Transitional Care Interventions From Hospital to Community to Reduce Health Care Use and Improve Patient Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Discharge from the hospital to the community has been associated with serious patient risks and excess service costs. Objective: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness associated with transitional care interventions with different complexity levels at improving health care utilization and patient outcomes in the transition from the hospital to the community. Data Sources: CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO were searched from inception until August 2022. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials evaluating transitional care interventions from hospitals to the community were identified. Data Extraction and Synthesis: At least 2 reviewers were involved in all data screening and extraction. Random-effects network meta-analyses and meta-regressions were applied. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were readmission at 30, 90, and 180 days after discharge. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits, mortality, quality of life, patient satisfaction, medication adherence, length of stay, primary care and outpatient visits, and intervention uptake. Results: Overall, 126 trials with 97 408 participants were included, 86 (68%) of which were of low risk of bias. Low-complexity interventions were associated with the most efficacy for reducing hospital readmissions at 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.92) and 180 days (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.66) and emergency department visits (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.96). Medium-complexity interventions were associated with the most efficacy at reducing hospital readmissions at 90 days (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.92), reducing adverse events (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.75), and improving medication adherence (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.67) but were associated with less efficacy than low-complexity interventions for reducing readmissions at 30 and 180 days. High-complexity interventions were most effective for reducing length of hospital stay (SMD, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.38 to -0.03) and increasing patient satisfaction (SMD, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.82) but were least effective for reducing readmissions at all time periods. None of the interventions were associated with improved uptake, quality of life (general, mental, or physical), or primary care and outpatient visits. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that low- and medium-complexity transitional care interventions were associated with reducing health care utilization for patients transitioning from hospitals to the community. Comprehensive and consistent outcome measures are needed to capture the patient benefits of transitional care interventions.

What should inpatient psychological therapies be for? Qualitative views of service users on outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There is limited research on what, when and how outcomes should be measured in psychological therapy trials in acute mental health inpatient wards. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to consider what outcomes service users think are important to measure. METHODS: This qualitative study explored the views of 14 participants, who had an inpatient admission within the last year, on outcomes of psychological therapies using semistructured interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis from a critical realist perspective with both inductive and deductive coding. RESULTS: The 126 outcomes that were important to participants were mapped onto an established taxonomy of outcomes across different health areas and the socioecological framework to consider the wider context and help summarise the outcomes. Most of the outcomes were mapped to the intrapersonal and interpersonal level. In addition to the outcome mapping, three themes were constructed from the qualitative data: (1) I am not a problem I am a person, (2) Feeling cared for and loved, (3) What does getting better look like. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the need for patient-reported outcomes which are cocreated with service users, disseminating research and training on preventing dehumanising experiences, enhancing psychological safety and therapeutic relationships and improving access to psychological therapy. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The wider People with Personal Experience Involvement Committee at the University of Bath were consulted which included a focus group during the early planning stages. We also collaborated with a person with personal experience, at every stage of the research. This included developing our research question and aims, protocol, participant documents (e.g., information and debrief forms), advertisement and recruitment strategy, interview topic guide, the codes, the final themes and quotes and reviewing the manuscript. People with lived experience of being admitted to an acute mental health inpatient ward participated in our study.

Supporting carers to improve patient safety and maintain their well-being in transitions from mental health hospitals to the community: A prioritisation nominal group technique.

INTRODUCTION: Carers of people with mental illness may face distinct challenges, including navigating fragmented health and social services during discharge from mental health hospitals. Currently, limited examples of interventions that support carers of people with mental illness in improving patient safety during transitions of care exist. We aimed to identify problems and solutions to inform future carer-led discharge interventions, which is imperative for ensuring patient safety and the well-being of carers. METHODS: The nominal group technique was used which combines both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods in four distinct phases: (1) problem identification, (2) solution generation, (3) decision making and (4) prioritisation. The aim was to combine expertise from different stakeholder groups (patients, carers and academics with expertise in primary/secondary care, social care or public health) to identify problems and generate solutions. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants generated potential solutions that were grouped into four themes. The most acceptable solution for each was as follows: (1) 'Carer Involvement and Improving Carer Experience' a dedicated family liaison worker, (2) 'Patient Wellness and Education' adapting and implementing existing approaches to help implement the patient care plan, (3) 'Carer Wellness and Education' peer/social support interventions for carers and (4) 'Policy and System Improvements' understanding the co-ordination of care. CONCLUSION: The stakeholder group concurred that the transition from mental health hospitals to the community is a distressing period, where patients and carers are particularly vulnerable to safety and well-being risks. We identified numerous feasible/acceptable solutions to enable carers to improve patient safety and maintain their own mental wellbeing. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public contributors were represented in the workshop and the focus of the workshop was to identify the problems they faced and co-design potential solutions. Patient and public contributors were involved in the funding application and study design.

Evaluating a co-designed care bundle to improve patient safety at discharge from adult and adolescent mental health services (SAFER-MH and SAFER-YMH): protocol for a non-randomised feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Patients being discharged from inpatient mental wards often describe safety risks in terms of inadequate information sharing and involvement in discharge decisions. Through stakeholder engagement, we co-designed, developed and adapted two versions of a care bundle intervention, the SAFER Mental Health care bundle for adult and youth inpatient mental health settings (SAFER-MH and SAFER-YMH, respectively), that look to address these concerns through the introduction of new or improved processes of care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two uncontrolled before-and-after feasibility studies, where all participants will receive the intervention. We will examine the feasibility and acceptability of the SAFER-MH in inpatient mental health settings in patients aged 18 years or older who are being discharged and the feasibility and acceptability of the SAFER-YMH intervention in inpatient mental health settings in patients aged between 14 and 18 years who are being discharged. The baseline period and intervention periods are both 6 weeks. SAFER-MH will be implemented in three wards and SAFER-YMH in one or two wards, ideally across different trusts within England. We will use quantitative (eg, questionnaires, completion forms) and qualitative (eg, interviews, process evaluation) methods to assess the acceptability and feasibility of the two versions of the intervention. The findings will inform whether a main effectiveness trial is feasible and, if so, how it should be designed, and how many patients/wards should be included. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the National Health Service Cornwall and Plymouth Research Ethics Committee and Surrey Research Ethics Committee (reference: 22/SW/0096 and 22/LO/0404). Research findings will be disseminated with participating sites and shared in various ways to engage different audiences. We will present findings at international and national conferences, and publish in open-access, peer-reviewed journals.

Developing the Resident Measure of Safety in Care Homes (RMOS): A Delphi and Think Aloud Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a measure of contributory factors to safety incidents in care homes to be completed by residents and/or their unpaid carers. INTRODUCTION: Care home residents are particularly vulnerable to patient safety incidents, due to higher likelihood of frailty, multimorbidity and cognitive decline. However, despite residents and their carers wanting to be involved in safety initiatives, there are few mechanisms for them to contribute and make meaningful safety improvements to practice. METHODS: We developed 73 evidence-based items from synthesis and existing measures, which we presented to a panel of stakeholders (residents/carers, health/social care professionals and researchers). We used two online rounds of Delphi to generate consensus (80%) on items important to include in the Resident Measure of Safety in Care Homes (RMOS); a consensus meeting was later held. The draft RMOS developed through the Delphi was presented to participants during 'Think Aloud' interviews using cognitive testing techniques. RESULTS: The 29-item RMOS was developed. Forty-three participants completed Delphi round 1, and 27 participants completed round 2, 11 participants attended the consensus meeting and 12 'Think Aloud' interviews were conducted. Of the 73 original items, 42 items that did not meet consensus in Delphi round 1 were presented in round 2. After the consensus meeting, it was agreed that 35 items would comprise the RMOS questionnaire and were presented in the 'Think Aloud' interviews. Participants suggested numerous changes to items mostly to improve comprehension and ability to answer. CONCLUSION: We have a developed an evidence-based RMOS, with good face validity, to assess contributory factors to safety in care homes from a resident/carer perspective. Future work will involve psychometrically testing the items in a pilot and developing a complementary simplified, dementia-friendly version to promote inclusivity. PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Four patient and public contributors worked with researchers to develop the online questionnaires. Patients (residents) and carers participated on the consensus panel. One member of the research team is an expert by lived experience and was involved in design and analysis decisions. The item list and instructions for the questionnaires were reviewed for face validity, understanding and acceptability by a patient and public involvement group and modified.

Patient safety, self-injection, and B12 deficiency: a UK cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with vitamin B12 deficiency (including pernicious anaemia) often report being 'let down' or stigmatised by general practice systems and policy, and choose instead to self-medicate via injection; the association between this and perceptions of safe primary care in this group of people is unknown. AIM: To examine the association between self-medication for vitamin B12 deficiency and patient-reported safety in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: A UK cross-sectional online survey. METHOD: The survey consisted of the three components: demographics; the validated Primary Care Patient Measure of Safety; and questions about self-medication for vitamin B12 deficiency. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and thematic synthesis were undertaken. RESULTS: Responses from 1297 participants indicated 508 (39.2%) self-medicated via injection. Perceived primary care safety was low. Those who self-medicated via injection reported a significantly lower level of patient safety in primary care including adverse patient-related factors (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.73 to 0.92), and patients >34 years of age were significantly more likely to self-medicate via injection. Many reported that treatment under the guidance of a clinician was preferable to self-medication, but felt they had no other choice to regain quality of life. Almost half felt that the doctor did not always consider what they wanted for their care. CONCLUSION: To the authors' knowledge, this is the largest study to date examining patient safety and vitamin B12 deficiency. It found that four out of 10 patients with B12 deficiency self-medicate via injection. Patients who self-medicated perceived primary care as less safe. Providing patient-centred care and treating these patients with dignity and respect is a policy priority to reduce unsafe health behaviours.

Transitional Care Interventions for Older Residents of Long-term Care Facilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) experience high hospitalization rates, yet little is known about the effects of transitional care interventions for these residents. Objective: To assess the association of transitional care interventions with readmission rates and other outcomes for residents of LTCFs who are 65 years and older and LTCF staff and to explore factors that potentially mitigate the association. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched for English-language studies published until July 21, 2021. Associated qualitative studies were identified using aspects of the CLUSTER (citations, lead authors, unpublished materials, searched Google Scholar, tracked theories, ancestry search for early examples, and follow-up of related projects) methodology. Study Selection: Controlled design studies evaluating transitional care interventions for residents of LTCFs 65 years and older were included. Records were independently screened by 2 reviewers; disagreements were resolved through discussion and involvement of a third reviewer. From 14 538 records identified, 15 quantitative and 4 qualitative studies met the eligibility criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. Fixed-effect and random-effects models were used according to the number of studies reporting the outcomes of interest. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome consisted of 30-, 60-, and 90-day readmission rates (hospital and emergency department [ED]). Other outcomes included length of stay, functional independence (Barthel score), and quality of life. The I2 statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity. Results: Of 14 538 records identified from searches, 15 quantitative studies (totaling 32 722 participants or records) and 4 qualitative studies were included. People allocated to transitional care interventions were 1.7 times less likely to be readmitted to the hospital or ED compared with those in control groups (14 studies; odds ratio, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.18-2.35]; I2 = 81% [95% CI, 70%-88%]). Length of stay in the ED was significantly decreased for intervention groups (3 studies; standardized mean difference, -3.00 [95% CI, -3.61 to -2.39]; I2 = 99% [95% CI, 98%-99%]). There were no significant differences for other outcomes. Factors associated with outcomes included communication and referral processes between health care professionals. Conclusions and Relevance: Emerging evidence suggests that transitional care interventions are associated with lower readmissions for residents of LTCFs 65 years and older. Despite this and with aging populations, investment in such interventions has been remarkably low across most countries.

Beyond the control of the care home: A meta-ethnography of qualitative studies of Infection Prevention and Control in residential and nursing homes for older people.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop interpretive insights concerning Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) in care homes for older people. DESIGN: This study had a meta-ethnography design. DATA SOURCES: Six bibliographic databases were searched from inception to May 2020 to identify the relevant literature. REVIEW METHODS: A meta-ethnography was performed. RESULTS: Searches yielded 652 records; 15 were included. Findings were categorized into groups: The difficulties of enacting IPC measures in the care home environment; workload as an impediment to IPC practice; the tension between IPC and quality of life for care home residents; and problems dealing with medical services located outside the facility including diagnostics, general practice and pharmacy. Infection was revealed as something seen to lie 'outside' the control of the care home, whether according to origins or control measures. This could help explain the reported variability in IPC practice. Facilitators to IPC uptake involved repetitive training and professional development, although such opportunities can be constrained by the ways in which services are organized and delivered. CONCLUSIONS: Significant challenges were revealed in implementing IPC in care homes including staffing skills, education, workloads and work routines. These challenges cannot be properly addressed without resolving the tension between the objectives of maintaining resident quality of life while enacting IPC practice. Repetitive staff training and professional development with parallel organisational improvements have prospects to enhance IPC uptake in residential and nursing homes. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A carer of an older person joined study team meetings and was involved in writing a lay summary of the study findings.

Developing Best Practice Guidance for Discharge Planning Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

Background: Discharge from acute mental health inpatient units is often a vulnerable period for patients. Multiple professionals and agencies are involved and processes and procedures are not standardized, often resulting in communication delays and co-ordination failures. Early and appropriate discharge planning and standardization of procedures could make inpatient care safer. Aim: To inform the development of a multi-component best practice guidance for discharge planning (including the 6 component SAFER patient flow bundle) to support safer patient transition from mental health hospitals to the community. Methods: Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness method, a panel of 10 professional stakeholders (psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, clinical psychologists, pharmacists, academics, and policy makers) rated evidence-based statements. Six hundred and sixty-eight statements corresponding to 10 potential components of discharge planning best practice were rated on a 9-point integer scale for clarity, appropriateness and feasibility (median ≥ 7-9) using an online questionnaire then remote online face-to-face meetings. Results: Five of the six "SAFER" patient flow bundle components were appropriate and feasible for inpatient mental health. One component, "Early Flow," was rated inappropriate as mental health settings require more flexibility. Overall, 285 statements were rated as appropriate and feasible. Forty-four statements were considered appropriate but not feasible to implement. Discussion: This consensus study has identified components of a best practice guidance/intervention for discharge planning for UK mental health settings. Although some components describe processes that already happen in everyday clinical interactions (i.e., review by a senior clinician), standardizing such processes could have important safety benefits alongside a tailored and timely approach to post-discharge care.

Improving mental health care transitions through information capture during admission to inpatient mental health services: a quality improvement study.

BACKGROUND: Many interventions aim to improve the transition from ward to community at the time of discharge, with varying success. Guidelines suggest that discharge planning should begin at admission, but in reality this is ideal rather than standard practice. We aimed to develop a novel information capture tool during admission that facilitates and accelerates discharge. METHODS: A quality improvement study to develop, implement and evaluate a novel tool that improves information capture upon admission to acute mental health wards within a single English National Health Service (NHS) trust. We developed the tool by synthesising existing evidence and working with multi-agency and multi-disciplinary professionals in two co-design workshops. During implementation the tool was piloted on three wards. Ethnographic observations (145 h) and interviews (45) were used to evaluate the implementation of the tool across the three wards. Thematic synthesis was used to consolidate the findings. RESULTS: The tool developed considerably as the process evolved. The finished product is a list of 10 information categories that should be captured from external agencies upon admission to hospital to facilitate discharge planning to community settings. Reported advantages of the tool were: (1) facilitating confidence in junior staff to legitimately question the suitability of a patient for an acute ward (2) collecting and storing essential information in a single accessible place that can be used throughout the care pathway and (3) collecting information from the services/agencies to which patients will eventually be discharged. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the quality of information at admission has the potential to facilitate and accelerate discharge. The novel tool provides a framework for capturing this information that can be incorporated into existing information systems. However, the introduction of the tool exacerbated complex, fragile distributed team dynamics, highlighting the importance of sociocultural context in information flow transitional interventions within distributed teams.

Effects of the first COVID-19 lockdown on quality and safety in mental healthcare transitions in England.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic forced the rapid implementation of changes to practice in mental health services, in particular transitions of care. Care transitions pose a particular threat to patient safety. AIMS: This study aimed to understand the perspectives of different stakeholders about the impact of temporary changes in practice and policy of mental health transitions as a result of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on perceived healthcare quality and safety. METHOD: Thirty-four participants were interviewed about quality and safety in mental health transitions during May and June 2020 (the end of the first UK national lockdown). Semi-structured remote interviews were conducted to generate in-depth information pertaining to various stakeholders (patients, carers, healthcare professionals and key informants). Results were analysed thematically. RESULTS: The qualitative data highlighted six overarching themes in relation to practice changes: (a) technology-enabled communication; (b) discharge planning and readiness; (c) community support and follow-up; (d) admissions; (e) adapting to new policy and guidelines; (f) health worker safety and well-being. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated some quality and safety concerns such as tensions between teams, reduced support in the community and increased threshold for admissions. Also, several improvement interventions previously recommended in the literature, were implemented locally. DISCUSSION: The practice of mental health transitions has transformed during the COVID-19 pandemic, affecting quality and safety. National policies concerning mental health transitions should concentrate on converting the mostly local and temporary positive changes into sustainable service quality improvements and applying systematic corrective policies to prevent exacerbations of previous quality and safety concerns.

What does safety in mental healthcare transitions mean for service users and other stakeholder groups: An open-ended questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Historically, safety mental health research has tended to focus on risks of homicide, suicide and deaths. Although wider safety issues are now recognized in regards to mental health services, the safety of mental health transitions, a key research and policy priority according to World Health Organisation, has not been explored. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate perceptions of safety in mental health transitions (hospital to community) amongst five stakeholder groups. DESIGN AND SETTING: An online, international cross-sectional, open-ended questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS: There were five stakeholder participant groups: service users; families/carers; mental health-care professionals; researchers; and end users of research. RESULTS: Ninety-three participants from 12 different countries responded. Three overarching themes emerged: 'individual/clinical', 'systems/services' and 'human, behavioural and social' elements of safe mental health transitions. Whilst there was a great focus on clinical elements from researchers and healthcare professionals, service users and carers considered safety in terms of human, behavioural and social elements of transitional safety (ie loneliness, emotional readiness for discharge) and systems/services (ie inter-professional communication). DISCUSSION: Safety in mental health-care transitions is perceived differently by service users and families compared to healthcare professionals and researchers. Traditional safety indicators for care transitions such as suicide, self-harm and risk of adverse drug events are raised as important. However, service users and families in particular have a much wider perception of transitions safety. CONCLUSION: Future quality and safety research and policy should consider including a service user voice and consider integration of psychosocial elements in discharge interventions.

A patient and public involvement workshop using visual art and priority setting to provide patients with a voice to describe quality and safety concerns: Vitamin B12 deficiency and pernicious anaemia.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) is recognized as important for improved quality in health service provision and research. Vitamin B12 deficiency is one area where PPIE has potential to benefit patients, as patients often report sub-optimal care due to diagnostic delay, insufficient treatment and poor relationships with health professionals. OBJECTIVE: In an effort to engage an understudied patient population in health-care quality and safety discussions, and provide patients with an opportunity to have a voice, contribute to research priorities and express their current quality and safety concerns, we hosted a PPIE workshop. METHODS: One researcher (with lived experience) facilitated a one day workshop with 12 patients with varied demographics. The workshop had four components (a) one-to-one sessions with an artist, (b) quality and safety research/education priority setting, (c) comments on research proposals, and (d) development of a PPIE group for future research. RESULTS: All elements of the workshop elicited a number of quality and safety priorities for the group. Priority setting highlighted issues with interpretation of test results, symptom-based treatment, self-medication and relationship with primary care health-care professionals. One of the major safety issues highlighted in the visual art element was feeling ignored, silenced or not listened too by health-care professionals. DISCUSSION: Visual art methods to express experiences of health, and research priority setting tasks achieved the aim of providing patients with an opportunity to have a voice and express concerns about health-care quality and safety issues. The addition of visual art allowed patients to articulate emotions and impacts on everyday life associated with quality and safety. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A public contributor was involved in preparation of this manuscript. The event aimed to enable PPIE contribution in future research.

Preventable medication harm across health care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mitigating or reducing the risk of medication harm is a global policy priority. But evidence reflecting preventable medication harm in medical care and the factors that derive this harm remain unknown. Therefore, we aimed to quantify the prevalence, severity and type of preventable medication harm across medical care settings. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to compare the prevalence of preventable medication harm. Searches were carried out in Medline, Cochrane library, CINAHL, Embase and PsycINFO from 2000 to 27 January 2020. Data extraction and critical appraisal was undertaken by two independent reviewers. Random-effects meta-analysis was employed followed by univariable and multivariable meta-regression. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic, and publication bias was evaluated. PROSPERO: CRD42020164156. RESULTS: Of the 7780 articles, 81 studies involving 285,687 patients were included. The pooled prevalence for preventable medication harm was 3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2 to 4%, I2 = 99%) and for overall medication harm was 9% (95% CI 7 to 11%, I2 = 99.5%) of all patient incidence records. The highest rates of preventable medication harm were seen in elderly patient care settings (11%, 95% 7 to 15%, n = 7), intensive care (7%, 4 to 12%, n = 6), highly specialised or surgical care (6%, 3 to 11%, n = 13) and emergency medicine (5%, 2 to 12%, n = 12). The proportion of mild preventable medication harm was 39% (28 to 51%, n = 20, I2 = 96.4%), moderate preventable harm 40% (31 to 49%, n = 22, I2 = 93.6%) and clinically severe or life-threatening preventable harm 26% (15 to 37%, n = 28, I2 = 97%). The source of the highest prevalence rates of preventable harm were at the prescribing (58%, 42 to 73%, n = 9, I2 = 94%) and monitoring (47%, 21 to 73%, n = 8, I2 = 99%) stages of medication use. Preventable harm was greatest in medicines affecting the 'central nervous system' and 'cardiovascular system'. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest meta-analysis to assess preventable medication harm. We conclude that around one in 30 patients are exposed to preventable medication harm in medical care, and more than a quarter of this harm is considered severe or life-threatening. Our results support the World Health Organisation's push for the detection and mitigation of medication-related harm as being a top priority, whilst highlighting other key potential targets for remedial intervention that should be a priority focus for future research.

A questionnaire study of the negative outcomes for UK health professional volunteers in low and middle income countries.

INTRODUCTION: Past research has reported considerable benefits of international health professional volunteering for British healthcare professionals; however, there are also some negative outcomes reported. Negative outcomes reportedly happen on a personal, professional and organisational level. However, there is little evidence of the frequency they might occur. METHODS: We aimed to understand what the negative outcomes of health professional volunteering in low-income and middle-income countries were, and how frequently they occurred, in an opportunistic sample of UK health professionals. We used a questionnaire developed using potential negative outcomes reported in the peer-reviewed papers. We conducted secondary analysis on cross-sectional questionnaire data from 222 healthcare professionals. RESULTS: This research provides an indication of the frequency that negative outcomes might occur. Post hoc analyses revealed that some outcomes were experienced by the majority of health professional volunteers, for example, lack of formal recognition (131/169, 78%) and financial cost (92/169, 68%). While others happened less, for example, a reliance on agency or locum work (12/169, 7%) and loss of pension (31/169, 18%). CONCLUSION: The outcomes reported in this research quantify some of the concerns that have been raised in previous literature. Negative outcomes might be associated with certain features of volunteering and further research is needed to prospectively compare different features. Organisers of volunteering opportunities should be aware of the potential negative outcomes and engage with the research into negative outcomes to generate and apply findings about minimising potential negative outcomes, carefully balancing these against the needs of the host country.

Developing a core outcome set for interventions to improve discharge from mental health inpatient services: a survey, Delphi and consensus meeting with key stakeholder groups.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a core set of outcomes to be used in all future studies into discharge from acute mental health services to increase homogeneity of outcome reporting. DESIGN: We used a cross-sectional online survey with qualitative responses to derive a comprehensive list of outcomes, followed by two online Delphi rounds and a face-to-face consensus meeting. SETTING: The setting the core outcome set applies to is acute adult mental health. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were recruited from five stakeholder groups: service users, families and carers, researchers, healthcare professionals and policymakers. INTERVENTIONS: The core outcome set is intended for all interventions that aim to improve discharge from acute mental health services to the community. RESULTS: Ninety-three participants in total completed the questionnaire, 69 in Delphi round 1 and 68 in round 2, with relatively even representation of groups. Eleven participants attended the consensus meeting. Service users, healthcare professionals, researchers, carers/families and end-users of research agreed on a four-item core outcome set: readmission, suicide completed, service user-reported psychological distress and quality of life. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the core outcome set in future trials research will provide a framework to achieve standardisation, facilitate selection of outcome measures, allow between-study comparisons and ultimately enhance the relevance of trial or research findings to healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers and service users.

Codesigning a Mental Health Discharge and Transitions of Care Intervention: A Modified Nominal Group Technique.

BACKGROUND: Discharge from acute mental health services has long been associated with mortality, risk, and related adverse outcomes for patients. Many of the interventions that currently aim to reduce adverse outcomes focus on a single group of healthcare professionals within a single healthcare setting. A recent systematic review highlights very few robust interventions that specifically aim to improve communication across services. However the importance of promoting interagency working and improving information flow between services is continually highlighted as a key priority. METHODS: Using a novel codesign and experience based approach we worked with a multistakeholder group to develop possible solutions to reduce the adverse outcomes commonly associated with discharge from acute mental health services. This utilized a modified Nominal Group Technique and creative problem solving method to follow a four-stage process: Problem Identification, Solution Generation, Decision-Making, Prioritization and Implementation. Thirty-two healthcare professionals and an expert by lived experienced engaged with the process that took place over two stakeholder events. RESULTS: Stakeholders at the first event identified and agreed upon 24 potential ideas to improve discharge from acute mental health services. These were refined at the second event to four elements of an interagency intervention: a multiagency 'Discharge Team' (with designated discharge coordinator), inclusive technology enabled team meetings, universal documentation and a patient generated discharge plan. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to codesign an interagency mental health discharge intervention based around a discharge team. We developed a model for working that places a greater focus on a patient generated discharge plan, interagency working, and information flow. A pilot of the proposed intervention is now needed to test the feasibility and effectiveness in reducing adverse outcomes.

Interventions to improve discharge from acute adult mental health inpatient care to the community: systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The transition from acute mental health inpatient to community care is often a vulnerable period in the pathway, where people can experience additional risks and anxiety. Researchers globally have developed and tested a number of interventions that aim to improve continuity of care and safety in these transitions. However, there has been little attempt to compare and contrast the interventions and specify the variety of safety threats they attempt to resolve. METHODS: The study aimed to identify the evidence base for interventions to support continuity of care and safety in the transition from acute mental health inpatient to community services at the point of discharge. Electronic Databases including PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, HMIC, CINAHL, IBSS, Cochrane Library Trials, ASSIA, Web of Science and Scopus, were searched between 2000 and May 2018. Peer reviewed papers were eligible for inclusion if they addressed adults admitted to an acute inpatient mental health ward and reported on health interventions relating to discharge from the acute ward to the community. The results were analysed using a narrative synthesis technique. RESULTS: The total number of papers from which data were extracted was 45. The review found various interventions implemented across continents, addressing problems related to different aspects of discharge. Some interventions followed a distinct named approach (i.e. Critical Time Intervention, Transitional Discharge Model), others were grouped based on key components (i.e. peer support, pharmacist involvement). The primary problems interventions looked to address were reducing readmission, improving wellbeing, reducing homelessness, improving treatment adherence, accelerating discharge, reducing suicide. The 69 outcomes reported across studies were heterogeneous, meaning it was difficult to conduct comparative quantitative meta-analysis or synthesis. CONCLUSIONS: The interventions reviewed are spread across a spectrum ranging from addressing a single problem within a single agency with a single solution, to multiple solutions addressing multi-agency problems. We recommend that future research attempts to improve homogeneity in outcome reporting.

An ethnographic study comparing approaches to inter-professional knowledge sharing and learning in discharge planning and care transitions.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to investigate how three communication interventions commonly used during discharge planning and care transitions enable inter-professional knowledge sharing and learning as a foundation for more integrated working. These interventions include information communication systems, dedicated discharge planning roles and group-based planning activities. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: A two-year ethnographic study was carried out across two regional health and care systems in the English National Health Service, focussing on the discharge of stroke and hip fracture patients. Data collection involved in-depth observations and 213 semi-structured interviews. FINDINGS: Information systems (e.g. e-records) represent a relatively stable conduit for routine and standardised forms of syntactic information exchange that can "bridge" time-space knowledge boundaries. Specialist discharge roles (e.g. discharge coordinators) support personalised and dynamic forms of "semantic" knowledge sharing that can "broker" epistemic and cultural boundaries. Group-based activities (e.g. team meetings) provide a basis for more direct "pragmatic" knowledge translation that can support inter-professional "bonding" at the cultural and organisational level, but where inclusion factors complicate exchange. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The study offers analysis of how professional boundaries complicate discharge planning and care transition, and the potential for different communication interventions to support knowledge sharing and learning. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The paper builds upon existing research on inter-professional collaboration and patient safety by focussing on the problems of communication and coordination in the context of discharge planning and care transitions. It suggests that care systems should look to develop multiple complementary approaches to inter-professional communication that offer opportunities for dynamic knowledge sharing and learning.

Measuring the outcomes of volunteering for education: development and pilot of a tool to assess healthcare professionals' personal and professional development from international volunteering.

OBJECTIVE: The development and pilot of a self-report questionnaire, to assess personal and professional development of healthcare professionals gained through experiences in low-income and middle-income countries. DESIGN: The instrument was developed from a core set of the outcomes of international placements for UK healthcare professionals. Principal component analysis and multidimensional item response theory were conducted using results of a cross-sectional pilot study to highlight items with the best psychometric properties. SETTING: Questionnaires were completed both online and in multiple UK healthcare professional events face-to-face. PARTICIPANTS: 436 healthcare professional participants from the UK (with and without international experience) completed a 110-item questionnaire in which they assessed their knowledge, skills and attitudes. MEASURES: The 110-item questionnaire included self-report questions on a 7-point Likert scale of agreement, developed from the core outcome set, including items on satisfaction, clinical skills, communication and other important healthcare professional knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviours. Item reduction led to development of the 40-item Measuring the Outcomes of Volunteering for Education-Tool. Internal consistency was evaluated by the Cronbach's α coefficient. Exploratory analysis investigated the structure of the data using principal component analysis and multivariate item response theory. RESULTS: Exploratory analysis found 10 principal components that explained 71.80% of the variance. Components were labelled 'attitude to work, adaptability, adapting communication, cultural sensitivity, difficult communication, confidence, teaching, management, behaviour change and life satisfaction'. Internal consistency was acceptable for the identified components (α=0.72-0.86). CONCLUSIONS: A 40-item self-report questionnaire developed from a core outcome set for personal and professional development from international placements was developed, with evidence of good reliability and validity. This questionnaire will increase understanding of impact of international placements, facilitating comparisons of different types of experience. This will aid decision making about whether UK healthcare professionals should be encouraged to volunteer internationally and in what capacity.