Consumer perspectives of allied health involvement in a public hospital setting: cross-sectional survey and electronic health record review.

Objective Consumer-centred care is fundamental to high-quality health care, with allied health professionals playing a pivotal role in hospital settings. Allied health typically operates within standard weekday working-hours. Consumer preferences for receiving allied health services are largely unexplored but could inform whether weekend and/or out-of-hours services are required. This study aims to understand consumer preferences for hospital-based inpatient and outpatient allied health services. Methods Using a cross-sectional survey and convenience sampling approach, consumers of a public health service in Melbourne, Australia were surveyed about preferences for allied health service delivery. Electronic health record reviews compared the accuracy of self-reported service delivery times. Descriptive statistics, concordance and predictive values were calculated. Responses to free-text survey items were analysed using content analysis. Results Of 120 participants (79% response rate), most (69%) received allied health services, however, almost half of inpatient responders (44%) were unsure of the specific allied health professional involved. Audit results found moderate-high concordance overall (range, 77-96%) between self-reported and audit-identified allied health services by profession. Most inpatient responders had no strong day of week preference, equally selecting weekdays and weekend days, with most preferring services between 8 am and 4 pm. Outpatient responders (81%) preferred a weekday appointment between 8 am and 12 pm or before 8 am (29%) to complete scheduled activities early in the day. Conclusion While provision of allied health services during standard working-hours was preferred by most consumers, some inpatient and outpatient consumers are receptive to receiving weekend and out-of-hours services, respectively. Decisions about offering these services should consider operational capacity and research evidence.

Effective clinical supervision of allied health professionals: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical supervision is recommended for allied health professionals for the purpose of supporting them in their professional role, continued professional development and ensuring patient safety and high quality care. The aim of this mixed methods study was to explore allied health professionals' perceptions about the aspects of clinical supervision that can facilitate effective clinical supervision. METHODS: Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted on a purposive sample of 38 allied health professionals working in a metropolitan public hospital. Qualitative analysis was completed using an interpretive description approach. To enable triangulation of qualitative data, a quantitative descriptive survey of clinical supervision effectiveness was also conducted using the Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale (MCSS-26). RESULTS: Three main themes emerged from qualitative analysis: Allied health professionals reported that clinical supervision was most effective when their professional development was the focus of clinical supervision; the supervisor possessed the skills and attributes required to facilitate a constructive supervisory relationship; and the organisation provided an environment that facilitated this relationship together with their own professional development. Three subthemes also emerged within each of the main themes: the importance of the supervisory relationship; prioritisation of clinical supervision relative to other professional duties; and flexibility of supervision models, processes and approaches to clinical supervision. The mean MCSS-26 score was 79.2 (95%CI 73.7 to 84.3) with scores ranging from 44 to 100. MCSS-26 results converged with the qualitative findings with participants reporting an overall positive experience with clinical supervision. CONCLUSIONS: The factors identified by allied health professionals that influenced the effectiveness of their clinical supervision were mostly consistent among the professions. However, allied health professionals reported using models of clinical supervision that best suited their profession's role and learning style. This highlighted the need for flexible approaches to allied health clinical supervision that should be reflected in clinical supervision policies and guidelines. Many of the identified factors that influence the effectiveness of clinical supervision of allied health professionals can be influenced by health organisations.

IMPACT: Investigating the impact of Models of Practice for Allied health Care in subacuTe settings. A protocol for a quasi-experimental mixed methods study of cost effectiveness and outcomes for patients exposed to different models of allied health care.

INTRODUCTION: This protocol considers three allied health staffing models across public health subacute hospitals. This quasi-experimental mixed-methods study, including qualitative process evaluation, aims to evaluate the impact of additional allied health services in subacute care, in rehabilitation and geriatric evaluation management settings, on patient, health service and societal outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This health services research will analyse outcomes of patients exposed to different allied health models of care at three health services. Each health service will have a control ward (routine care) and an intervention ward (additional allied health). This project has two parts. Part 1: a whole of site data extraction for included wards. Outcome measures will include: length of stay, rate of readmissions, discharge destinations, community referrals, patient feedback and staff perspectives. Part 2: Functional Independence Measure scores will be collected every 2-3 days for the duration of 60 patient admissions.Data from part 1 will be analysed by linear regression analysis for continuous outcomes using patient-level data and logistic regression analysis for binary outcomes. Qualitative data will be analysed using a deductive thematic approach. For part 2, a linear mixed model analysis will be conducted using therapy service delivery and days since admission to subacute care as fixed factors in the model and individual participant as a random factor. Graphical analysis will be used to examine the growth curve of the model and transformations. The days since admission factor will be used to examine non-linear growth trajectories to determine if they lead to better model fit. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Findings will be disseminated through local reports and to the Department of Health and Human Services Victoria. Results will be presented at conferences and submitted to peer-reviewed journals. The Monash Health Human Research Ethics committee approved this multisite research (HREC/17/MonH/144 and HREC/17/MonH/547).