Cargando…

Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial

BACKGROUND: Peer-review networks aim to help services to improve the quality of care they provide, however, there is very little evidence about their impact. We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial of a peer-review quality network for low-secure mental health services to examine the impac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aimola, Lina, Jasim, Sarah, Tripathi, Neeraj, Bassett, Paul, Quirk, Alan, Worrall, Adrian, Tucker, Sarah, Holder, Samantha, Crawford, Mike J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6303937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30577847
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3797-z
_version_ 1783382261257732096
author Aimola, Lina
Jasim, Sarah
Tripathi, Neeraj
Bassett, Paul
Quirk, Alan
Worrall, Adrian
Tucker, Sarah
Holder, Samantha
Crawford, Mike J.
author_facet Aimola, Lina
Jasim, Sarah
Tripathi, Neeraj
Bassett, Paul
Quirk, Alan
Worrall, Adrian
Tucker, Sarah
Holder, Samantha
Crawford, Mike J.
author_sort Aimola, Lina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Peer-review networks aim to help services to improve the quality of care they provide, however, there is very little evidence about their impact. We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial of a peer-review quality network for low-secure mental health services to examine the impact of network membership on the process and outcomes of care over a 12 month period. METHODS: Thirty-eight low secure units were randomly allocated to either the active intervention (participation in the network n = 18) or the control arm (delayed participation in the network n = 20). A total of 75 wards were assessed at baseline and 8 wards dropped out the study before the data collection at 12 month follow up. The primary outcome measure was the quality of the physical environment and facilities of the services. The secondary outcomes included: safety of the ward, patient mental wellbeing and satisfaction with care, staff burnout, training and supervision. We hypothesised that, relative to control wards, the quality of the physical environment and facilities would be higher on wards in the active arm of the trial 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: The difference in the primary outcome between the groups was not statistically significant (4.1; 95% CI [− 0.2, 8.3] p = 0.06). The median number of untoward incidents rose in control services and remained the same at the member of the network (Difference between members and non-members = 0.55; 95% IC [0.29, 1.07] p = 0.08). At follow up, a higher proportion of staff in the active arm of the trial indicated that they felt safe on the ward relative to those in the control services (p = 0.04), despite reporting more physical assaults (p = 0.04). Staff working in services in the active arm of the trial reported higher levels of burnout relative to those in the control group. No difference was seen in patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence that participation in a peer-review network led to marked changes in the quality of the physical environment of low secure mental health services at 12 months. Future research should explore the impact of accreditation schemes and examine longer term outcomes of participation in such networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN79614916. Retrospectively registered 28 March 2014.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6303937
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-63039372018-12-31 Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial Aimola, Lina Jasim, Sarah Tripathi, Neeraj Bassett, Paul Quirk, Alan Worrall, Adrian Tucker, Sarah Holder, Samantha Crawford, Mike J. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Peer-review networks aim to help services to improve the quality of care they provide, however, there is very little evidence about their impact. We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial of a peer-review quality network for low-secure mental health services to examine the impact of network membership on the process and outcomes of care over a 12 month period. METHODS: Thirty-eight low secure units were randomly allocated to either the active intervention (participation in the network n = 18) or the control arm (delayed participation in the network n = 20). A total of 75 wards were assessed at baseline and 8 wards dropped out the study before the data collection at 12 month follow up. The primary outcome measure was the quality of the physical environment and facilities of the services. The secondary outcomes included: safety of the ward, patient mental wellbeing and satisfaction with care, staff burnout, training and supervision. We hypothesised that, relative to control wards, the quality of the physical environment and facilities would be higher on wards in the active arm of the trial 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: The difference in the primary outcome between the groups was not statistically significant (4.1; 95% CI [− 0.2, 8.3] p = 0.06). The median number of untoward incidents rose in control services and remained the same at the member of the network (Difference between members and non-members = 0.55; 95% IC [0.29, 1.07] p = 0.08). At follow up, a higher proportion of staff in the active arm of the trial indicated that they felt safe on the ward relative to those in the control services (p = 0.04), despite reporting more physical assaults (p = 0.04). Staff working in services in the active arm of the trial reported higher levels of burnout relative to those in the control group. No difference was seen in patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence that participation in a peer-review network led to marked changes in the quality of the physical environment of low secure mental health services at 12 months. Future research should explore the impact of accreditation schemes and examine longer term outcomes of participation in such networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN79614916. Retrospectively registered 28 March 2014. BioMed Central 2018-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6303937/ /pubmed/30577847 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3797-z Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Aimola, Lina
Jasim, Sarah
Tripathi, Neeraj
Bassett, Paul
Quirk, Alan
Worrall, Adrian
Tucker, Sarah
Holder, Samantha
Crawford, Mike J.
Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title_full Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title_fullStr Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title_full_unstemmed Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title_short Impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
title_sort impact of a peer-review network on the quality of inpatient low secure mental health services: cluster randomised control trial
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6303937/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30577847
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-3797-z
work_keys_str_mv AT aimolalina impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT jasimsarah impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT tripathineeraj impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT bassettpaul impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT quirkalan impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT worralladrian impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT tuckersarah impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT holdersamantha impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial
AT crawfordmikej impactofapeerreviewnetworkonthequalityofinpatientlowsecurementalhealthservicesclusterrandomisedcontroltrial