Needs and needs assessment: their components and definitions with reference to dementia

The concept of need and the practice of needs assessment are both subject to a wide range of interpretations, to the likely detriment of individual assessments and to multidisciplinary working. Clear definition is important for individual assessment, for the development of multidisciplinary tools and in gathering planning information. The concept of need is clarified, firstly by distinguishing between need and the difficulties that engender it, and secondly through a taxonomy of need. These assist clear definitions of both need and needs assessment when linked with a consideration of the current help a person receives and a specification of the type of help required by a person to meet their needs. Such definitions have implications for the role of needs assessment in individual assessment, service evaluation, service management and planning and in the development of multidisciplinary needs assessment tools.     

Improving community health and social care practitioners’ confidence,perceived competence and intention to use behaviour change techniques in health behaviour change conversations

Community health and social care practitioners play an increasingly important role in the health promotion agenda, but lack confidence in having effective health behaviour change (HBC) conversations with members of the public. This study reports the development and evaluation of a training intervention based on health psychology to improve health and social care practitioner self-rated confidence, competence and intention to use five behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in their HBC conversations. A 2-day behavioural science interprofessional skills training course plus online learning module was designed for health and social care staff across North East Scotland, teaching five evidence-based BCTs (e.g. Action Planning), plus person-centred communication skills. Participants rated confidence, competence and future intention to use the BCTs on likert scales (1–10) pre-course and post-course, and provided acceptability data. 177 participants aged 20–64 took part, qualitative and quantitative data suggested that the course had high acceptability. Paired samples t tests (n = 120 with complete data) showed significant improvements in confidence, competence and intention following the course, which remained significant with a conservative analysis (n = 174) assuming no change for missing data. Perceived competence in Action Planning increased most during the course (mean change 3.09). In conclusion, health psychology-based skills training can improve practitioner confidence, competence and intention to use evidence-based BCTs; further evaluation is needed to assess practice change.     

How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think‐aloud study

Background

The English NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme biennially invites individuals aged 60–74 to participate in screening. The booklet, ‘Bowel Cancer Screening: The Facts'' accompanies this invitation. Its primary aim is to inform potential participants about the aims, advantages and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening.

Objective

To provide detailed commentary on how individuals process the information contained within ‘The Facts’ booklet.

Design, setting and participants

This study comprised of 18 interviews with individuals aged 45–60 and used a ‘think‐aloud’ paradigm in which participants read aloud the booklet. Participant utterances (verbal statements made in response to researcher‐led prompts) were transcribed and analysed using a combination of content and thematic analysis.

Results

A total of 776 coded utterances were analysed (mean = 43.1 per person; range = 8–95). While overall comprehension was satisfactory, several problem areas were identified such as the use of complex unfamiliar terminology and the presentation of numerical information. Specific sections such as colonoscopy risk information evoked negative emotional responses. Participants made several suggestions for ways in which comprehension might be improved.

Conclusion

Public perceptions of the NHS Bowel Cancer Screening Programme information materials indicated that specific aspects of the booklet were difficult to process. These materials may be an appropriate target to improve public understanding of the aims, benefits and disadvantages of colorectal cancer screening. These findings will contribute to a broader NIHR‐funded project that aims to design a supplementary ‘gist‐based’ information leaflet suitable for low literacy populations.