50+ were stratified by individual-level educational attainment, social class, housing tenure and area deprivation quintile, measured at the 2001 Census. Time-to-event analysis examined associations between indicators of SES and CRC incidence and survival (all-cause and CRC death), over a 15-year follow-up period. Among 178116 LS members, incidence of CRC was lower among those with a degree, compared to those with no degree and higher among those employed in manual occupations compared to non-manual occupations. No clear relationship was observed between CRC incidence and the area-based measure of deprivation. Disparities were greater for survival. Among 5016 patients diagnosed with CRC aged 50+, probability of death from all-causes was lower among those with a degree, compared to no degree and higher among those employed in manual occupations, compared to non-manual occupations and among those living in social-rented housing, compared to owner-occupiers. Individual indicators of SES were also associated with probability of death from CRC. Those living in the most deprived areas had a higher probability of death (from all-causes and CRC) compared to those in the least deprived areas. Both individual and area-based indicators of SES were associated with CRC survival, and the relationships were stronger than those observed for CRC incidence. These findings could help inform more effective targeting of public health interventions for CRC.