Brief training in psychological assessment and interventions skills for cancer care staff: a mixed methods evaluation of deliberate practice techniques

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (11) ◽  
pp. 1786-1793
Author(s):  
Ruth Barrett‐Naylor ◽  
Sam Malins ◽  
Joanna Levene ◽  
Sanchia Biswas ◽  
Chloe Mays ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Deliberate Practice ◽  
Care Staff ◽  
Brief Training ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Perceptions of the cancer care left undone in primary and community services: A mixed methods evaluation

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 2117-2124
Author(s):  
Jessica Lawler ◽  
Alison Leary ◽  
Lydia Lofton ◽  
Dave Bushe
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Community Services ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

scholarly journals Virtual Cancer Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Alberta: Evidence From a Mixed Methods Evaluation and Key Learnings

2021 ◽  
pp. OP.21.00144
Author(s):  
Linda Watson ◽  
Siwei Qi ◽  
Andrea Delure ◽  
Claire Link ◽  
Eclair Photitai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation ◽  
Virtual Care ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Virtual Visits ◽  
The Impact

PURPOSE This study reports on a mixed methods evaluation conducted within a provincial cancer program in Alberta, Canada. The purpose was to capture key learnings from a rapid virtual care implementation because of the COVID-19 pandemic and to understand the impact on patient and staff experiences. METHODS Administrative data were collected for 21,362 patients who had at least one virtual or in-person visit to any provincial cancer center from April 1, 2020, to June 10, 2020. Patient surveys were conducted with 397 randomly selected patients who had received a virtual visit. Surveys were also conducted with 396 Cancer Care Alberta staff. RESULTS 14,906 virtual visits took place in this period, and about 40% of weekly visits were virtual. Significant differences were observed in both patient-reported symptom questionnaire completion rates and referrals to supportive care services between patients seen in-person and virtually. Patients receiving active treatments reported significantly lower levels of satisfaction with virtual visits than those seen for follow-up, but overall 90% of patients indicated interest in receiving virtual care in the future. Staff thought virtual visits increased patients' access to care but less than one third (31.5%) felt confident meeting patients' emotional needs and having conversations about disease progression and/or end of life virtually. CONCLUSION The COVID-19 pandemic has driven the rapid implementation of virtual visits for cancer care delivery in health care settings. The findings from this mixed methods evaluation provide a concrete set of considerations for organizations looking to develop a large-scale, enduring virtual care strategy.

A Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Multi-Country, Cross-Sectoral Knowledge Transfer Partnership to Improve Health Systems Across Africa

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-148
Author(s):  
Erika Linnander ◽  
◽  
Katherine LaMonaca ◽  
Marie A. Brault ◽  
Medha Vyavahare ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Knowledge Transfer ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation ◽  
Improve Health

A Mixed Methods Evaluation of the Effects of an Innovative Art-Based Rehabilitation Program for Youths with Stabilized Psychiatric Disorders

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 212-224
Author(s):  
Kim Archambault ◽  
Isabelle Archambault ◽  
Sarah Dufour ◽  
Frederic N. Briere ◽  
Patricia Garel
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Psychiatric Disorders ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation

Mixed-Methods Evaluation as Scaffold to the Development of a Mobile Health Application to Support the Prescription of Wheelchairs and Postural Support Devices (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana Klein ◽  
Roseli de Deus Lopes ◽  
Rodrigo Suigh
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mobile Health ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
The Third ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
Mixed Methods Evaluation ◽  
Usability Tests ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Postural Support ◽  
Support Devices

BACKGROUND EasySeating is a mobile health (mHealth) app that supports the prescription of wheelchair and postural support devices (WPSD). It can be used by occupational therapists (OT) and physiotherapists (PT) who prescribe WPSD. The app offers a standardization of the prescription procedure, showing images, metrics and details that guide the prescriber to decide on the best equipment. It was developed with an iterative mixed-methods evaluation approach. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the processes involved in the prescription of WPSD and to propose, develop and evaluate a mHealth to support OT and PT prescribers. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to investigate the processes involved in the prescription of WPSD and to propose, develop and evaluate a mHealth to support OT and PT prescribers. METHODS This study was divided into three phases and was carried out as an iterative process composed of user consulting/testing (using a mixed-methods evaluation approach), system (re)design and software development. The first phase consisted of the collection of qualitative and quantitative data to map and understand the users requirements and of the development of the first prototype (v1) of the app. This data collection was performed through semi-structured interviews with 14 OT and PT prescribers, 5 specialized technicians and 5 WPSD users. The second phase aimed at improving the overall functionality of the app and consisted in the development, test and evaluation of the prototypes v1, v2, v3 and v4. A total of 59 prescribers tested and evaluated these prototypes by means of open interviews, semi-structured questionnaires and focus groups. The third phase focused in the usability aspects of the app. It consisted in the development and test of the prototype v5. Eight technology specialists assessed its usability through heuristics evaluation. RESULTS Data collected in phase one indicated there is a lack of standardization on the prescription of postural support devices (PSD). A divergent nomenclature for the PSDs was also found and classified in eight categories. These information guided the development of the first prototype of the EasySeating app. Phase two results pointed that the prescribers value the insertion of the app into their clinical practice, as it accelerates and increases the quality of the evaluation process and improves the organization of the prescription information. Significant suggestions for the improvement of the app were given during the users tests, including the use of images to represent the PSDs. The usability tests from the third phase revealed two strong issues that must be solved: the need of greater feedback and failures in the persistence of the input data. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that there is a lack of systematization of the WPSD prescription process. The evaluation of the developed EasySeating app demonstrated that there is a potential to standardize, integrate and organize the WPSD prescription information, supporting and facilitating the decision making process of the prescribers. CLINICALTRIAL This study was approved by the Research Ethics Board of the Universidade de São Paulo (registered protocol n°53929516.6.0000.0065) URL - http://plataformabrasil.saude.gov.br/login.jsf

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document