Graça Cardoso1, Ana Papoila2, Gina Tomé2, Helen Killaspy3, Michael King3, José Miguel Caldas-de-Almeida2. 1. Chronic Diseases Research Centre (CEDOC), NOVA Medical School/Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria 130, 1169-056, Lisbon, Portugal. graca.cardoso@nms.unl.pt. 2. Chronic Diseases Research Centre (CEDOC), NOVA Medical School/Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria 130, 1169-056, Lisbon, Portugal. 3. Division of Psychiatry, University College London, 6th Floor, Maple House, 149 Tottenham Court Road, London, W1T 7NF, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a staff-training intervention to improve service users' engagement in activities and quality of care, by means of a cluster randomised controlled trial. METHOD: All residential units with at least 12-h a day staff support (n = 23) were invited to participate. Quality of care was assessed with the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC) filled online by the unit's manager. Half the units (n = 12) were randomly assigned to continue providing treatment as usual, and half (n = 11) received a staff-training intervention that focused on skills for engaging service users in activities, with trainers working alongside staff to embed this learning in the service. The primary outcome was service users' level of activity (measured with the Time Use Diary), reassessed at 4 and 8 months. Secondary outcomes were the quality of care provided (QuIRC), and service users' quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life) reassessed at 8 months. Generalized linear mixed effect models were used to assess the difference in outcomes between units in the two trial arms. The trial was registered with Current Controlled Trials (Ref NCT02366117). RESULTS: Knowledge acquired by the staff during the initial workshops increased significantly (p ≤ 0.01). However, the intervention and comparison units did not differ significantly in primary and secondary outcomes at either follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention increased the level of knowledge of staff without leading to an improvement in service users' engagement in activities, quality of life, or quality of care in the units.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a staff-training intervention to improve service users' engagement in activities and quality of care, by means of a cluster randomised controlled trial. METHOD: All residential units with at least 12-h a day staff support (n = 23) were invited to participate. Quality of care was assessed with the Quality Indicator for Rehabilitative Care (QuIRC) filled online by the unit's manager. Half the units (n = 12) were randomly assigned to continue providing treatment as usual, and half (n = 11) received a staff-training intervention that focused on skills for engaging service users in activities, with trainers working alongside staff to embed this learning in the service. The primary outcome was service users' level of activity (measured with the Time Use Diary), reassessed at 4 and 8 months. Secondary outcomes were the quality of care provided (QuIRC), and service users' quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life) reassessed at 8 months. Generalized linear mixed effect models were used to assess the difference in outcomes between units in the two trial arms. The trial was registered with Current Controlled Trials (Ref NCT02366117). RESULTS: Knowledge acquired by the staff during the initial workshops increased significantly (p ≤ 0.01). However, the intervention and comparison units did not differ significantly in primary and secondary outcomes at either follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention increased the level of knowledge of staff without leading to an improvement in service users' engagement in activities, quality of life, or quality of care in the units.
Entities:
Keywords:
Intervention; Recovery; Residential units; Severe mental illness; Staff training
Authors: Helen Killaspy; Louise Marston; Nicholas Green; Isobel Harrison; Melanie Lean; Sarah Cook; Tim Mundy; Thomas Craig; Frank Holloway; Gerard Leavey; Leonardo Koeser; Paul McCrone; Maurice Arbuthnott; Rumana Z Omar; Michael King Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2015-01-08 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Helen Killaspy; Sarah White; Christine Wright; Tatiana L Taylor; Penny Turton; Matthias Schützwohl; Mirjam Schuster; Jorge A Cervilla; Paulette Brangier; Jiri Raboch; Lucie Kališová; Georgi Onchev; Spiridon Alexiev; Roberto Mezzina; Pina Ridente; Durk Wiersma; Ellen Visser; Andrzej Kiejna; Tomasz Adamowski; Dimitri Ploumpidis; Fragiskos Gonidakis; José Caldas-de-Almeida; Graça Cardoso; Michael B King Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2011-03-01 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Melanie Lean; Gerard Leavey; Helen Killaspy; Nicholas Green; Isobel Harrison; Sarah Cook; Thomas Craig; Frank Holloway; Maurice Arbuthnott; Michael King Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2015-09-02 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Helen Killaspy; Sarah Cook; Tim Mundy; Thomas Craig; Frank Holloway; Gerard Leavey; Louise Marston; Paul McCrone; Leonardo Koeser; Maurice Arbuthnott; Rumana Z Omar; Michael King Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 3.630