The What and the How: A pilot study of feedback from service providers and consumers about service development in new urban mental health hub.

OBJECTIVE: An inner-city hospital purchased a local hotel to provide support, digital engagement, skill development groups and referrals to partner agencies. Being aware of the hotel's importance to the local community, we sought feedback on a model of care relevant to perceived gaps and needs in support for mental health. METHODS: Four online focus groups included healthcare professionals, nominated opinion leaders from local Non-Government Organisations (NGOs), consumers and carers to reflect a range of views. Focus group data were qualitatively analysed. RESULTS: Participants made useful suggestions about WHAT educational, preventative and therapeutic services were needed. They emphasised the importance of HOW people engage with the service, the balance between accessibility and security. Other themes included targeting people with limited health literacy, integration with existing services, building on site heritage and ongoing evaluation of objectives and needs. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated clear support for providing safe and welcoming access to services, with resources and access to services to improve their health and wellbeing built on principles of social justice and inclusion. Participants had constructive ideas of what was needed, and ongoing patient and public research is anticipated.

A comparison of mountain rescue casualty bags in a cold, windy environment.

OBJECTIVE: To help the Mountain Rescue Association of Scotland find the best protective mountain rescue casualty bag in cold and windy conditions. The study investigated how 3 different casualty bags (labeled Bag 1, Bag 2, and Bag 3) performed in a cold (-10 degrees C, dry bulb), windy (wind speed 3.0 m x s(-1)) environment using physiological and subjective responses of the participating subjects. METHODS: Eleven male subjects, aged 23.4+/-4 years, percentage body fat 15.5+/-2 (mean +/- SD). Each participated in a total of 3 tests (1 for each bag). The tests were scheduled to last 60 minutes. Core and skin temperatures (skin values were measured on the arm, chest, thigh, and calf, and a mean skin temperature was calculated) were measured during the tests. Heart rate, oxygen consumption (Vo2), and subjective cold perception ratings were also recorded at regular intervals throughout the test duration. All variables except for Vo2 and cold discomfort were adjusted for baseline. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the mean response between the bags for the following variables: arm, chest, thigh, calf, mean temperature, and cold discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 bags showed limited ability to protect the subjects in cold, windy conditions. However, the study shows that Bag 2 offered the least protection against the imposed environment. It is difficult to differentiate between the other 2 bags, because Bag 1 performed better than Bag 3 for arm, calf, and mean temperatures, while Bag 3 outperformed Bag 1 for chest and thigh temperatures and cold discomfort scores.