Clinicians' views of formats of performance comparisons

Rationale, aims and objectives Comparisons of the performance of health care providers are increasingly being used. Despite one key audience being clinicians, there has been little research on the format and content of such comparisons. Our aim was to explore clinicians' comprehension and preferences of format and content in displaying provider outcomes using comparisons of patient reported outcome measures data. Method A qualitative study, based on seven meetings involving 107 clinicians (mostly consultant and junior doctors, and nurses), revealed their views on nine formats and five aspects of content. Results Key findings were the desire for data in more than one format, explicit display of comparative performance (rank order) and the need for explanations (e.g. of unfamiliar formats and of statistical uncertainty). Conclusions Several themes were identified that shaped clinicians' views. Results were sufficiently clear to permit recommendations for the form and content of standard reports for the National Health Service.     

Decision-making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids

OBJECTIVE: To develop and pilot two computer-based decision aids to assist women with decision-making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section (CS), which could then be evaluated in a randomized-controlled trial. BACKGROUND: Women with a previous CS are faced with a decision between repeat elective CS and vaginal birth after caesarean. Research has shown that women may benefit from access to comprehensive information about the risks and benefits of the delivery options. DESIGN: A qualitative pilot study of two novel decision aids, an information program and a decision analysis program, which were developed by a multidisciplinary research team. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 15 women who had recently given birth and had previously had a CS and 11 pregnant women with a previous CS, recruited from two UK hospitals. Women were interviewed and observed using the decision aids. RESULTS: Participants found both decision aids useful and informative. Most liked the computer-based format. Participants found the utility assessment of the decision analysis program acceptable although some had difficulty completing the tasks required. Following the pilot study improvements were made to expand the program content, the decision analysis program was accompanied by a training session and a website version of the information program was developed to allow repeat access. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study was an essential step in the design of the decision aids and in establishing their acceptability and feasibility. In general, participating women viewed the decision aids as a welcome addition to routine antenatal care. A randomized trial has been conducted to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the decision aids.     

Public Health Genomics

Which consequences can be drawn from genome-based knowledge and how can it be responsibly and timely translated into policies and practice? What are recent developments in genetics and molecular biology, what are the challenges, what are the risks of these developments? Which policies can provide an acceptable balance between providing strong protection of individuals'interests and needs while enabling society to benefit from the genomic advances and empowering individuals? How can molecular medicine contribute to more effective and efficient health care services, and what infrastructures and policies can already now be implemented to assure a benefit for population health? Thus, Public Health Genomics (PHG) tries to answer these challenging questions. This integration of genomics into the aims of public health is called Public Health Genomics (PHG) and is defined as "the responsible and effective translation of genome-based knowledge and technologies into public policy and health services for the benefit of population health".     

Establishing local priorities for a health research agenda

Aim/Background

To describe the two‐stage prioritization process being used by the UK National Institute for Health Research''s Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care for the South‐West Peninsula (or PenCLAHRC) – a joint health service and university partnership and reflect on implications for the wider context of priority setting in health‐care research.

Method

PenCLAHRC''s process establishes the priorities of Stakeholders including service users across a regional health system for locally relevant health services research and implementation. Health research questions are collected from clinicians, academics and service users in Devon and Cornwall (UK) using a web‐based question formulation tool. There is a two‐stage prioritization process which uses explicit criteria and a wide Stakeholder group, including service users to identify important research questions relevant to the south‐west peninsula locality.

Results

To date, a wide variety of health research topics have been prioritized by the PenCLAHRC Stakeholders. The research agenda reflects the interests of academics, clinicians and service users in the local area. Potential challenges to implementation of the process include time constraints, variable quality of questions (including the language of research) and initiating and maintaining engagement in the process. Shared prioritization of local health research needs can be achieved between Stakeholders from a wide range of perspectives.

Conclusions

The processes developed have been successful and, with minor changes, will continue to be used during subsequent rounds of prioritization. Engagement of Stakeholders in establishing a research agenda encourages the most relevant health questions to be asked and may improve implementation of research findings and take up by service users.