Identifying barriers and facilitators to implementing mindfulness-based programmes into schools: A mixed methods study.

Mindfulness-based initiatives have been shown to improve psychological wellbeing and increase academic engagement in school settings. The current study explored barriers and facilitators to the implementation of mindfulness-based (MB) programmes in schools. Ninety-five teachers completed an online survey, and six principals were interviewed, with questions for both informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Quantitative data was analysed via descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests. Qualitative interview data were analysed via thematic analysis. Teachers reported facilitators to successful MB programme implementation as self-efficacy and motivation, knowledge about MB programmes, acceptance of responsibility to deliver MB programmes and belief of negative consequences if MB programmes are not delivered. Principals reported organisational-level facilitators as having a school-wide positive education framework relevant to the school context, taking a long-term approach, school leaders supporting the initiatives and understanding the evidence behind MB programmes and empowering staff to engage in mindfulness. Individual-level facilitators included staff buy-in and commitment to practice and understanding mindfulness. Barriers included time, resources/money, staff buy-in and competing strategic priorities within the school. These findings are important for consideration by policymakers determining the way forward for more widespread implementation of MB programmes in Australia.

REFOCUS-PULSAR Recovery-Oriented Practice Training in Adult Primary Mental Health Care: Exploratory Findings Including From a Pretest-Posttest Evaluation.

Objectives: Australian general practitioners (GPs) are pivotal in mental health care. The REFOCUS-PULSAR (Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery) primary care study aimed to improve personal recovery outcomes in adults with mental health problems consulting GPs. Design: Modified from an intended stepped-wedge cluster study, an exploratory (pre- and post-intervention) design employed cross-sectional surveys of patients consulting GPs. Setting: Eighteen primary care sites (clusters) in Victoria, Australia in 2013-2017. Participants: From 30 GPs recruited, 23 participated (76%), with 235 patient surveys returned from adults aged <75 years receiving mental health care. Intervention: A co-delivered face-to-face training intervention for GPs in recovery-oriented practice (ROP), with personal recovery a key focus, used multimedia, mnemonics, and targeted interview schedules to encourage ROP-with availability of support sessions for 1 year. Outcome Measures: Primary: the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery full-scale score (outcome). Secondary: INSPIRE (experience), Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS) and Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) (outcomes). Other: General-practice-Users Perceived-need Inventory (experience). Results: Small positive significant effects indicated primary-outcome post-intervention improvements [t-test (233) = -2.23, p = 0.01], also improvement in two secondary outcomes (WEMWBS t(233) = -2.12, p = 0.02 and K10 t(233) = 2.44, p = 0.01). More patients post-intervention reported "no need" for further help from their GP; but in those reporting needs, there was greater unmet need for counseling. Conclusions: ROP implementation, internationally influential in specialist mental health care, here is explored in primary care where it has had less attention. These exploratory findings suggest better patient outcomes followed introducing GPs to ROP in routine practice conditions. Higher unmet need for counseling post-intervention reported by patients might be a sign of limited supply despite ROP facilitating better identification of needs. Challenges in project implementation means that these findings carry risks of bias and flag the importance establishing research infrastructure in primary care. Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov/, The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry Identifier: ACTRN12614001312639.

REFOCUS-PULSAR recovery-oriented practice training in specialist mental health care: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recovery-oriented practice promotes the strengths and recovery potential of individuals. We aimed to establish whether individuals who access mental health services where staff have received the REFOCUS-PULSAR intervention, an adaptation of the UK's REFOCUS recovery-oriented staff intervention for use in Australia, show increased recovery compared with people using non-intervention services. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, two-step, stepped-wedge, randomised controlled trial at 18 sites grouped into 14 clusters across public mental health services and mental health community support services in Victoria, Australia. Eligible staff were working part-time or full-time in a direct service role at one of the 18 sites and had consumers being recruited for this study. Eligible consumers were receiving care from a participating cluster, with contact in the 3 months before data collection; aged 18-75 years; and not imprisoned. Clusters were randomly assigned with a web-based randomisation tool to receive the REFOCUS-PULSAR intervention in either the first year (step one) or second year (step two). Consumers, but not staff, were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR), for which cross-sectional data were collected across three timepoints (baseline [T0], year 1 [T1], and year 2 [T2]). The primary analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ANZCTR, number ACTRN12614000957695. FINDINGS: 190 staff (111 from public mental health services and 79 from mental health community support services) received the REFOCUS-PULSAR recovery-oriented training intervention. Between Sept 18, 2014, and May 19, 2017, 942 consumers were recruited across the three timepoints (T0: n=301; T1: n=334; T2: n=307). The mean QPR score was 53·6 (SD 16·3) in the control group and 54·4 (16·2) in the intervention group (adjusted difference 3·7, 95% CI 0·5-6·8; p=0·023). The Cohen's d value for the intervention effect was small (d=0·23). INTERPRETATION: The REFOCUS-PULSAR intervention had a small but significant effect on the QPRs of individuals using community mental health services and might be effective in promotion of recovery-oriented practice across sectors. FUNDING: Victorian Government Mental Illness Research Fund.

The PULSAR Specialist Care protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized control trial of a training intervention for community mental health teams in recovery-oriented practice.

BACKGROUND: Recovery features strongly in Australian mental health policy; however, evidence is limited for the efficacy of recovery-oriented practice at the service level. This paper describes the Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery (PULSAR) Specialist Care trial protocol for a recovery-oriented practice training intervention delivered to specialist mental health services staff. The primary aim is to evaluate whether adult consumers accessing services where staff have received the intervention report superior recovery outcomes compared to adult consumers accessing services where staff have not yet received the intervention. A qualitative sub-study aims to examine staff and consumer views on implementing recovery-oriented practice. A process evaluation sub-study aims to articulate important explanatory variables affecting the interventions rollout and outcomes. METHODS: The mixed methods design incorporates a two-step stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) examining cross-sectional data from three phases, and nested qualitative and process evaluation sub-studies. Participating specialist mental health care services in Melbourne, Victoria are divided into 14 clusters with half randomly allocated to receive the staff training in year one and half in year two. Research participants are consumers aged 18-75 years who attended the cluster within a previous three-month period either at baseline, 12 (step 1) or 24 months (step 2). In the two nested sub-studies, participation extends to cluster staff. The primary outcome is the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery collected from 756 consumers (252 each at baseline, step 1, step 2). Secondary and other outcomes measuring well-being, service satisfaction and health economic impact are collected from a subset of 252 consumers (63 at baseline; 126 at step 1; 63 at step 2) via interviews. Interview-based longitudinal data are also collected 12 months apart from 88 consumers with a psychotic disorder diagnosis (44 at baseline, step 1; 44 at step 1, step 2). cRCT data will be analyzed using multilevel mixed-effects modelling to account for clustering and some repeated measures, supplemented by thematic analysis of qualitative interview data. The process evaluation will draw on qualitative, quantitative and documentary data. DISCUSSION: Findings will provide an evidence-base for the continued transformation of Australian mental health service frameworks toward recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12614000957695 . Date registered: 8 September 2014.

The PULSAR primary care protocol: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial to test a training intervention for general practitioners in recovery-oriented practice to optimize personal recovery in adult patients.

BACKGROUND: General practitioners (GPs) in Australia play a central role in the delivery of mental health care. This article describes the PULSAR (Principles Unite Local Services Assisting Recovery) Primary Care protocol, a novel mixed methods evaluation of a training intervention for GPs in recovery-oriented practice. The aim of the intervention is to optimize personal recovery in patients consulting study GPs for mental health issues. METHODS: The intervention mixed methods design involves a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial testing the outcomes of training in recovery-oriented practice, together with an embedded qualitative study to identify the contextual enablers and challenges to implementing recovery-oriented practice. The project is conducted in Victoria, Australia between 2013 and 2017. Eighteen general practices and community health centers are randomly allocated to one of two steps (nine months apart) to start an intervention comprising GP training in the delivery of recovery-oriented practice. Data collection consists of cross-sectional surveys collected from patients of participating GPs at baseline, and again at the end of Steps 1 and 2. The primary outcome is improvement in personal recovery using responses to the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery. Secondary outcomes are improvements in patient-rated measures of personal recovery and wellbeing, and of the recovery-oriented practice they have received, using the INSPIRE questionnaire, the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. Participant data will be analyzed in the group that the cluster was assigned to at each study time point. Another per-protocol dataset will contain all data time-stamped according to the date of intervention received at each cluster site. Qualitative interviews with GPs and patients at three and nine months post-training will investigate experiences and challenges related to implementing recovery-oriented practice in primary care. DISCUSSION: Recovery-oriented practice is gaining increasing prominence in mental health service delivery and the outcomes of such an approach within the primary care sector for the first time will be evaluated in this project. If findings are positive, the intervention has the potential to extend recovery-oriented practice to GPs throughout the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ( ACTRN12614001312639 ). Registered: 8 August 2014.

Bridging the practice and science of employee engagement: a qualitative investigation / Uniendo la ciencia y la práctica del engagement laboral: una investigación cualitativa

While the practice and the science of employee engagement continue to run on largely separate paths, the science of engagement continues to evolve with ongoing incremental refinements to existing models and measures. This qualitative study sought to map the extent of the science-practice divide and to further inform the content of the science and the practice of employee engagement. Interview data obtained from 51 senior operational and human resource managers of a large multi-national mining company revealed that whereas a considerable overlap is apparent in the way that scientists and practitioners view the nature and the drivers of employee engagement, there are also key differences and differences of emphasis. Consistent with recent research, the importance of a reciprocal or two-way partnership between management and employees was highlighted by interviewees as being very important to engagement. The interview data also suggested that ‘focused energy’ and ‘alignment with organizational goals’ should further be recognized as key attributes of engagement within the academic literature. Importantly, a number of opportunities to elaborate the Job Demands-Resources model were identified. First, the differential influence of organizational level resources (e.g. senior leadership; organizational climate) versus job level resources emerged. Second, the potential differential influence that challenge versus stressor demands can exert at the organizational level (e.g. large scale organizational change; organizational politics) and at the job level (e.g. role ambiguity; role conflict) emerged. Third, the direct effects of both challenge demands and hindrance demands on work engagement could be usefully and more explicitly acknowledged in the JD-R model. Finally, taking into account the study limitations, we propose future opportunities to extend the integration of the science and the practice of employee engagement.

Mientras que la práctica y la ciencia del engagement laboral continúan recorriendo caminos separados, la ciencia del engagement sigue evolucionando a través de constantes refinamientos aplicados a modelos y medidas existentes. Este estudio cualitativo busca poder mapear el alcance de la separación de la ciencia y la práctica; además de informar el contenido de la ciencia y la práctica del engagement laboral. Los datos obtenidos a partir de un universo de 51 operadores experimentados y gerentes de recursos humanos, pertenecientes a una compañía minera multinacional, revelaron que mientras una considerable sobreposición es aparente en la forma en que los científicos y practicantes ven la naturaleza y las conducciones del engagement laboral, también existen diferencias clave y de énfasis. De manera consistente con investigaciones recientes, la importancia recíproca, o la sociedad igualitaria entre gerentes y empleados, se destacó como algo esencial por parte de los entrevistados en función del engagement. Los datos obtenidos también sugieren que la “energía enfocada” y “la alineación de objetivos organizacionales, deberían ser reconocidos como atributos fundamentales del engagement dentro de la literatura académica. Es de esta forma, se identificaron un número de oportunidades para elaborar un modelo de “Demandas y Recursos Laborales” (Job Demands-Resources model, en inglés). Lo primero en surgir fue la influencia diferencial de los recursos de nivel organizacional (liderazgo experimentado; clima organizacional) versus los recursos de nivel laboral. Lo segundo en presentase fue la influencia potencial diferencial que desafía versus las demandas estresantes que se ejercen a nivel organizacional (cambio organizacional a gran escala, políticas organizacionales) y al nivel laboral (ambigüedad de rol, conflictos de rol). Tercero, los efectos directos de las ordenes complicadas y las demandas obstaculizadoras sobre el engagement laboral...