1
|
Wells I, G-Medhin A, Owen N, Thelwell ELR, Giacco D. Experiences of support received by carers of people who are involuntarily admitted to hospital under the Mental Health Act: qualitative study of carers' perspectives. BJPsych Open 2024; 10:e82. [PMID: 38622966 PMCID: PMC11060084 DOI: 10.1192/bjo.2024.44] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2023] [Revised: 02/09/2024] [Accepted: 02/27/2024] [Indexed: 04/17/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Carers of people who are involuntarily admitted to hospital report feeling isolated and unsupported by services. The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act (MHA) recommended that carers be supported. However, no research has directly explored what type of support carers would find most helpful when a relative/friend is involuntary admitted. AIMS To explore carers' experiences and views around the support they want to receive when their relative/friend is involuntarily admitted under the MHA. METHOD A total of 22 one-to-one interviews with carers were conducted online at three sites across England. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed, and data were analysed with thematic analysis. RESULTS Four main themes were identified: (a) heterogeneity in the current support for carers, (b) information about mental health and mental health services, (c) continuous support, and (d) peer support and guidance. Carers reported receiving support from professionals, peers and relatives, but this was unstructured, and the extent of support varied across carers. Carers reported wanting more information about mental health services, and for this information to be consistent. Carers also reported wanting emotional support from a single, continuous person, helping them establish a more personal and sincere connection. Peers were also identified as important in the provision of carer support, allowing carers to feel reassured and understood in their experience. CONCLUSIONS The support received by carers is currently unstructured. To meet the MHA review recommendations, carers of patients who are involuntarily admitted should be allocated a named contact person, ideally with lived experience, to offer information and personal continuity of support.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Imogen Wells
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, UK
| | | | - Nicole Owen
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, UK
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ramasawmy M, Poole L, Thorlu-Bangura Z, Chauhan A, Murali M, Jagpal P, Bijral M, Prashar J, G-Medhin A, Murray E, Stevenson F, Blandford A, Potts HWW, Khunti K, Hanif W, Gill P, Sajid M, Patel K, Sood H, Bhala N, Modha S, Mistry M, Patel V, Ali SN, Ala A, Banerjee A. Frameworks for implementation, uptake and use of digital health interventions in ethnic minority populations: a scoping review using cardiometabolic disease as a case study. (Preprint). JMIR Cardio 2022; 6:e37360. [PMID: 35969455 PMCID: PMC9412726 DOI: 10.2196/37360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2022] [Revised: 04/17/2022] [Accepted: 04/18/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Digital health interventions have become increasingly common across health care, both before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health inequalities, particularly with respect to ethnicity, may not be considered in frameworks that address the implementation of digital health interventions. We considered frameworks to include any models, theories, or taxonomies that describe or predict implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions. Objective We aimed to assess how health inequalities are addressed in frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; health and ethnic inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. Methods SCOPUS, PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and gray literature were searched to identify papers on frameworks relevant to the implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions; ethnically or culturally diverse populations and health inequalities; and interventions for cardiometabolic disease. We assessed the extent to which frameworks address health inequalities, specifically ethnic inequalities; explored how they were addressed; and developed recommendations for good practice. Results Of 58 relevant papers, 22 (38%) included frameworks that referred to health inequalities. Inequalities were conceptualized as society-level, system-level, intervention-level, and individual. Only 5 frameworks considered all levels. Three frameworks considered how digital health interventions might interact with or exacerbate existing health inequalities, and 3 considered the process of health technology implementation, uptake, and use and suggested opportunities to improve equity in digital health. When ethnicity was considered, it was often within the broader concepts of social determinants of health. Only 3 frameworks explicitly addressed ethnicity: one focused on culturally tailoring digital health interventions, and 2 were applied to management of cardiometabolic disease. Conclusions Existing frameworks evaluate implementation, uptake, and use of digital health interventions, but to consider factors related to ethnicity, it is necessary to look across frameworks. We have developed a visual guide of the key constructs across the 4 potential levels of action for digital health inequalities, which can be used to support future research and inform digital health policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mel Ramasawmy
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Lydia Poole
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | | | - Aneesha Chauhan
- Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mayur Murali
- Division of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine, and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Parbir Jagpal
- School of Pharmacy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Mehar Bijral
- University College London Medical School, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Jai Prashar
- University College London Medical School, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Abigail G-Medhin
- Department of Population Health Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Elizabeth Murray
- eHealth Unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London Medical School, London, United Kingdom
| | - Fiona Stevenson
- eHealth Unit, Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London Medical School, London, United Kingdom
| | - Ann Blandford
- University College London Interaction Centre, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Henry W W Potts
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Kamlesh Khunti
- Diabetes Research Centre, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom
| | - Wasim Hanif
- Department of Diabetes and Institute of Translational Medicine, University Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Paramjit Gill
- Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Madiha Sajid
- Patient and Public Involvement Representative, DISC Study (UK), United Kingdom
| | - Kiran Patel
- Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
- University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Harpreet Sood
- Health Education England, London, United Kingdom
- Hurley Group Practice, London, United Kingdom
| | - Neeraj Bhala
- Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, United Kingdom
- Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Shivali Modha
- Patient and Public Involvement Representative, DISC Study (UK), United Kingdom
| | - Manoj Mistry
- Patient and Public Involvement Representative, DISC Study (UK), United Kingdom
| | - Vinod Patel
- Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah N Ali
- Department of Diabetes and Endocrinology, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Aftab Ala
- Department of Access and Medicine, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, United Kingdom
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom
- Institute of Liver Studies, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Amitava Banerjee
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|