Views Of Clinicians Research Articles

Factors that influence the uptake of virtual care solutions in Australian primary care practice: a systematic scoping review.

Uptake of virtual care solutions in primary care settings has increased exponentially, and current evidence suggests high patient satisfaction but mixed clinician views. This paper aimed to identify factors influencing its' implementation to support delivery to the right patient, in the right clinical context, at the right time. Further, this paper evaluates how the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) can be used to assess these factors that contribute to the uptake of virtual care innovations. This systematic scoping review identified empirical research on factors influencing the uptake of virtual care solutions in the Australian primary care setting. Searches were undertaken in Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The CFIR was used to code factors influencing the implementation of virtual care solutions. Inductive coding was used to generate new constructs where no appropriate CFIR construct could be identified. Fourteen eligible studies were identified as eligible for inclusion. Five common influencing factors were identified. Three are from the existing CFIR framework, and two are newly developed constructs. CFIR constructs included innovation relative advantage, capability, and IT infrastructure. New constructs included accessibility and suitability. A further six new constructs were identified (trust, privacy, governance, unintended consequences, preference, and choice) but these were not prominently mentioned. Common factors influence virtual care uptake in Australian primary care. The CFIR assisted in conceptualizing these but was not sufficient for capturing factors unique to virtual care. Newly developed constructs are noted to be of importance in the literature, but further research is needed to understand whether they are applicable in multiple contexts. http://links.lww.com/IJEBH/A286.

Care Coordination in Primary Care: Views of Clinicians and Clinic Leaders.

Care coordination is an important strategy for addressing patient needs and improving outcomes of care. The Minnesota Care Coordination Effectiveness Study sought to better understand the perspectives and experiences of clinicians/clinic leaders regarding the value, barriers, and facilitators for care coordination in primary care. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 clinic managers, physicians, and advanced practice clinicians. Data were analyzed using a directed content analysis approach. Five themes arose in the interviews: financial issues were perceived as a primary barrier to care coordination; participants valued care coordination as an important asset; they employed significant variation in how care coordination was structured; they identified both medical and social needs of patients as important; and care coordinators' background, experience, and integration were viewed as critical to program success. Care coordination received strong support from clinicians and clinic leaders who viewed it as a valuable component of successful care delivery.

Trauma clinicians’ views of physical exercise as part of PTSD and complex PTSD treatment: A qualitative study

Physical exercise has the potential to be a helpful, adjunctive intervention for supporting people with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD). However, little is known about the views of clinicians on including physical exercise in treatment. We aimed to explore trauma clinicians’ perspectives on the role of physical exercise in PTSD and CPTSD treatment and to understand key barriers and facilitators in recommending physical exercise as an adjunctive treatment. Twelve specialist trauma clinicians from across the UK were interviewed to explore their views on the role of physical exercise and the key barriers and facilitators in recommending it as an adjunctive treatment for PTSD and CPTSD. We used a qualitative explorative methodology with semi-structured interviews and analysed transcripts using reflexive thematic analysis. Trauma clinicians viewed physical exercise as a potentially beneficial supportive intervention for PTSD and CPTSD, and perceived several ways in which physical exercise could be included in the treatment process, with an individualised approach to care underpinning inclusion. However, there were also notable barriers to including exercise at environmental, client and clinician/service levels, including; limited access to exercise resources, client-related factors such as agoraphobia and physical health problems, clinician-related factors such as lack of confidence and training, and service-level factors such as gaps in service provision. The findings highlight the importance of considering individualised approaches to physical exercise interventions in trauma treatment. Addressing identified barriers, such as improving access to resources and providing training for clinicians, is crucial for successful integration of physical exercise into PTSD and CPTSD treatment protocols. This study underscores the need for further research to inform future policies and provide guidance for trauma clinicians on how to effectively incorporate physical exercise as an adjunctive treatment.

Aversion to pragmatic randomised controlled trials: three survey experiments with clinicians and laypeople in the USA

ObjectivesPragmatic randomised controlled trials (pRCTs) are essential for determining the real-world safety and effectiveness of healthcare interventions. However, both laypeople and clinicians often demonstrate experiment aversion: preferring to implement either...

Deep Brain Stimulation for Childhood Treatment-Resistant Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Mental Health Clinician Views on Candidacy Factors

Introduction Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is approved under a humanitarian device exemption to manage treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder (TR-OCD) in adults. It is possible that DBS may be trialed or used clinically off-label in children and adolescents with TR-OCD in the future. DBS is already used to manage treatment-resistant childhood dystonia. Evidence suggests it is a safe and effective intervention for certain types of dystonia. Important questions remain unanswered about the use of DBS in children and adolescents with TR-OCD, including whether mental health clinicians would refer pediatric patients for DBS, and who would be a good candidate for DBS. Objectives To explore mental health clinicians’ views on what clinical and psychosocial factors they would consider when determining which children with OCD would be good DBS candidates. Materials and Methods In depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with n = 25 mental health clinicians who treat pediatric patients with OCD. The interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using thematic content analysis. Three questions focused on key, clinical, and psychosocial factors for assessing candidacy were analyzed to explore respondent views on candidacy factors. Our analysis details nine overarching themes expressed by clinicians, namely the patient’s previous OCD treatment, OCD severity, motivation to commit to treatment, presence of comorbid conditions, family environment, education on DBS, quality of life, accessibility to treatment, and patient age and maturity. Conclusions Clinicians generally saw considering DBS treatment in youth as a last resort and only for very specific cases. DBS referral was predominantly viewed as acceptable for children with severe TR-OCD who have undertaken intensive, appropriate treatment without success, whose OCD has significantly reduced their quality of life, and who exhibit strong motivation to continue treatment given the right environment. Appropriate safeguards, eligibility criteria, and procedures should be discussed and identified before DBS for childhood TR-OCD becomes practice.

Could extended reality haptics be used in health-care education? A survey of health-care students, educators and clinicians

PurposeThis study, which is a cross-sectional survey, aims to investigate health-care academics, clinicians and students’ perspectives of health-care simulation-based learning (SBL) and extended reality (XR) haptics use within health-care education. Participants’ views regarding the application, barriers and facilitators of SBL and XR haptics were explored.Design/methodology/approachThe authors conducted an online international cross-sectional survey of 178 participants.FindingsThe survey found high health-care SBL use (n = 97, 55.1%) but low awareness (n = 48, 27.3%) or prior use of XR haptics (n = 14, 7.9%). Participants expressed interest in XR haptic technology emphasising its potential in SBL, particularly for understanding anatomy and physiology, enhancing clinical reasoning and consultation and practical skills.Research limitations/implicationsWhilst there was interest in XR haptics, few participants described previous experience of using this technology in SBL. A large percentage of the participants were UK-based. Most participants were from a nurse or physiotherapy professional background.Practical implicationsXR haptics is a developing technology for SBL in health-care education. Whilst there was clear interest from survey participants, further research is now required to develop and evaluate the feasibility of using this technology in health-care education.Originality/valueHealth-care students, educators and clinicians views on XR haptics have not previously been explored in the development and application of this technology. The findings of this survey will inform the development of XR learning scenarios that will be evaluated for feasibility in health-care SBL.

Potential US Health Care Savings Based on Clinician Views of Feasible Site-of-Care Shifts

Shifting care to alternative sites when clinically appropriate may be associated with reduced US health care spending, improved access, and, in some cases, improved care outcomes. To fill 2 main gaps in the current literature on site-of-care shifts: (1) understanding the clinician perspective on appropriateness of alternative care sites, given the central role they play in referrals and patient trust and (2) considering all potential sites where care could shift and calculating net savings potential. In this survey study, physicians (MDs and DOs), nurse practitioners, physician assistants, nurse anesthetists, radiology and imaging technicians, and psychologists were surveyed from September 17 to November 22, 2021, about potential shifts of care from the hospital setting to alternative sites. Participants were selected by the survey firm Intellisurvey to provide broad representation across all specialties of interest. A minimum of 34 clinicians responded to each question. Data were analyzed from April 2022 through October 2023. More than 5000 individual diagnostic and procedural codes were reviewed and sorted into 312 distinct care activities by an expert panel of physicians. Survey respondents were then provided with the 2019 claims-based distribution across sites of care for each care activity and were asked, "based on your clinical judgment, what portion of [care activity] could safely occur in each of the following sites of care, without compromising clinical outcomes?" Based on clinician-reported distributions, the total potential shift of volume from hospital-based settings to alternative sites and the associated net savings were estimated. Survey respondents included 1069 practicing clinicians (386 female [36.1%]; mean [SD] years since residency of physicians, 21.0 [9.7] years; mean [SD] age of nonphysicians, 45.3 [9.4] years) across specialties, all of whom practiced more than 20 clinical hours per week. There were 794 physicians (74.3%), and the remaining 275 respondents were midlevel professionals, such as physician assistants. Among 312 care activities surveyed, respondents indicated that 10.3 percentage points (95% CI, 10.0-10.5 percentage points) of commercial and 10.9 percentage points (95% CI, 10.7-11.1 percentage points) of Medicare volume currently taking place in hospital-based settings could shift to alternative sites with today's technology without compromising clinical outcomes. Across the entire US health care system, these shifts could be associated with a reduction in overall health care consumption spending ($3 562 339 000 000 000) by approximately $113.8 billion ($113 767 446 087 174 [3.2%]) to $147.7 billion ($147 661 672 284 263 [4.1%]) annually. In this study, a substantial net savings opportunity was estimated. However, realizing this potential will require ongoing alignment among organizations, clinicians, and policymakers to overcome barriers to these shifts.

Clinician perceptions of a novel wearable robotic hand orthosis for post-stroke hemiparesis

Purpose Wearable robotic devices are currently being developed to improve upper limb function for individuals with hemiparesis after stroke. Incorporating the views of clinicians during the development of new technologies can help ensure that end products meet clinical needs and can be adopted for patient care. Methods In this cross-sectional mixed-methods study, an anonymous online survey was used to gather clinicians’ perceptions of a wearable robotic hand orthosis for post-stroke hemiparesis. Participants were asked about their clinical experience and provided feedback on the prototype device after viewing a video. Results 154 participants completed the survey. Only 18.8% had previous experience with robotic technology. The majority of participants (64.9%) reported that they would use the device for both rehabilitative and assistive purposes. Participants perceived that the device could be used in supervised clinical settings with all phases of stroke. Participants also indicated a need for insurance coverage and quick setup time. Conclusions Engaging clinicians early in the design process can help guide the development of wearable robotic devices. Both rehabilitative and assistive functions are valued by clinicians and should be considered during device development. Future research is needed to understand a broader set of stakeholders’ perspectives on utility and design.

Stopping anticoagulation for isolated or incidental pulmonary embolism: the STOPAPE RCT protocol.

Is withholding anticoagulation for patients with isolated or incidental subsegmental pulmonary embolism clinically and cost-effective compared with full anticoagulation for 3 months? There has been an increase in the diagnosis of subsegmental pulmonary embolism since the advent of computed tomography pulmonary angiogram to investigate patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Subsegmental pulmonary embolism is not often detectable with older nuclear medicine-based diagnostic imaging for ventilation/perfusion mismatch. The case fatality of pulmonary embolism has reduced as subsegmental pulmonary embolism diagnoses from computed tomography pulmonary angiogram have increased. There is growing equipoise about the optimal treatment for patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism, given that full anticoagulation has significant risks of bleeding and subsegmental pulmonary embolism was not often diagnosed previously with ventilation/perfusion scanning and therefore most likely left predominantly untreated prior to the introduction of computed tomography pulmonary angiogram scanning. Determine whether withholding anticoagulation for isolated or incidental subsegmental pulmonary embolism (i.e. subsegmental pulmonary embolism with no coexisting deep-vein thrombosis) reduces the harms of recurrent thromboembolism and major bleeding compared with 3 months of full anticoagulation at 3, 6 and 12 months. Determine the rate of complications of anticoagulation therapy (predominantly bleeding) in patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism. Determine whether not treating isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism is acceptable to clinicians and patients. Determine the reclassification rate of subsegmental pulmonary embolism diagnoses made by general reporting radiologists when reviewed by specialist respiratory radiologists and develop a set of rules to improve general radiologists' diagnoses of subsegmental pulmonary embolism. Assess cost-effectiveness of not treating patients with isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism with anticoagulation, taking a health service perspective. Prospective individually randomised open controlled trial with blinded end-point committee assessment for outcomes, powered for non-inferiority for recurrent venous thromboembolism and for superiority for bleeding events. An internal pilot phase is included for feasibility and acceptability of no anticoagulation. We planned to recruit 1466 patients from at least 50 acute hospital sites. Allowing for a dropout rate of 15%, this would have given us 90% power to detect a reduction in major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding from 7.3% in the anticoagulation arm to 3% in the intervention arm. We were powered to determine that a strategy of no anticoagulation was non-inferior to anticoagulation with an upper margin of a 2.3% increase in recurrent venous thromboembolism from an expected rate of 2% in those who receive full anticoagulation. We also planned to undertake a study comparing acute reporting radiologists' diagnoses of subsegmental pulmonary embolism from all computed tomography pulmonary angiograms with specialist respiratory radiologists. This would have allowed us to determine safety in the pilot study (i.e. patients with pulmonary embolism that was in fact larger than subsegmental would have been identified) and develop guidance for subsegmental pulmonary embolism diagnosis for general radiologists. Patients with lived experience of thrombosis contributed to all aspects of the trial design and were part of the Trial Management Group. The STOPAPE trial was stopped prematurely due to a low recruitment rate in the wake of the COVID pandemic and prioritisation of recovery of the National Institute for Health and Care Research research portfolio. There are no outcome data available for this trial. Separate NIHR Library publications will detail the linked qualitative study examining the views of patients and clinicians around withholding anticoagulation for isolated subsegmental pulmonary embolism as well as presenting all collected data of recruited patients. This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number NIHR128073. A plain language summary of this research article is available on the NIHR Journals Library Website https://doi.org/10.3310/HRCW7937.

The acceptability of technology-enabled physical activity feedback in cardiac patients and health care professionals

PurposePhysical activity is a key component of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Despite the widely reported benefits of CR, uptake in the United Kingdom is still low. Alternative home-based and technology-facilitated delivery models are needed to improve CR uptake and physical activity. This study set out to explore patient and clinician views of personalised, multidimensional physical activity feedback and its potential use within CR.MethodsWe developed graphics for the presentation of personalised multidimensional physical activity feedback from data collected through wrist-worn monitors. Thirteen cardiac patients and nine healthcare professionals recruited from South West England wore research grade physical activity monitors for seven days. Participants then attended semi-structured interviews during which personalised physical activity feedback was provided. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically.ResultsTwo main themes were derived from the data which covered: 1) the perceived value of multidimensional physical activity feedback, and 2) support needed to facilitate understanding. Within the first theme, participants acknowledged that multidimensional physical activity feedback was useful for monitoring progress, goal setting, and increasing self-awareness of physical activity behaviour among both patients and clinicians. Within theme two, the need for more guidance and support from clinicians to aid patient understanding and reassurance was highlighted, particularly for those with very low physical activity levels.ConclusionsMultidimensional physical activity feedback delivered using a technology-enabled approach was perceived as acceptable among patients and clinicians. This study provides insights into the potential novel use of technology-enabled physical activity feedback to support and expand the delivery of CR.

Attachment, regulation, and competency framework in mental health services with youth experiencing homelessness: A qualitative study of clinician views

AimsAims were to 1) explore mental health clinicians’ experiences receiving training in the Attachment, Regulation, and Competency (ARC) framework, and 2) examine clinicians’ views of their own use of ARC when providing mental health services for youth experiencing homelessness (YEH). MethodParticipants included 10 clinicians with experience providing mental health services to YEH. Researchers collected data using a semi-structured interview guide and coded data following thematic analysis methods. ResultsClinicians described their ARC training and subsequent readiness to deliver ARC-informed services and provided feedback on how training could be improved. When reflecting on their use of ARC, they described the framework as inclusive, shared challenges and solutions to applying ARC in their work, and detailed how they promote attachment, regulation, and competency with YEH using this model. ConclusionClinicians emphasized the need for flexibility and creativity when using ARC-informed interventions in mental health care for YEH.

BRIDGE to liver health: implementation of a group telehealth psychoeducational program through shared medical appointments for MASLD management

BackgroundMetabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) represents a significantly costly and increasingly prevalent disease, with treatment focused on lifestyle intervention. Integrating education and behavioral health into clinical care offers opportunities to engage and empower patients to prevent progression of liver disease. We describe the design and implementation of Behavioral Resources and Intervention through Digital Group Education (BRIDGE), a 6-session group telehealth program led by advanced practice providers (APPs) in 90-min shared medical appointments (SMAs) with small groups of MASLD patients in an academic outpatient hepatology clinic. The program contains multi-component group interventions, with didactic education and behavioral coaching, while leveraging peer-based learning and support.MethodsA mixed-methods exploratory pilot study was conducted. Feasibility and acceptability of the clinical intervention were assessed by tracking recruitment, attendance, and retention of BRIDGE participants, patient interviews, and debriefing of clinician and staff views of the clinical program. Implementation metrics included program development time, workflow and scheduling logistics, and billing compliance for sustainability. Finally, patient parameters including changes in liver enzymes, FIB-4, weight, and BMI from pre- to post-BRIDGE were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsWe included 57 participants (median age 57, interquartile range (IQR) 50 – 65 years), 38 (67%) female, 38 (67%) white, and 40% had public insurance. Thirty-three (58%) participants completed all six sessions, while 43 (75%) attended at least five sessions. Patients who completed all sessions were older (median age 61 vs 53.5; p = 0.01). Gender, race/ethnicity, and insurance type were not significantly associated with missed sessions, and patients had similar rates of completion regardless of weight, BMI, or stage of liver disease. Barriers to completion included personal illness, family reasons, work commitments, or insurance issues. Prior to BRIDGE, median BMI was 31.9 (SD 29 – 36), with a median weight loss of 2 pounds (IQR -2 – 6) after BRIDGE.ConclusionThe BRIDGE telehealth SMA program was feasible, well-attended, and positively reviewed. This pilot study informs future iterations of program development and evaluation of outcome measures.

Epilepsy professionals' views on sudden unexpected death in epilepsy counselling: A tale of two countries.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is a leading cause of epilepsy mortality. All international guidance strongly advocates for clinicians working with people with epilepsy (PWE) to discuss SUDEP. Clinician views working with PWE in the UK and Norway on SUDEP counselling are compared. A cross-sectional online mixed methodology survey of 17 Likert and free-text response questions using validated themes was circulated via International League against Epilepsy/Epilepsy Specialist Nurses Association in the UK and International League against Epilepsy/Epilepsinet in Norway using a non-discriminatory exponential snowballing technique leading to non-probability sampling. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis, chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Significance was accepted at p < 0.05. Thematic analysis was conducted on free-text responses. Of 309 (UK 197, Norway 112) responses, UK clinicians were more likely to have experienced an SUDEP (p < 0.001), put greater importance on SUDEP communication (p < 0.001), discuss SUDEP with all PWE particularly new patients (p < 0.001), have access and refer to bereavement support (p < 0.001) and were less likely to never discuss SUDEP (p < 0.001). Significant differences existed between both countries' neurologists and nurses in SUDEP counselling with UK clinicians generally being more supportive. UK responders were more likely to be able to identify bereavement support (p < 0.001). Thematic analysis highlighted four shared themes and two specific to Norwegians. Despite all international guidelines stating the need/importance to discuss SUDEP with all PWE there remain hesitation, avoidance and subjectivity in clinicians having SUDEP-related conversations, more so in Norway than the UK. Training and education are required to improve communication, engagement and decision making.

Clinician Views of Proactive Tobacco Treatment Programs: A Qualitative Evaluation.

Proactive tobacco treatment programs are an evidence-based strategy to recruit patients who smoke to make supported quit attempts. However, such programs are rarely implemented. We performed a qualitative assessment of clinicians to inform the creation of a proactive outreach program for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who smoke. Informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we conducted semi-structured interviews to assess clinician views of proactive outreach, including barriers, program structure, and the use of technology. Clinicians included primary and specialty care physicians, nurses and advanced practice providers, pharmacists, respiratory therapists, a psychologist, and relevant members of leadership. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using directed content analysis. Clinicians in all roles identified that proactive outreach could be an effective use of resources to help patients with COPD who smoke quit with several advantages over the current state. Clinicians disagreed on the priority population (e.g., younger patients, sicker patients), and to some extent on whether proactive outreach is a clinical priority. Though they supported that technology could be part of the outreach program, most advocated for multiple avenues (phone calls, drop-in clinic, texting), as these patients were perceived to be low technology utilizers. The primary implementation barriers were competing priorities and cost, as well as unclear billing and staffing models. Clinicians support proactive outreach for patients with COPD, but the optimal way to structure, staff, and fund such programs remains unclear. Health systems should leverage implementation strategies to speed uptake of these potentially life-saving programs.

Conservative management versus invasive management of significant traumatic pneumothoraces in the emergency department (the CoMiTED trial): a study protocol for a randomised non-inferiority trial

IntroductionTraumatic pneumothoraces are present in one of five victims of severe trauma. Current guidelines advise chest drain insertion for most traumatic pneumothoraces, although very small pneumothoraces can be managed with...

Patient-initiated follow-up in gynaecology: Patient and clinician views

ObjectivesFollow-up appointments in the UK National Health Service account for up to two thirds of outpatient activity, but there is a significant resource impact in providing time fixed follow-up appointments. Increasingly patient initiated follow-up is being used, to make follow-up appointments work better for patients both in terms of timing and necessity, and to reduce unnecessary outpatient activity. The objective of this study was to use a modified questionnaire to evaluate patient and clinician views regarding Patient-Initiated Follow-Up (PIFU) in gynaecology services and identify subgroups suited to this pathway of care. Study designParticipants including both patients and clinicians were recruited from a gynaecology outpatient department. Patients who have poorer access healthcare (with disabilities and black and ethnic minority background) were purposively targeted so their experiences could be included. Value and burden scores were evaluated using patient and clinician surveys based on a modified QQ-10 questionnaire which assessed perceived value and burden of patient initiated follow-up in gynaecology. Free text comments regarding PIFU were also collected. Results305 patients and 30 clinicians were surveyed. Overall response to patient initiated follow-up was positive. Patients and clinicians attributed high value (77.4 % and 81.4 %) and low burden scores (37.5 % and 44.7 %) to PIFU. Patient autonomy was cited as a reason for this by 84.6 % of patients and 93.3 % of clinicians. Patients attending benign gynaecological sub-specialties including endometriosis (84.2), general gynaecology (82.5) and vulval clinics (81.4) attributed the highest value scores. Gynaecology oncology patients attributed the lowest value (64.0) and highest burden score (51.3) of all subgroups. Younger adults (<60) were more likely to express a preference for PIFU (52.9 %) than older adults (≥60) (28.6 %). ConclusionsIn this study, both patients and clinicians are in favour of selected use of PIFU in gynaecology services. Both questionnaires found younger patients with benign gynaecological conditions were perceived as best suited PIFU. We recommend offering PIFU to select patients who are confident in self-monitoring, factoring patient choice so patients are not disadvantaged by this system. Further evaluation of PIFU in practice is needed before widespread implementation.

How do primary care clinicians approach the management of frailty? A qualitative interview study.

Around 15% of adults aged over 65 live with moderate or severe frailty. Contractual requirements for management of frailty are minimal and neither incentivised nor reinforced. Previous research has shown frailty identification in primary care is ad hoc and opportunistic, but there has been little focus on the challenges of frailty management, particularly within the context of recent introduction of primary care networks and an expanding allied health professional workforce. Explore the views of primary care clinicians in England on the management of frailty. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with clinicians across England, including general practitioners (GPs), physician associates, nurse practitioners, paramedics and clinical pharmacists. Thematic analysis was facilitated through NVivo (Version 12). A total of 31 clinicians participated. Frailty management was viewed as complex and outside of clinical guidelines with medication optimisation highlighted as a key example. Senior clinicians, particularly experienced GPs, were more comfortable with managing risk. Relational care was important in prioritising patient wishes and autonomy, for instance to remain at home despite deteriorations in health. In settings where more formalised multidisciplinary frailty services had been established this was viewed as successful by clinicians involved. Primary care clinicians perceive frailty as best managed through trusted relationships with patients, and with support from experienced clinicians. New multidisciplinary working in primary care could enhance frailty services, but must keep continuity in mind. There is a lack of evidence or guidance for specific interventions or management approaches.

From not knowing to doing: An interprofessional approach to clinician training in use of Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) as a recovery-oriented outcome measure in a rural mental health service.

Outcome measurement and feedback are key to quality improvement in healthcare. Goal attainment scaling (GAS) is a tool that could be used to measure outcomes of mental health services delivering recovery-oriented care. The objective of this prospective study was to evaluate the effectiveness of tailored, interprofessional, multilevel and adaptable GAS training on clinician views, learning, competence, performance and confidence in the use of GAS. Thematic analysis of eight clinician participant views was done using the method proposed by Braun and Clarke (Thematic analysis: a practical guide to understanding and doing, 2022). Four main themes were generated: clinicians found that this type of training is useful, GAS influenced the way they thought about their roles in goal setting and recovery-oriented care and COVID-19 pandemic impacts. Furthermore, clinicians' skills to set scalable GAS goals with consumers and clinician confidence in using GAS improved. The results of this study show a positive impact of tailored, interprofessional, multilevel and adaptable training supporting development of clinician skills in the GAS process. The training design had a favourable effect on clinician views, learning, competence, performance and confidence of GAS as a recovery-oriented outcome measure. The approach to GAS training and use of GAS as a recovery-oriented outcome measure should be considered in response to mental health service reform.

Views of Specialist Clinicians and People With Multiple Sclerosis on Upper Limb Impairment and the Potential Role of Virtual Reality in the Rehabilitation of the Upper Limb in Multiple Sclerosis: Focus Group Study.

Finding enjoyable and effective long-term approaches to rehabilitation for improving the upper limb (UL) function of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) is challenging. Using virtual reality (VR) could be a solution to this challenge; however, there is a lack of reporting on the views of people with MS and clinicians on VR-based approaches and recommendations for games for rehabilitation. This study aims to identify common UL problems and their related current therapeutic approaches for people with MS, and to explore the opinions of people with MS and specialist clinicians on VR and obtain suggestions for the development and design of VR games. Separate focus groups were conducted with people with MS, recruited through the MS Society UK's research network, and clinicians, recruited through the MS Trust Therapists in MS network. A total of 10 people with MS (2 focus groups) and 8 clinicians (5 physiotherapists, 2 occupational therapists, and 1 MS nurse in 2 focus groups) were involved. The focus groups were recorded and transcriptions were analyzed using theme-based content analysis. People with MS commonly reported that their UL problems interfered with activities of daily living and resulted in the loss of meaningful hobbies such as writing. Many people with MS neglected UL exercise and found strategies for adapting to the UL impairments. Similarly, clinicians stated UL rehabilitation was neglected within their service and that it was challenging to find interesting treatment strategies. VR was suggested by both participant groups as a solution, as it was convenient for people with MS to access and it could provide a more engaging and disguised approach to exercise. There were shared concerns with cybersickness and disengagement with using VR approaches. Both groups agreed games should be meaningful and adaptable for users but suggested different VR activities, with clinicians suggesting games directly reflecting activities of daily living and people with MS suggesting more abstract activities. VR was well received by both people with MS and clinicians for UL rehabilitation. Recommendations were made for the development of VR rehabilitation games which are personalized and customizable for the varying abilities of people with MS.

A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians

BackgroundTumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences.MethodsAdult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields.ResultsInterviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician’s opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients.ConclusionsThis is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients’ decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.