Developing and validating a novel staff questionnaire to identify barriers and enablers to nutrition and mealtime care on hospital wards.

AIMS: Improving hospital nutrition and mealtime care is complex and often requires multifaceted interventions and implementation strategies to change how staff, wards and systems operate. This study aimed to develop and validate a staff questionnaire to identify multilevel barriers and enablers to optimal nutrition and mealtime care on hospital wards, to inform and evaluate local quality improvement. METHODS: Literature review, multidisciplinary focus groups and end-user testing informed questionnaire development and establishment of content and face validity. To determine the construct validity, the questionnaire was administered to ward staff working in five wards across two facilities (acute hospital, rehabilitation unit). Exploratory factor analysis was used to estimate the number of factors and to guide decisions about whether to retain or reject individual items. Scale reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 138 staff, with most respondents being nurses (57%) and working in the acute care facility (76%). Exploratory factor analysis supported construct validity of four of the original seven subscales. The final questionnaire consisted of 17 items and 4 sub sub-scales related to (1) Personal Staff Role; (2) Food Service; (3) Organisational Support, and (4) Family Involvement; each sub-scale demonstrated good reliability with Cronbach's alpha values all >0.70. CONCLUSION: This novel and brief questionnaire shows good reliability and preliminary evidence of construct validity in this small sample. It provides a potentially useful instrument to identify barriers and enablers to nutrition and mealtime care from the staff perspective and inform where improvement efforts should be focused.

The impact of COVID-19 on a specialised menopause clinic: Changes in practice and women's experiences.

AIMS: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the rapid change in a dedicated multidisciplinary menopause clinic from in-person consultations to telehealth. The aim of this study was to explore the impact of COVID-19 on menopause service delivery and consumer experiences. METHODS: Two-part study involving the following. (i) Clinical audit conducted June-July 2019 (pre-COVID-19) and June-July 2020 (COVID-19) assessing practice and service delivery changes. Assessment outcomes included: patient demographics, cause of menopause, presence of menopause symptoms, appointment attendance, medical history, investigations and menopause treatments. (ii) A post-clinic online survey exploring the acceptability and experience of telehealth, once telehealth models of care had been routinely used in the menopause service (2021). RESULTS: Pre-COVID (n = 156) and COVID-19 (n = 150) clinic consultations were audited. Menopause care delivery changed significantly from 100% face-to-face consultations in 2019 to 95.4% telehealth consultations in 2020. In 2020, fewer women had investigations performed vs 2019 (P < 0.001), although use of menopausal therapies was similar (P < 0.05). Ninety-four women completed the online survey. Most women (70%) were satisfied with their telehealth consultation and perceived that the doctor effectively communicated with them (76%). Women preferred face-to-face consultations for their first menopause clinic visit (69%) and telehealth for review consultations (65%). The majority of women (62%) viewed the continuation of telehealth consultations as 'moderately' to 'extremely useful' post-pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant changes to menopause service delivery. Telehealth was perceived as feasible and acceptable by women, supporting the continuation of a hybrid service delivery model incorporating telehealth and face-to-face consultation to meet the needs of women.

'I will walk out of here': Qualitative analysis of older rehabilitation patients' perceptions of mobility.

OBJECTIVES: To understand the motivation of older rehabilitation inpatients for mobilisation, and identify barriers and enablers to greater mobilisation. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with older rehabilitation inpatients. All interviews were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic and inductive techniques. RESULTS: From 23 interviews, we found that older patients strongly value mobilisation during rehabilitation admission, to get better and maintain identity, personhood and meaningful connections. At the patient level, mobilisation was impacted by patient's confidence, family support and symptom management. At the organisational level, barriers to mobilisation included lack of timely staff support, inflexible routines, limited social opportunities, lack of physical resources, and poor communication. CONCLUSIONS: Recognising and understanding motivators, enablers and barriers to mobilising during subacute hospitalisation of older patients is an essential step towards developing and implementing successful strategies to promote greater mobilisation. Addressing mobilisation barriers requires a multifaceted approach at the patient and organisational level.

Evaluation of a Center of Research Excellence in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome as a Large-Scale Collaborative Research Translation Initiative, Including Evaluating Translation of Guideline Impact.

Research translation and evaluation are often underconsidered in research design and implementation thus limiting research benefit to the end user. In this article, we first describe a best practice approach to evaluation, for a center of research excellence in polycystic ovary syndrome. Within this, we outline a comprehensive research translation program with inbuilt evaluation of the first International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (2018). We seek to provide a real-world example of comprehensive approaches to evaluation and research translation.