The aim of this audit was to assess the effect of the Quality Mark programme on the quality of acute care received by older patients by comparing the experiences of staff and older adults before and after the programme. Data from 31 wards in 12 acute hospitals were collected over two stages. Patients and staff completed questionnaires on the perceived quality of care on the ward. Patients rated improved experiences of nutrition, staff availability and dignity. Staff received an increase in training and reported better access to support, increased time and skill to deliver care and improved morale, leadership and teamwork. Problems remained with ward comfort and mealtimes. Overall, results indicated an improvement in ratings of care quality in most domains during Quality Mark data collection. Further audits need to explore ways of improving ward comfort and mealtime experience.
Attitude of Health Personnel , Patient Satisfaction , Quality of Health Care , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , State Medicine , United Kingdom
OBJECTIVES: This study aims to track electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) clinics' compliance with standards for the administration of ECT before and after the introduction of the Electroconvulsive Therapy Accreditation Service (ECTAS) in 2003. METHODS: Three audits on the practice of ECT were retrospectively analyzed, and ECTAS data from 2004 to 2011 were prospectively analyzed. Overall compliance with 10 ECT audit standards was presented in 2 ways: annually and for each of the 3 waves of accreditation. RESULTS: There have been continuing improvements since the introduction of the accreditation service in compliance with all 10 ECT audit standards whether measured annually or by accreditation cycle, although these improvements have not been linked to changes in clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although improvements in ECT delivery have coincided with the accreditation service, other factors may have also contributed.
Accreditation/standards , Ambulatory Care Facilities/standards , Electroconvulsive Therapy/standards , Medical Audit/methods , Psychiatry/standards , Quality Improvement , Evidence-Based Practice/standards , Guideline Adherence/standards , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , United Kingdom
PURPOSE: Partial or non-adherence is common in people taking antipsychotic medication. A good therapeutic alliance is thought by psychiatrists to encourage engagement with a service and improve adherence. This paper aims to examine how psychiatrists and patients communicate in outpatient consultations about partial or non-adherence to antipsychotic prescribing. METHODS: Ninety-two outpatient consultations involving patients prescribed antipsychotic medication and their psychiatrists were tape recorded. Parts of consultations where partial/non-adherence to antipsychotic medication was discussed were analysed using conversation analysis. RESULTS: In 22 (24 %) consultations, partial/non-adherence was disclosed. Most commonly, it was volunteered without prompting and was more likely to be presented as a deliberate choice than omission by the patient. Psychiatrists responded to all but one disclosure, and patients delivered their reports in ways that minimised the prospect of this response being disciplinary. The most common outcome was a change in prescribing: a medication omission, swap or dosage reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and psychiatrists work together to create a safe conversational environment in which to discuss this potentially difficult issue. Unlike previous studies of patient reports of psychotic symptoms and side effects of drowsiness being ignored, psychiatrists nearly always respond to disclosures of partial/non-adherence. Psychiatrists should apply the same listening skills to patients' disclosures of troubling side effects and psychotic symptoms.
Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Communication , Medication Adherence , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , Physician-Patient Relations , Psychotic Disorders/drug therapy , Adult , Antipsychotic Agents/administration & dosage , Drug Substitution , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outpatients , Psychotic Disorders/psychology , Referral and Consultation , Videotape Recording
The professional identity of psychiatry depends on it being regarded as one amongst many medical specialties and sharing ideals of good practice with other specialties, an important marker of which is the achievement of shared decision-making and avoiding a reputation for being purely agents of social control. Yet the interactions involved in trying to achieve shared decision-making are relatively unexplored in psychiatry. This study analyses audiotapes of 92 outpatient consultations involving nine consultant psychiatrists focusing on how pressure is applied in shared decisions about antipsychotic medication. Detailed conversation analysis reveals that some shared decisions are considerably more pressured than others. At one end of a spectrum of pressure are pressured shared decisions, characterised by an escalating cycle of pressure and resistance from which it is difficult to exit without someone losing face. In the middle are directed decisions, where the patient cooperates with being diplomatically steered by the psychiatrist. At the other extreme are open decisions where the patient is allowed to decide, with the psychiatrist exerting little or no pressure. Directed and open decisions occurred most frequently; pressured decisions were rarer. Patient risk did not appear to influence the degree of pressure applied in these outpatient consultations.
Antipsychotic Agents/administration & dosage , Decision Making , Mental Health Services/organization & administration , Outpatients/psychology , Patient Participation/methods , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Adult , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Communication , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Participation/psychology , Psychiatry/organization & administration , Schizophrenic Psychology , Sociology, Medical
BACKGROUND: The breaking and receipt of bad news is little referred to in the mental health literature, particularly from a service user perspective. AIMS: This project aimed to gain understanding of service users' experiences of receiving good and bad news from mental health professionals. METHOD: Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted in which mental health service users recounted key moments when good or bad news was delivered to them and described the impact of that news on their psychological well being. Transcripts were analysed thematically. RESULTS: The receiving of a diagnosis could be perceived as bad news or a cause of confusion where a diagnosis is changed. The importance of trust in professionals, the use of adequate time and information was considered important in buffering the impact of potentially bad news. The technique of comparing a mental disorder to a physical disorder is not always helpful. CONCLUSIONS: The delivery of bad news in mental health is more complex than a "good or bad news" paradigm and it should be done in the context of a good therapeutic alliance. An individualized approach to delivering news about diagnosis is advocated.
Adaptation, Psychological , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Health , Physician-Patient Relations , Truth Disclosure , Adult , Aged , Confusion , Female , Humans , Male , Mental Disorders/psychology , Middle Aged , Time Factors
