Different stakeholder perspectives on NHS safety.

John Tingle, Lecturer in Law, Birmingham Law School, University of Birmingham, discuses some key NHS stakeholder perspectives on NHS patient safety.

Taking care of nurses is a boost for patients and the wider economy.

Investment in nursing is key to having a healthy workforce and a healthy population. NHS Chief Nursing Officers for Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England Alex McMahon, Maria McIlgorm, Sue Tranka and Ruth May reflect on policies adopted over the past year aimed at developing the healthcare workforce.

Guidance for the provision of absorbent products for adult incontinence.

The Association for Continence Professionals first published their guidance for the provision of absorbent products for adult incontinence in 2017. This consensus document is targeted towards commissioning leads, NHS Trust Boards, Bladder and Bowel leads, among others, and has been updated over the years to ensure that all adults who suffer with continence issues undergo a comprehensive assessment and have access to an equitable service. This article provides an overview of the latest guidelines which were published in February 2023.

Developing an integrated nurse and physiotherapist-led bladder, bowel and pelvic health team.

A service redesign in 2019 led to the formation of an integrated team of nurses and physiotherapists working together to form a bladder, bowel and pelvic health team across two hospitals and the community in Lewisham and Greenwich NHS Trust. The last few years have had their challenges, but the team is now very successful and has won awards for the integration and achievements, particularly in the redesign of the containment product service. Integrating two professional groups has led to excellent team-work and smoother patient journeys.

Practical guide to implementing patient-reported outcome measures in gender-affirming care: evaluating acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility.

OBJECTIVE: Assess acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the Practical Guide to Implementing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in Gender-Affirming Care (PG-PROM-GAC) from a sample of patients and healthcare professionals. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study conducted August-October 2023. SETTING: Participants were recruited from a National Health Service (NHS) gender clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Patient participants seeking care and healthcare professionals working at an NHS gender clinic were eligible for participation. The PG-PROM-GAC was sent to participants via email for review. OUTCOME MEASURES: Three validated tools to measure acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility were administered: the acceptability of intervention measure (AIM), intervention appropriateness measure (IAM) and feasibility of intervention measure (FIM). The percentage of participants indicating agreement or disagreement with items on the AIM, IAM and FIM was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 132 transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients (mean age, SD: 33, 14) and 13 gender-affirming healthcare professionals (mean age, SD: 43, 11) completed the AIM, IAM and FIM, representing a range of gender identities. The cumulative percentage of patients indicating agree or strongly agree on the AIM, IAM and FIM for the patient-relevant strategies in the PG-PROM-GAC was over 50% for each item. The cumulative percentage of patients indicating disagree or strongly disagree on the AIM, IAM and FIM for the PG-PROM-GAC was less than 20% for each item. The cumulative percentage of healthcare professionals indicating agree or strongly agree on the AIM, IAM and FIM for the healthcare professional-relevant strategies in the PG-PROM-GAC was over 38% for each item. The cumulative percentage of healthcare professionals indicating disagree or strongly disagree on the AIM, IAM and FIM for the PG-PROM-GAC was less than 15% for each item. CONCLUSIONS: Gender-affirming healthcare professionals and TGD patients find the PG-PROM-GAC acceptable, appropriate and feasible. The PG-PROM-GAC is ready-to-use for clinicians, policy-makers and researchers committed to service improvement for gender-affirming care.

Identifying barriers to outpatient appointment attendance in patient groups at risk of inequity: a mixed methods study in a London NHS trust.

BACKGROUND: There is significant health inequity in the United Kingdom (U.K.), with different populations facing challenges accessing health services, which can impact health outcomes. At one London National Health Service (NHS) Trust, data showed that patients from deprived areas and minority ethnic groups had a higher likelihood of missing their first outpatient appointment. This study's objectives were to understand barriers to specific patient populations attending first outpatient appointments, explore systemic factors and assess appointment awareness. METHODS: Five high-volume specialties identified as having inequitable access based on ethnicity and deprivation were selected as the study setting. Mixed methods were employed to understand barriers to outpatient attendance, including qualitative semi-structured interviews with patients and staff, observations of staff workflows and interrogation of quantitative data on appointment communication. To identify barriers, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients who missed their appointment and were from a minority ethnic group or deprived area. Staff interviews and observations were carried out to further understand attendance barriers. Patient interview data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to create a thematic framework and triangulated with staff data. Subthemes were mapped onto a behavioural science framework highlighting behaviours that could be targeted. Quantitative data from patient interviews were analysed to assess appointment awareness and communication. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients and 11 staff were interviewed, with four staff observed. Seven themes were identified as barriers - communication factors, communication methods, healthcare system, system errors, transport, appointment, and personal factors. Knowledge about appointments was an important identified behaviour, supported by eight out of 26 patients answering that they were unaware of their missed appointment. Environmental context and resources were other strongly represented behavioural factors, highlighting systemic barriers that prevent attendance. CONCLUSION: This study showed the barriers preventing patients from minority ethnic groups or living in deprived areas from attending their outpatient appointment. These barriers included communication factors, communication methods, healthcare the system, system errors, transport, appointment, and personal factors. Healthcare services should acknowledge this and work with public members from these communities to co-design solutions supporting attendance. Our work provides a basis for future intervention design, informed by behavioural science and community involvement.

Deprivation of liberty and the community nurse.

In this month's Policy column, Iwan Dowie discusses the 'deprivation of liberty' - which is used to safeguard patients who may be lacking sufficient mental capacity to manage their own safety. The author, through previous legal cases, shares how the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS)-an amendment to the Mental Capacity Act 2005-came into being, and the importance of community nurses in knowing the DoLS.

Delegation of insulin administration: a survey of community nursing teams in England.

In community nursing, the administration of insulin for people with type 2 diabetes can be delegated by registered nurses to healthcare support workers. Although a voluntary framework in England provides national guidance, little is known about its uptake. The project aim was to determine the roll-out, characteristics and support needs in relation to the delegation of insulin administration in community settings. An online survey was disseminated to community nursing services in England via social media and nursing networks. Of the 115 responding organisations, 81% (n=93) had an insulin delegation programme, with most initiated since 2018. From these services, 41% (n=3704) of insulin injections were delegated daily, with benefits for patients, staff and services reported, along with some challenges. Delegation of insulin administration is an established and valued initiative. Awareness of the national voluntary framework is increasing. National guidance is considered important to support governance arrangements and safety.

Commissioning and co-production in health and care services in the United Kingdom and Ireland: An exploratory literature review.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory literature review seeks to examine the literature around commissioning processes in the co-production of health and care services, focusing on two questions: How do health and care commissioning processes facilitate and/or pose barriers to co-production in service design and delivery? What are the contextual factors that influence these processes? METHOD: A systematic search of three databases (Medline, Public Health and Social Policy and Practice) and a search platform (Web of Science) was conducted for the period 2008-2023. A total of 2675 records were retrieved. After deduplication, 1925 were screened at title and abstract level. Forty-seven reports from 42 United Kingdom and Ireland studies were included in the review. A thematic synthesis of included studies was conducted in relation to the research questions. RESULTS: The review identified one overarching theme across the synthesised literature: the complexity of the commissioning landscape. Three interconnected subthemes illuminate the contextual factors that influence this landscape: commissioners as leaders of co-production; navigating relationships and the collective voice. CONCLUSION: Commissioning processes were commonly a barrier to the co-production of health and care services. Though co-production was an aspiration for many commissioners, the political and economic environment and service pressures meant that it was often not fully realised. More flexible funding models, longer-term pilot projects, an increased emphasis in social value across the health and care system and building capacity for strong leadership in commissioning is needed. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and the public did not contribute to this review as it was a small piece of work following on from a completed project, with no budget for public involvement.

Pulsed field ablation with the pentaspline catheter compared with cryoablation for the treatment of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation in the UK NHS: a cost-comparison analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Pulsed field ablation (PFA) is a promising new ablation modality for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) that has recently become available in the UK National Health Service (NHS). We provide the first known economic evaluation of the technology. METHODS: A cost-comparison model was developed to compare the expected 12-month costs of treating AF using the pentaspline PFA catheter compared with cryoablation for a single hypothetical patient. Model parameters were based on a recent cost-effectiveness analysis by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence where possible or published literature otherwise. Deterministic sensitivity, scenario and threshold analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Costs for a single patient treated with PFA were -3% (-£343) less over 12 months than those who received treatment with cryoablation. PFA was associated with 16% higher catheter costs but repeat ablation costs were over 50% less, driven by a reduction in repeat ablations required. Costs of managing complications were -£211 less in total for PFA compared with cryoablation. CONCLUSIONS: Routine adoption of PFA with the pentaspline PFA catheter looks to be as affordable for the NHS as current treatment alternative cryoablation.