from Narcis.nl: "Background: Introducing a post-discharge community pharmacist home visit can secure continuity of care and prevent drug-related problems. Currently, this type of pharmaceutical care is not standard practice and implementation is challenging. Mapping the factors influencing the implementation of this new form of care is crucial to ensure successful embedding. Objective: To explore which barriers and facilitators influence community pharmacists' adoption of a post-discharge home visit. Methods: A mixed methods study was conducted with community pharmacists who had recently participated in a study that evaluated the effectiveness of a post-discharge home visit in identifying drug-related problems. Four focus groups were held guided by a topic guide based on the framework of Greenhalgh et al. After the focus groups, major barriers and facilitators were formulated into statements and presented to all participants in a scoring list to rank for relevance and feasibility in daily practice. Results: Twenty-two of the eligible 26 pharmacists participated in the focus groups. Twenty pharmacists (91%) returned the scoring list containing 21 statements. Most of these statements were perceived as both relevant and feasible by the responding pharmacists. A small number scored high on relevance but low on feasibility, making these potential important barriers to overcome for broad implementation. These were the necessity of dedicated time for performing pharmaceutical care, implementing the home visit in pharmacists' daily routine and an adequate reimbursement fee for the home visit. Conclusions: The key to successful implementation of a post-discharge home visit may lay in two facilitators which are partly interrelated: changing daily routine and reimbursement. Reimbursement will be a strong incentive, but additional efforts will be needed to reprioritize daily routines."
MULTIFILE
Mental health problems in adolescence can have a profound influence on school functioning, educational attainment and thus future societal participation. Supported education (SEd) is a potentially useful method for educational professionals to help adolescents with mental health problems in secondary school improve their functioning by stimulating collaboration, ownership, and participation. In this study, we examined the feasibility of SEd in secondary education by examining its acceptability, implementation, and preliminary effectiveness. We performed a mixed-methods study using quantitative data (questionnaires) and qualitative data (interviews) from educational professionals (EP) and adolescents, aged 13–17, about their experiences with a SEd intervention. Regarding the acceptability of the intervention, three main themes emerged: (a) structure, (b) autonomy, and (c) applicability of the intervention. Themes regarding the implementation were: (a) lack of time, (b) personal attitude, (c) mastery, and (d) complexity of the school environment. The findings show that, for those that followed the intervention, SEd is a promising approach to support adolescents with mental health problems to improve their functioning and participation in school. Further research is needed on the effectiveness of the intervention.This article belongs to the Special Issue Children and Young People’s Participation in Health and Well-Being.
LINK
Marfan syndrome (MFS) is a multisystemic, autosomal dominant connective tissue disorder that occurs de novo in 25%. In many families, parent and child(ren) are affected, which may increase distress in parents. To assess distress, 42 mothers (29% MFS) and 25 fathers (60% MFS) of 43 affected children, completed the validated screening‐questionnaire Distress thermometer for parents of a chronically ill child, including questions on overall distress (score 0–10; ≥4 denoting “clinical distress”) and everyday problems (score 0–36). Data were compared to 1,134 control‐group‐parents of healthy children. Mothers reported significantly less overall distress (2, 1–4 vs. 3, 1–6; p = .049; r = −.07) and total everyday problems (3, 0–6 vs. 4, 1–8; p = .03; r = −.08) compared to control‐group‐mothers. Mothers without MFS reported significantly less overall distress compared to mothers with MFS, both of a child with MFS (1, 0–4 vs. 3.5, 2–5; p = .039; r = −.17). No significant differences were found between the father‐groups, nor between the group of healthy parents of an affected child living together with an affected partner compared to control‐group‐parents. No differences in percentages of clinical distress were reported between mothers and control‐group‐mothers (33 vs. 42%); fathers and control‐group‐fathers (28 vs. 32%); nor between the other groups. Distress was not associated with the children's MFS characteristics. Concluding, parents of a child with MFS did not show more clinical distress compared to parents of healthy children. However, clinical distress was reported in approximately one‐third and may increase in case of acute medical complications. We advise monitoring distress in parents of a child with MFS to provide targeted support.
