Over the past few decades advance care planning (ACP) has become the subject of debate, research and legislation in many countries. Encouraging people to express their preference for treatment in advance, ideally in written form, seems a natural way to identify what someone might have wanted when they can no longer participate in decision-making. The notion of ACP as an unequivocal good permeates much of the research and policy work in this area. For example, ACP is now actively encouraged in Australian federal and state government policies and the Victorian Government has recently published a practical ACP strategy for Victorian health services (2014-2018). However, advance care plan is ethically complex and the introduction of the Victorian health services strategy provides an opportunity to reflect on this complexity, particularly on the benefits and risks of ACP.
Background The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of health care workers’ mental health and well-being for the successful function of the health care system. Few targeted digital tools exist to support the mental health of hospital-based health care workers, and none of them appear to have been led and co-designed by health care workers. Objective RMHive is being led and developed by health care workers using experience-based co-design (EBCD) processes as a mobile app to support the mental health challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic to health care workers. We present a protocol for the impact evaluation for the rapid design and delivery of the RMHive mobile app. Methods The impact evaluation will adopt a mixed methods design. Qualitative data from photo interviews undertaken with up to 30 health care workers and semistructured interviews conducted with up to 30 governance stakeholders will be integrated with qualitative and quantitative user analytics data and user-generated demographic and mental health data entered into the app. Analyses will address three evaluation questions related to engagement with the mobile app, implementation and integration of the app, and the impact of the app on individual mental health outcomes. The design and development will be described using the Mobile Health Evidence Reporting and Assessment guidelines. Implementation of the app will be evaluated using normalization process theory to analyze qualitative data from interviews combined with text and video analysis from the semistructured interviews. Mental health impacts will be assessed using the total score of the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ4) and subscale scores for the 2-item Patient Health Questionnaire for depression and the 2-item Generalized Anxiety Scale for anxiety. The PHQ4 will be completed at baseline and at 14 and 28 days. Results The anticipated average use period of the app is 30 days. The rapid design will occur over four months using EBCD to collect qualitative data and develop app content. The impact evaluation will monitor outcome data for up to 12 weeks following hospital-wide release of the minimal viable product release. The study received funding and ethics approvals in June 2020. Outcome data is expected to be available in March 2021, and the impact evaluation is expected to be published mid-2021. Conclusions The impact evaluation will examine the rapid design, development, and implementation of the RMHive app and its impact on mental health outcomes for health care workers. Findings from the impact evaluation will provide guidance for the integration of EBCD in rapid design and implementation processes. The evaluation will also inform future development and rollout of the app to support the mental health needs of hospital-based health care workers more widely. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/26168
ObjectivePandemics negatively impact healthcare workers’ (HCW’s) mental health and well-being causing additional feelings of anxiety, depression, moral distress and post-traumatic stress. A comprehensive review and evidence synthesis of HCW’s mental health and well-being interventions through pandemics reporting mental health outcomes was conducted addressing two questions: (1) What mental health support interventions have been reported in recent pandemics, and have they been effective in improving the mental health and well-being of HCWs? (2) Have any mobile apps been designed and implemented to support HCWs’ mental health and well-being during pandemics?DesignA narrative evidence synthesis was conducted using Cochrane criteria for synthesising and presenting findings when systematic review and pooling data for statistical analysis are not suitable due to the heterogeneity of the studies.Data sourcesEvidence summary resources, bibliographic databases, grey literature sources, clinical trial registries and protocol registries were searched.Eligibility criteriaSubject heading terms and keywords covering three key concepts were searched: SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (or similar infectious diseases) epidemics, health workforce and mental health support interventions. Searches were limited to English-language items published from 1 January 2000 to 14 June 2022. No publication-type limit was used.Data extraction and synthesisTwo authors determined eligibility and extracted data from identified manuscripts. Data was synthesised into tables and refined by coauthors.Results2694 studies were identified and 27 papers were included. Interventions were directed at individuals and/or organisations and most were COVID-19 focused. Interventions had some positive impacts on HCW’s mental health and well-being, but variable study quality, low sample sizes and lack of control conditions were limitations. Two mobile apps were identified with mixed outcomes.ConclusionHCW interventions were rapidly designed and implemented with few comprehensively described or evaluated. Tailored interventions that respond to HCWs’ needs using experience co-design for mental health and well-being are required with process and outcome evaluation.
Identity and decision-making are interrelated concepts, but the relationship between them is complex particularly when an unwell person’s ability to make decisions is compromised. In this article we discuss how moral self-definition (Nelson, 2001;Walker, 1987) can be used within a Listening Guide (LG) analysis to extend analysis of the temporal relationship between identity and decisions. In this project, the LG was used to analyze interviews exploring older people’s understanding of medical decision-making when the unwell person’s capacity is diminished. The second step of the LG drew attention to the participants’ expression of decision-making voices and health-related identities, but the iterative and temporal relationship between identity and decisions was less well illuminated. Therefore, we applied the theoretical framework of moral self-definition within the third listening. The focus of this article is on how moral self-definition can be integrated as a theoretical framework within the contrapuntal listening to extend the LG analysis.
A commentary on “What's Not Being Shared in Shared Decision‐Making?” from the July‐August 2013 issue.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.