Search Results

Evaluation & Exploration of Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership Interventions Welcome to the Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership study webpage A team of researchers from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Southampton are doing a research study to learn more about how to best help people who have used stalking behaviours. ​ We want to learn more about the experiences of people who are being, or have been, supported by the Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership, in Hampshire & Isle of Wight. The goal is to help the Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership improve the services they offer. ​ You can help us improve this service by taking part in an ‘interview’ – a telephone discussion with a researcher. This is optional – you will receive the same service from the Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership whether you participate or not. If you do decide to participate in an interview, this would be completely confidential and would take about an hour, at a time and date of your choosing. We would ask you questions about your experiences since being referred to the Multi-Agency Stalking Partnership. For example, were you satisfied with the support you received? Has the support had any impact on your life? Why or why not? We can offer you a £25 shopping voucher to thank you for your time. ​ Would you like to share your experience? We would be interested to hear from you. Please watch this video to learn more. ​ (EMBED VIDEO HERE) If you decide to participate in an interview, the researcher will ask you to provide your informed consent – to ensure that you understand why we are asking you questions, and how we will use and store the answers you give to those questions. Click here to see a copy of the Consent Form that will be used. (EMBED LINK TO PDF DOCUMENT HERE) If you have any questions, or if you would like to take part in this research project, please contact: MASPresearch@soton.ac.uk

Impact Since ARC Wessex began in October 2019 it has focussed on the tackling the health and care challenges of our communities and beyond. ​ In addition to our four research themes, ARC Wessex has developed a Mental Health Hub and secured funding to look at the challenges and needs of our social care systems. We also lead on the National efforts to increase the number of researchers working on dementia (DEM-COM ) and the Healthy Ageing, Dementia and Frailty National Priority Programme with collaborated with the ARC network across England. ​ Here we show examples of the impact of our completed research and the benefits to patients and the wider communities in Wessex. Improving physical activity and lives in care homes The ImPACT study looked to create and test the feasibility of using trained exercise volunteers in care home settings to increase the amount of physical activity for older people living there. Are we making the right decisions on nursing numbers? In England a general yardstick is used to work out the number of nursing staff needed to look after patients on a ward in hospital. Recent research has now updated NHS guidance with its findings Clever help matches care and skills for district nurses The complexity of managing a busy team of district nurses has been made simpler by using computer and mathematical modelling to schedule visits - and the system could go further. Researchers test new ways to help tackle childhood obesity In England, over a fifth of children aged 4–5 years were classed as overweight or obese in 2021/22. A team of ARC Wessex researchers has been testing a way to help families improve kids diets. Building research capacity in Wessex 50 + 10 + £600K Invested We have trained more than 50 health and care professionals to make their first steps into research ... more than 10 PhD students are making their next move in research ..and growing numbers of Post Doctorate researchers getting to grips with the issues that effect us all

Web-based Implementation Toolkit (WIT) Quick links: Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Adoption and Spread Checklist, webinar and resources Quick links: Project Outputs This Web-based Implementation Toolkit (WIT) is designed to be easy to use and intended for a variety of users, projects and settings where implementation is planned or being considered. Implementation is the attempt to introduce a new intervention, innovation or policy developed through research and apply it to health and/or social care and the third sector. WIT provides you with an interactive Implementation Wheel, Checklist and bite-size Webinars (average 10 minutes) to support you through your implementation journey. Who is WIT for? WIT recognises the need to provide freely available, accessible and simple to use tools that focus on key considerations at the outset of a project. WIT was through interactive workshops with health and social care professionals, third sector organisation professionals, academics and members of the public. Anyone looking to understand more about or engage in implementation. Why use WIT? When to use WIT From the beginning – when first considering and designing a project Throughout all stages of your implementation journey and beyond To guide you through implementation considerations for your project There are six wheel domains to help you consider what is required for implementation. Click on a domain segment to find out more. Adoption and Spread Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact How to use WIT Use the interactive Implementation Wheel, Checklist and bitesize Webinars to support you on your implementation journey and beyond. The six Wheel domains can be used iteratively, and in no particular order. The Checklist is downloadable and consists of the same domains as the Wheel. You can use this to complete with your team and check progress of your implementation journey. The Webinars , approximately 10 minutes duration, provide sessions relating to the six Wheel and Checklist domains and also to an introduction to implementation and implementation theories and frameworks. Hover on keywords to see definitions Other words in bold represent key learning points The Resources section provides suggestions for other resources you may find helpful. implementation Implementation is the attempt to introduce a new intervention, innovation or policy developed through research and apply it to health and/or social care and the third sector. co-produced Co-production refers to a way of working together, often with service users, to reach a collective output. Feedback via our short survey If you fulfil the criteria on the attached poster , Researchers from the School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton/NIHR ARC Wessex would like you to test WIT by providing feedback via a short survey . Or alternatively scan the QR code. Thank you. Contact us If you have any questions about WIT, please contact: C.F.Brooks@soton.ac.uk Disclaimer The development of WIT has been supported by the NHS Insight Prioritisation Programme (NIPP). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of this website. How to cite Brooks, C.F., Lund, S., Kryl, D., and Myall M. (2023) Web-based Implementation Toolkit (WIT). University of Southampton. Available at: www.arc-wx.nihr.ac.uk/web-implementation-toolkit Accessibility We are committed to providing a website that is accessible to as many people as possible. We are actively working to increase the accessibility and usability of the website.

Checklist, webinar and resources Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Adoption and Spread Checklist, webinar and resources Quick links: The ARC Wessex Implementation Team have developed a process to assess the implementation factors of ARC projects outputs. Our Implementation Checklist assesses how far research teams have considered implementation and enables us to determine the level of input we need to provide to support the implementation process. ​ The checklist comprises six domains representing key elements in the process leading to implementation. Within each domain there are a set of statements addressing different aspects of this process and the conditions required for implementation. In addition, there are several questions which are intended as prompts to help make the assessment. ​ To complete the checklist, think about your project and consider each statement within the domain and its accompanying question(s). Decide if you agree or disagree with the statement by placing a tick in the relevant column. You should also think about the evidence you have to support your response and details of this should be provided in the last column. ​ If you have questions about the checklist email, please send these to arcwessex@soton.ac.uk addressed to the “Implementation Team” ​ Complete the evaluation survey ​ implementation checklist Implementation Checklist The ARC Wessex Implementation Team have developed a process to assess the implementation factors of ARC projects outputs. Our Implementation Checklist assesses how far research teams have considered implementation and enables us to determine the level of input we need to provide to support the implementation process. ​ ​ ​ The checklist comprises six domains representing key elements in the process leading to implementation. Within each domain there are a set of statements addressing different aspects of this process and the conditions required for implementation. In addition, there are several questions which are intended as prompts to help make the assessment. ​ To complete the checklist, think about your project and consider each statement within the domain and its accompanying question(s). Decide if you agree or disagree with the statement by placing a tick in the relevant column. You should also think about the evidence you have to support your response and details of this should be provided in the last column. ​ If you have questions about the checklist email, please send these to arcwessex@soton.ac.uk addressed to the “Implementation Team” Download implementation checklist Learn more about implementation checklist Download implementation checklist Download the poster Introduction to Implementation - Dr David Kryl (video) Virtual workshop recorded in October 2020 (video) Use the Web-based Implementation Toolkit Video gallery Video gallery Implementation resources Bitesize guides to Implementation Bitesize guides to Implementation Play Video Play Video 10:12 Implementation Bitesize session 1- Dr David Kryl Implementation bitesize 1 - An introduction to Implementation by Dr David Kryl (10 minutes) Play Video Play Video 15:29 Implementation presentation Session 2 Dr Michelle Myall Implementation bitesize 2 - Implementation Science and Frameworks by Dr Michelle Myall Play Video Play Video 09:51 Implementation bitesize 3 - Checklist by Cindy Brooks Implementation bitesize 3 - Checklist by Cindy Brooks (10 minutes) Play Video Play Video 13:48 Implementation Bite size 4 Q & A.mp4 The ARC Wessex Implementation team answers your questions Implementation Checklist Play Video Play Video 10:54 Introduction to Implementation - Dr David Kryl Introduction to Implementation - Dr David Kryl (video) Play Video Play Video 01:15:22 Virtual workshop recorded in October 2020 Virtual workshop recorded in October 2020 (video) Summer Series 2021 Summer series 2021 Play Video Play Video 19:54 Summer Series Session 1: Study Outputs, Buy in & Engagement Cindy Brooks and Dr Michelle Myall explain Implementation in a series of summer sessions Live Q & A session Thursday 7th October 12.00pm Play Video Play Video 15:31 Summer Series Session 2: Fit and alignment with health and social care systems & priorities Summer Series Session 2: Fit and alignment with health and social care systems & priorities by Dr Michelle Myall and Cindy Brooks Play Video Play Video 11:12 Summer Series Session 3: Outcomes and Impact and Adoption and Spread Cindy Brooks and Dr Michelle Myall explain Implementation in a series of summer sessions Live Q & A session Thursday 7th October 12.00pm

Outcomes and Impact Project Outputs This domain helps you consider the outcomes and impact of your project output(s) for patients, service users, health and social care professionals, third sector organisation professionals and health and social care systems. NHS Dorset Integrated Care System (ICS) Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care System (ICS) NHS Trusts Dorset County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Dorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Isle of Wight NHS Trust Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust Solent NHS Trust Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Universities Bournemouth University University of Portsmouth University of Southampton University of Winchester Research partners Health Innovation Wessex (formerly Wessex Academic Health Sciences Network) What should I consider for my project? Adoption and Spread Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Adoption and Spread Checklist, webinar and resources Quick links: Case study Stroke awareness Action Learning Sets for health and social care professionals Project (SALs) team “ Upon reflection, thinking about the potential benefit or outcomes of our project to different stakeholder groups has been essential to increasing the impact of our project. We thought about what we wanted to achieve during the lifetime of the project in terms of improving awareness of stroke in clinical and community settings, but also longer-term and how this may improve patient and service user experiences of accessing stroke care. We knew that our stakeholder groups would be patients, social care users and health care professionals, social care professionals and third sector organisation professionals, as well as the wider health and social care system. At the beginning of the project, we considered how we would measure or evaluate the impact of the project outputs with these stakeholder groups. Closure of a local stroke awareness information support centre during the project, was devastating to the local community. It also meant that we wanted to adapt the aims of the project to accommodate the needs of those directly affected. Had we not been engaged with different stakeholder groups; this would not have happened. It made us realise the importance of engagement with stakeholders throughout to ensure that what we needed to measure or evaluate was closely aligned to their needs and priorities.” Take away tips Potential outcomes and impact of implementation should be considered at the outset of a project Engagement with stakeholders is essential to determining outcomes and impact for individuals, organisations and the wider health and social care system

ADOPTED: Social Prescribers In Deprescribing Role (SPiDeR) Team: Dr Kinda Ibrahim, Pharmacist and Lecturer, Faculty of Medicine, Deputy Lead Ageing and Dementia, ARC Wessex Dr Sara McKelvie, NIHR Clinical Lecturer in General Practice Dr Eloise Radcliff, Research Fellow, Faculty of Medicine Emma Ward, 3rd Year Medical Student Lizzie Wimbourne, PhD candidate and Policy Intern (supported by Gareth Giles) Dr Laura Bryant, GP and School of Primary Care Apprentice Pam Douglas and Neil Wilson, Public Contributors and Co-applicants Senior Support Prof Hazel Everitt, Dr Stephanie Tierney, Prof Peter Griffiths and Prof Joanne Reeve Starts: April 2023 Ends: September 30, 2024 In the UK, a third of all people aged 65 years and above regularly take five or more medications, known as polypharmacy. Polypharmacy can increase the risks of side effects and hospital admissions. One of national priorities for NHS England set by the Chief Pharmacist, is to reduce prescribing unnecessary medication (overprescribing) by 10% for patients being treated by their GPs. One important way to identify and stop harmful medication is called a Structured Medication Review (SMR) but only half of older patients attended their GP practice for this in 2018-19. Instead of medicines, some people might benefit from other activities such as changes in diet, ways to reduce stress, increasing exercise or participating in group activities. Social prescribers are starting to work within GP teams to direct people to some of these activities. The Chief Pharmacists report on overprescribing suggested that NHS England should expand the use of SMRs in GP practices to benefit patients most at risk of overprescribing. They also recommended the involvement of trained social prescribing link workers as part of GP teams to support patients during and after a SMR. We currently don’t know how social prescribers can be integrated in the SMR process or whether this will have an impact on overprescribing for older people. The aim of this study is to explore the role of social prescribers in the SMR process and identify any training needs or resources required to enable their active involvement in the process. We will hold focus groups with healthcare professionals (GPs, pharmacists and social prescribing link workers) and interview older people who have experience of taking several medicines and/or their caregivers to: 1- Understand whether there is a role for social prescribers in SMR in Primary Care teams 2- Identify training needs for social prescribers to be actively involved in Primary Care teams who are doing SMR reviews 3- Identify factors that might prevent or improve social prescribers’ involvement in SMR 4- Consider what older people and healthcare professionals felt about alternatives to medications and map relevant activities and guidance that could be used as a substitute to medications such as dietary advice, exercise groups or cognitive behaviour therapy 5- Develop a model to describe how social prescribers can be best involved in SMR Understanding the role of social prescribing link workers in the SMR process might increase the use of non-medical solutions for health-related problems and reduce overprescribing. This study could help develop the role of social prescribers and understanding how they could work in primary care to support SMR. We hope this research will help us design and test different models of how social prescribers can work within GP teams to support deprescribing. This project is linked to STOP-DEM and MODIFY SPiDeR project for ARC Wessex 18.9.23 .pptx Download PPTX • 6.89MB

Meet our academy - Interns, PhDs and Post-Docs We all grow throughout our lives, and the our Academy is here to help expand the number of people in Wessex conducting high quality applied health research. It's part of our legacy to the health and social care community across Hampshire, Dorset and the Isle of Wight. ​ This page lists those people who have joined us in their journey to enrich our research community. There are internships for people starting their research journey, PhD awards for those wanting to develop their experience and research career, and Post-Doctoral Awards to help drive the research agenda in Wessex. Internships Mr Mark Green Justin Strain Anna Wells Dr Cheska Ball Dr Sofia Michopoulou Naomi Purdie Megan Pound Cherish Boxall Emma Stennett Jan Cavolina Dr Camilla Holmes Mrs Cathy Pogson Ms Deborah Butler Samuel Page Dr Theo Akudjedu Mrs Victoria Tweedy Ms Jo Murfin Ms Lauren Green Ms Lucy Bakewell Ms Danni Swaithe Dr Eloise Radcliffe Ms Lisa Osborn- Jenkins Ms Rachel Middle Ms Rayan Taher Mrs Stefanie Gibb Mrs Krisi Downton Mrs Eirini Manali Ms Kim Yun Jung Emily Leach Madison Geeves Nicola Legg Nour Odeh Paul New Raquel Lima Rebecca Verling Catarina Fandinga Daniella Matteccui Andrea Brimson Clare Phillips Kirtsy Ballinger Clare Pinder Jennifer Malpass Wellington Tshabangu Niall Berry Christina Leadley Sara Ribeiro Blue Pike Harriet Wilding Joshua Bailey Katherine McGinn Katie Brown Sarah Curtis Kate Gillet Ellenor (Elle) Gray Bhavin Dedhia Sharon Court Matthew Wood Dr Carolina Machuca-Vargas Sawsen Sabbah Dr Donna Austin Jia Pei Ong From: Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust ​ Ambulatory care: exploring an alternative care pathway to support patients with a diagnosis of Heart Failure ​ Long Term Conditions theme PhD Fellowship Samantha Belfrage Qian Yue Tan Alex Smith Sandra Bartolomeu Pires Anna Badley Sam Porter Rosie Harper Samuel Alugsi Jenny Barker Suzanne Shepperd Linda Amungwa Developing and evaluating the feasibility of a community-based health literacy intervention to empower socially disadvantaged parents/carers of children aged 0-4 years to m anage minor childhood illness and confidently navigate health services Project Team Members: Professor James Faulkner – University of Winchester, Dr Margaret Husted – University of Winchester, Dr Simon Fraser– University of Southampton, Dr Sanjay Patel – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Organisations Involved: University of Southampton, University of Winchester, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Brief summary of project: This research project aims to make community- based intervention recommendations to increase the health literacy of parents/ caregivers of children aged 0 to 4 years. This project will use a systematic review and sequential descriptive mixed method designs to meet the following research aims: • Research Aim 1: establish the effectiveness of community-based health literacy interventions aimed at parents • Research Aim 2: generate evidence of the validity of the Parent Health Literacy Questionnaire (pHLQ) • Research Aim 3: profile the health literacy of parents living in areas of high deprivation • Research Aim 4: identify interventions which could meet the health literacy needs of parents living in areas of high deprivation Patient and public involvement will be sought throughout this research project. ​ Listen to her latest Podcast - Finding the Power in Empowerment - Episode One - Long Term Conditions- Sam and Lynn are joined by guests Holly and Mick. Post Doctoral Dr Kate Glyn-Owen - Healthy Communities Theme Dr Leire Ambrosio - Long Term Conditions theme Dr Miriam Avery - Workforce & Health Systems Dr Jo Hope Project: Early detection of chronic liver disease in community settings More details here

COMPLETED: StOP UTI project: Strategies in older people's care settings to prevent infection Background Urinary tract infection is more common in older people living in care homes but can be difficult to recognise. This can lead to overuse of antibiotics and may result in antibiotic-resistant infection and hospital admission. We wanted to find out what can work in care homes to prevent and recognise UTI and what support care home staff need to enable safe care for all residents. What we did We reviewed evidence from a range of sources, including research studies and improvement projects. We also asked care home staff, residents, family carers and healthcare professionals about their experiences. We combined these experiences and ideas with the evidence we found from published literature to develop an understanding of what needs to happen in care homes for older people to prevent and recognise UTI. What we found out What difference will this make? UTI can be prevented by embedding prevention activities in care routines: ensuring residents are hydrated ensuring residents with recurrent UTI are managed actively with preventative treatment avoiding the use of urinary catheters wherever possible Unnecessary antibiotic use can be avoided by: involving the whole care team, resident and family in recognising UTI using active monitoring when there is uncertainty about UTI supporting care staff to develop the skills to accurately recognise UTI using tools that support decision-making and communication across the wider care team Safe care for each resident can be achieved when: care staff receive education that is contextualised to their role and helps them to prioritise and deliver person-centred care care home managers are committed to supporting the delivery of best practice commissioners and regulators promote UTI prevention and recognition as a priority area for care homes Why is this important? Our findings suggest ways that care home providers and policy makers can support the prevention and recognition of UTI in the care of older people living in care homes. A system-wide approach is vital to enable care home managers and their staff to prioritise UTI prevention and recognition as part of person-centred care. At policy level, there is a need to integrate UTI prevention with diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship and to unify the content of education and decision-support resources so that care staff can see the value of their role in prevention as well as supporting diagnosis and treatment of UTI. What next? Our research is the start of a process of understanding what works in care home settings and will identify where further research is needed. A report, summary and articles provide practical examples and recommendations relevant to care home staff, care home managers, researchers, educators, carers and relatives for use to improve the prevention and recognition of UTI in older people’s long-term care and to plan further research to investigate them. We are turning our findings into a range of different resources and digital communications, with input from experts who support the adoption and spread of innovation, for sharing via care home networks and associations. Publication Realist synthesis protocol for understanding which strategies are effective to prevent urinary tract infection in older people in care homes Link to University of Southampton site Research team: • Dr Jacqui Prieto, Joint Chief Investigator, University of Southampton • Professor Heather Loveday, Joint Chief Investigator, University of West London • Professor Jennie Wilson, Co-investigator, University of West London • Mrs Alison Tingle, Co-investigator, University of West London • Mrs Emily Cooper, Co-investigator, UK Health Security Agency • Dr Melanie Handley, Co-investigator, University of Hertfordshire • Professor Jo Rycroft-Malone, Co-investigator, University of Lancaster • Dr Lynne Williams, Co-investigator, Bangor University • Mrs Jennifer Bostock, Co-investigator, Patient and public involvement • Lois Woods, Information Specialist, University of Southampton • Simon Briscoe, Information Specialist, University of Exeter • Jemima Kakpa, Research assistant, University of Southampton • Christine Logan, Administrative assistant, University of West London Project Advisory Group: • Jennifer Bostock (Chair) • Professor Lona Mody • Mr Mark Stott • Dr Leah Jones • Mrs Susan Bennett • Mr James McMahon • Mrs Annabelle Stigwood • Mrs Anita Astle

ADOPTED PROJECT: Development of a decision aid for offloading device selection for people with diabetic foot ulceration ADOPTED PROJECT: Development of a decision aid for offloading device selection for people with diabetic foot ulceration Principal Investigator: Dr Lindsey Cherry , Associate Professor University of Southampton Research team: Dr Emma Cowley, University of Southampton; Dr Michael Backhouse, Associate Professor, University of Warwick; Dr Kate Lippiet, University of Southampton & Wessex Cancer Alliance Partners: University of Southampton & Solent NHS Trust, University of Warwick & Wessex Cancer Alliance Lay Summary: We aim to create a visual tool, called a decision aid (DA). A DA shows the good and bad points for different treatment options. A DA can help people choose the best treatment for them. Helping people choose their treatment can make them healthier and happier in the longer term. We also aim to find out what is needed to support clinicians to use the DA.Treatments to help diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) heal include a plaster cast or removeable boot. Both treatments have good and bad points. For example, we know casts tend to heal DFUs faster than boots, but you cannot drive with them. People can drive with a boot. Driving may be a priority for some people, to collect children or get to work, but healing quickly could be a priority for others. Aim: To develop a shared decision aid (DA) for offloading device selection for people with diabetic foot ulceration; A secondary aim is to explore workforce willingness, confidence, and competence to use DAs and shared decision-making. Methods: Two parallel workstreams (WS) will be completed. WS1 DA development will be undertaken in accordance with the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The DA will likely contain information about a) the decision to be made, b) option risks and benefits, c) related values and d) decision next steps. WS2 Workforce readiness will be evaluated through a) scoping literature review, b) national workforce survey, and c) stakeholder focus group about workforce capability development, training needs, and implementation recommendations. Expected outcomes: WS1 will produce a decision aid and the consolidation and generation of new partnerships ready for full trial evaluation. WS2 will identify priority areas to support workforce implementation of shared decision-making and DAs. This programme addresses multiple JLA priorities including PSP1, PSP2, PSP5 and PSP9. Additional benefits include research capacity growth in PSP areas through subsequent national multi-centre trial, with routes to support Advanced Clinical Practice and an embedded PhD studentship.

COMPLETED: Safer Nursing Care Tool and nurse staffing requirements What did we learn We found that for some wards using the Safer Nursing Care Tool (SNCT) gives a good estimate of the number of nursing staff needed. However, for other wards, relying on the estimate provided by this tool without further thought could lead to unsafe staffing levels for different reasons. For example, the current guidance recommends setting staffing levels to meet the average requirement, but following this logic, 18 wards in the three Trusts would often have been short-staffed. Also, a quarter of wards needed a sample of over 182 days to estimate the number of staff needed precisely, when the current recommendation is 20 days. Nursing workforce leaders at the three Trusts suggested characteristics of wards where the tool performed least well, for instance, high patient throughput and differences in workload between mornings and evenings. What difference can this new knowledge make? • This project and the previous related project (NIHR-funded study https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08160 ) led to a direct collaboration with NHS England and NHS Improvement and an invitation to work with them to further develop and update the guidance on using the Safer Nursing Care Tool. • The team have spoken about the research findings and implications at a series of NHS Improvement safe staffing fellows training events. • They have developed a set of resources to help nurses plan staffing: a professional guidance framework and a series of videos. • Impact has been achieved through this research shaping revised guidelines published by NHS England and NHS Improvement on using the SNCT in combination with professional judgement to determine nurse staffing requirements. Why is this important? • The professional judgement framework we developed as a result of these projects will benefit nurses, who use this tool nationally, by giving them concrete guidance on issues to consider when deciding staffing levels. • It will benefit patients admitted to inpatient wards, through better matching of staffing levels to demand. Having too few nursing staff is related to adverse effects for patients (more deaths, more falls, longer stays in hospital), staff (turnover, sickness) and organisations (higher costs from temporary staff to fill gaps). Diagram 1 We presented the list of wards which were flagged as having overall poor fit to three nursing workforce leaders Some of the common factors they suggested as potential reasons for poor fit are shown here above. They highlighted wards with large morning-evening differences in staffing requirements (based on acuity-dependency ratings) may be among those where the tool fits least well. For wards that are particularly small or large, it is possible that the number generated by the SNCT is less likely to be sufficient to maintain minimum registered nurse levels when rostering staff to shifts. They highlighted some ward characteristics that mean the SNCT multipliers, as they are applied, may underestimate the true workload. These were high patient turnover, older patient population, cancer infusion/device activity. a high proportion of patients requiring one-to-one care AKA enhanced care/specialling. The factors suggested are on the whole congruent with published evidence What next? Our next step is applying for funding to conduct research around predicting demand for nursing staff which we plan will also lead to tools and resources to guide decision-making around staffing. Research team: • Professor Peter Griffiths, Chair of Health Services, University of Southampton • Rosemary Chable, Deputy Director of Nursing, Education & Workforce, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust • Nicky Sinden, Head of Nursing Workforce, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust • Tracy Moran, Lead Nurse for Nursing Workforce, Education & Practice, Poole Hospital NHS Trust Project partners: • University of Southampton • University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust • Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust • Poole Hospital NHS Trust More information Evi dence Brief Publication 24_11_Professional_Judgement_Staffing_Eprints[16] .pdf Download PDF • 186KB Publications: Saville, Christina and Griffiths, Peter (2021) Ward staffing guided by a patient classification system: A multi-criteria analysis of “fit” in three acute hospitals. Journal of Nursing Management, 29 (7), 2260-2269. ( doi:10.1111/jonm.13341 ). Saville C, Griffiths P, Casey A, Chable R, Chapman H, Radford M, and Watts N (2023) Professional Judgement Framework, doi: 10.5258/SOTON/P1102 University of Southampton ( https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/P1102 ) Video: Computer simulation what and why? https://sho.co/1E34T The importance of professional judgement in nurse staffing decisions https://southampton.cloud.panopto.eu/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=87fcb9bb-e9dc-4b43-8377-acb700e3bec2 Here is the orginal research outline Identifying wards for which the Safer Nursing Care Tool is appropriate for assessing nurse staffing requirements Principal Investigator: Dr Christina Saville Team members: Dr Christina Saville (Research Fellow, University of Southampton) Professor Peter Griffiths (Chair of Health Services Research, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton), Rosemary Chable RN (Deputy Director of Nursing, Education & Workforce, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust) Ms Nicky Sinden (Head of Nursing Workforce at Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust), Tracy Moran (Lead Nurse for Nursing Workforce, Education & Practice, Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust) Start: 1 December 2019 Ends: 1 August 2020 Partners: University of Southampton, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Lay summary It is important to have enough qualified (registered) nurses looking after patients staying on hospital wards, because having too few is associated with worse patient care and more patient deaths. On the other hand, there are extreme shortages of nurses, so having “too many” on a ward could be considered a waste. The Safer Nursing Care Tool is used in many hospital wards in England to work out the number of nursing staff (including nursing assistants) needed. However, a recent study showed that it is more suitable on some wards than on others. For example, we found that factors not accounted for in the tool, e.g. whether a ward is surgical or medical, and the proportion of single rooms, also affected professional judgement of whether staffing was adequate. Aim This study aims to understand which ward characteristics mean that the Safer Nursing Care Tool gives a good estimate of the nursing staff required, and which ward characteristics mean that the number might need to be adjusted or further considered by taking into account the expertise of ward leaders. It also aims, if possible, to provide some general rules or an add-on tool to help nursing managers with setting staffing levels. Methods We will analyse the data that were collected for a previous study in a different way. This time we will focus on differences between wards rather than hospitals. We will use analytical techniques for finding patterns in data to identify similar wards. In our team we have experienced leaders in nursing who will provide expert professional insights into ward characteristics. Patient, public and community involvement and sharing results We will involve nursing managers in the study because they are the potential users of any rules or tools we develop. We plan to develop a resource (rules or a tool) for nursing ward managers and to run a workshop to test use of this resource. We plan to write one academic paper about what we find out. We also can share the plans for this with lay members from the PPI group as appropriate. We are developing a smaller user group across Workforce and Frailty and Older People teams.

< Back How I overcame my fears to win recognition for nurse research Rosalynn Austin Clinical Doctoral Research Fellow and Specialist Research Nurse, Portsmouth For the past 3 years, every year in October, I have a tradition. The call for Early Investigator Awards (EIA) comes out and with the support of my supervisors I submit an abstract. Every year the abstract gets rejected. When I saw the email this year, from the British Society for Heart Failure (BSH), I steeled myself for the traditional annual rejection. The words, “I am delighted to tell you that you have been selected to present at the meeting” jumped off my screen and I double checked to see if it was actually addressed to me. To then learn that my research was the first nurse led research to be shortlisted for this award carried with it a mixture of honour and responsibility. Having attended this conference before I knew my biggest challenge was not the 5-minute presentation, but in explaining burden of treatment to a clinical audience, unfamiliar with this theory. I knew that this was key to them understanding the relevance of my results and increasing the possibility of impacting on their clinical care of heart failure patients. Channelling my inner Florence Nightingale, I wrote and re-wrote my presentation, practicing it multiple times to the cardiology team at Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust. “Never lose an opportunity of urging a practical beginning, however small, for it is wonderful how often in such matters the mustard-seed germinates and roots itself.”― Florence Nightingale Nerves before a presentation are normal for me, but on Thursday Dec 2, 2021 my pre-presentation nerves were on a new level. The knowledge that I was the first nurse to be invited to present for this award category in the BSH, had raised the stakes considerably. I wanted honour and represent so many nurse researchers who inspired and supported my journey as a Nurse Researcher. At the coffee break following my presentation, nurses and doctors come up to me and not just comment on my presentation going well, but on how they found it interesting. Better than that they had more questions about burden of treatment and my research. This continued on social media and even now looking back on Thursday evening I can’t help but smile. I felt then that regardless of the announcement of winner announcement on Friday morning, that I had won. I had represented nurse researchers honourably, becoming a trailblazer, inspiring others and creating clinical curiosity around burden of treatment. The announcement ( https://twitter.com/BSHeartFailure/status/1466720998468820994 ), the next day, that I together with Simon Beggs (Cardiology registrar & Honorary clinical lecturer) and Amrit Lota (Cardiology Specialist Registrar, specialising in heart failure and imaging) were to be joint winners cemented those thoughts. I am grateful to my supervisors who supported me in this journey and especially the participants who gave of their time to inform my research. This win is theirs too. To find out more about the winners follow on twitter: @RosalynnAustin @amritlota *Link to the report of the event including the announcement of the winners of the EIA: https://bjcardio.co.uk/2022/01/freedom-from-failure-the-british-society-of-heart-failure-annual-meeting-highlights/ Previous Next

ADOPTED: Exploratory research to examine the health impact of scams and fraud and the current knowledge and systems in the police and partner agencies for targeting and delivering victim support services Lead research ers: Ms Ruth Halkon and Dr Michael Skidmore, The Police Foundation; Professor Mark Button, Director of the Centre for Cybercrime and Economic Crime, University of Portsmouth; Dr Amy Meenaghan, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Portsmouth. Aims We aim to help the police find those who are most likely to suffer the worst damage to their mental and physical health from falling victim to fraud and make sure they receive the support they need to prevent that damage happening. Background Fraud is the most common and fastest growing crime in England and Wales. Many people do not report fraud and those who do often don’t receive help to reduce the crime's impact on their wellbeing. People affected by fraud can suffer serious physical and mental health problems which can lead to poor physical health, anxiety, depression and suicide. Many factors can shape how victims are affected: stress caused by losing what to them are big sums of money feeling betrayed by someone they thought was their friend or partner blaming themselves feeling friends, family and service providers do not understand them struggling to recover due to existing social or health needs. The police know less about the needs of fraud victims than victims of other crimes like domestic abuse. They are under pressure to improve the service they offer but there are many gaps: Fraud is common crime and can affect victims in many ways, which hinders finding victims who need the most support Those police think are most likely to be harmed, known as ‘vulnerable’, may not suffer the worst effects It is not clear what being 'vulnerable' in a crime context actually means Current systems to address 'vulnerability' mainly focus on cutting crime rather than victim health Research by Which? suggests the impact of fraud on victims' wellbeing amounts to £9.3bn, but we need more data Design and methods Our research will focus on two police forces who work jointly to provide support to victims which is widely seen as the best in the country. The project will focus on their systems, data and services to measure their success and produce a case study for understanding and addressing fraud's health impacts. This will be done via: Reading research papers to find out more about fraud victim impact, vulnerability and victim needs Looking at police and health and welfare data to learn about health impacts of different fraud types Talking to those working for the police, social services, victim support services and key health services Interviews with national subject matter experts Interviews with fraud victims who have been given support after fraud impacted their health to learn how this helped them Patient and public involvement Our overall aim is to involve fraud victims in finding a support framework that works for them Dissemination The report will be launched at an event and published on the Police Foundation website. It will be promoted on our blog, newsletter and social media channels. This fact finding project is a first step to creating a new framework that will be used to find those who need the most help to stop their mental and physical health being badly hit and make sure they are given it. The future project would involve: Organising roundtable events with people Bringing police, health and welfare services together to trial the framework Sharing findings and learning points across the country