Explore the vast range of titles available.

Why did you do this work?Childhood illness and treatment can present significant challenges for patients and their families. At our tertiary centre, some have travelled internationally to access care for life-threatening or life-limiting conditions. Beyond the physical and emotional toll of illness, hospitalisation can involve disruption to familiar routines and separation from established support systems.This work was undertaken to explore the psychological and practical needs of children, families, and healthcare staff within this context. Using these insights, we sought to establish and evaluate a tailored psychology service model designed to effectively address these needs.What did you do?We developed a paediatric psychology service through an iterative process, emphasising relationship-building and co-production with key stakeholders, including patients and families, healthcare staff and operational teams. Service development focused on understanding the unique needs of this patient population and their interactions with healthcare systems, particularly regarding psychological support.We began by conducting resource mapping through participatory workshops. Following this, we carried out a multi-level needs assessment to ensure that the priorities identified were proactively addressed and integrated into the broader service framework.We evaluated the effectiveness of our multi-level interventions through both qualitative and quantitative measures. These included feedback from patients and staff, as well as metrics such as engagement levels and referral rates over time. This evaluation process facilitated ongoing refinement of the service model, ensuring it remains responsive to evolving needs.What did you find?The service has experienced significant engagement. This is evidenced by positive feedback from patients, families, and staff, alongside a 300% increase in service requests and referrals between January 2023 and February 2024. Qualitative feedback highlighted improvements in emotional well-being, communication, and overall satisfaction with care, while quantitative data demonstrated enhanced engagement levels and a marked increase in referrals.We came to understand that patients responded well to individual and family-focused psychological support, and to initiatives aimed at fostering peer relationships and expanding networks. The introduction of reflective practice programs for staff – including interpreters – helped identify team priorities and manage the emotional demands of care delivery.Core aspects of service delivery involve building trust, ensuring accessibility, and respecting diverse perspectives. The service addresses social, linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity, in part by co-producing tailored resources in collaboration with families and staff.Challenges included meeting the growing demand and navigating the medical and operational drivers inherent in this context.What does it mean?This innovative, embedded service model has yielded positive outcomes for children, families, and staff. It underscores the importance of a population-focused and context-sensitive approach, contributing to the overall wellbeing of all stakeholders. This aligns with both national and global healthcare priorities, emphasising the necessity of integrated psychological support in paediatric care.

Why did you do this work?Childhood illness and treatment can present significant challenges for patients and their families. At our tertiary centre, some have travelled internationally to access care for life-threatening or life-limiting conditions. Beyond the physical and emotional toll of illness, hospitalisation can involve disruption to familiar routines and separation from established support systems.This work was undertaken to explore the psychological and practical needs of children, families, and healthcare staff within this context. Using these insights, we sought to establish and evaluate a tailored psychology service model designed to effectively address these needs.What did you do?We developed a paediatric psychology service through an iterative process, emphasising relationship-building and co-production with key stakeholders, including patients and families, healthcare staff and operational teams. Service development focused on understanding the unique needs of this patient population and their interactions with healthcare systems, particularly regarding psychological support.We began by conducting resource mapping through participatory workshops. Following this, we carried out a multi-level needs assessment to ensure that the priorities identified were proactively addressed and integrated into the broader service framework.We evaluated the effectiveness of our multi-level interventions through both qualitative and quantitative measures. These included feedback from patients and staff, as well as metrics such as engagement levels and referral rates over time. This evaluation process facilitated ongoing refinement of the service model, ensuring it remains responsive to evolving needs.What did you find?The service has experienced significant engagement. This is evidenced by positive feedback from patients, families, and staff, alongside a 300% increase in service requests and referrals between January 2023 and February 2024. Qualitative feedback highlighted improvements in emotional well-being, communication, and overall satisfaction with care, while quantitative data demonstrated enhanced engagement levels and a marked increase in referrals.We came to understand that patients responded well to individual and family-focused psychological support, and to initiatives aimed at fostering peer relationships and expanding networks. The introduction of reflective practice programs for staff – including interpreters – helped identify team priorities and manage the emotional demands of care delivery.Core aspects of service delivery involve building trust, ensuring accessibility, and respecting diverse perspectives. The service addresses social, linguistic, cultural, and religious diversity, in part by co-producing tailored resources in collaboration with families and staff.Challenges included meeting the growing demand and navigating the medical and operational drivers inherent in this context.What does it mean?This innovative, embedded service model has yielded positive outcomes for children, families, and staff. It underscores the importance of a population-focused and context-sensitive approach, contributing to the overall wellbeing of all stakeholders. This aligns with both national and global healthcare priorities, emphasising the necessity of integrated psychological support in paediatric care.

Why did you do this work?Our tertiary paediatric service provides complex care for multi-national patients. To promote holistic patient-centred care we hold weekly psychosocial multidisciplinary meetings. As a team, we envisaged that a quality improvement project could develop our processes.The overall aim was to improve the effectiveness of our psychosocial meetings.The objectives were to: identify and implement strategies during psychosocial meetings to ensure most effective use of time, enhance inter-disciplinary communications and promote a holistic approach to care.What did you do?Anonymous qualitative survey was conducted to understand staff experiences of the meetings. Quantitative measures were also set up to provide a baseline of meeting effectiveness criteria. This alongside listening events supported further idea generation and multidisciplinary working. Ideas were implemented through iterative test cycles. In chronological order, these included: the creation of an online shared patient list, a newly appointed psychologist who also acquired the role of chairing the meetings, a move from virtual to hybrid format, consistent minuting, and encouraging broad multidisciplinary team (MDT) attendance. To evaluate the impact a second survey was conducted one year later, after the changes were implemented.What did you find?The number of respondents increased from 11 to 19 between the two time points. Staff perceived that representation from MDT professions was initially only 27%; this increased to 90%. Staff satisfaction with the meetings improved from 36% to 68%. Initially 18% of respondents reported that the meetings were effective; this improved to 71%. 71% reported that the implemented changes were effective, with 65% reporting that they had positively influenced patient care.Many highlighted the importance of having dedicated time and space to come together, share insights, and ensure a holistic approach is integrated alongside medical management. Respondents reported that the introduction of a new and embedded psychologist, who now chairs the meetings, has fostered more family-centred discussions and encouraged consideration of broader systemic factors.It was suggested that functional enhancement of the electronic record system could lead to more effective meetings. Respondents expressed mixed feelings about the hybrid format due to unreliable audio-visual technology.What does it mean?This project highlighted the benefits of having effective psychosocial meetings. It demonstrated that implementing changes in response to feedback results in an improved staff experience of psychosocial meetings, better inter-professional communication and, in turn, perceived patient care. This study was for a single service, but learning could be transferred to similar contexts. It would be beneficial to complete a further quality improvement cycle around use of technology to better support the meetings.

Why did you do this work?Our tertiary paediatric service provides complex care for multi-national patients. To promote holistic patient-centred care we hold weekly psychosocial multidisciplinary meetings. As a team, we envisaged that a quality improvement project could develop our processes.The overall aim was to improve the effectiveness of our psychosocial meetings.The objectives were to: identify and implement strategies during psychosocial meetings to ensure most effective use of time, enhance inter-disciplinary communications and promote a holistic approach to care.What did you do?Anonymous qualitative survey was conducted to understand staff experiences of the meetings. Quantitative measures were also set up to provide a baseline of meeting effectiveness criteria. This alongside listening events supported further idea generation and multidisciplinary working. Ideas were implemented through iterative test cycles. In chronological order, these included: the creation of an online shared patient list, a newly appointed psychologist who also acquired the role of chairing the meetings, a move from virtual to hybrid format, consistent minuting, and encouraging broad multidisciplinary team (MDT) attendance. To evaluate the impact a second survey was conducted one year later, after the changes were implemented.What did you find?The number of respondents increased from 11 to 19 between the two time points. Staff perceived that representation from MDT professions was initially only 27%; this increased to 90%. Staff satisfaction with the meetings improved from 36% to 68%. Initially 18% of respondents reported that the meetings were effective; this improved to 71%. 71% reported that the implemented changes were effective, with 65% reporting that they had positively influenced patient care.Many highlighted the importance of having dedicated time and space to come together, share insights, and ensure a holistic approach is integrated alongside medical management. Respondents reported that the introduction of a new and embedded psychologist, who now chairs the meetings, has fostered more family-centred discussions and encouraged consideration of broader systemic factors.It was suggested that functional enhancement of the electronic record system could lead to more effective meetings. Respondents expressed mixed feelings about the hybrid format due to unreliable audio-visual technology.What does it mean?This project highlighted the benefits of having effective psychosocial meetings. It demonstrated that implementing changes in response to feedback results in an improved staff experience of psychosocial meetings, better inter-professional communication and, in turn, perceived patient care. This study was for a single service, but learning could be transferred to similar contexts. It would be beneficial to complete a further quality improvement cycle around use of technology to better support the meetings.

This review addresses an under-explored area by consolidating interventions and service developments undertaken by mental health organisations for the implementation of public mental health approaches in the United Kingdom. A scoping review was chosen to facilitate the synthesis of this information. Searches were conducted in PsychInfo, CINAHL and MEDLINE and further articles were identified through hand searching of included studies. A total of 1285 articles were screened and twenty were included. Data relating to population characteristics, intervention descriptions and results were extracted, followed by a thematic analysis of the included studies. Four themes emerged from the data: overcoming structural barriers to accessing support; social connectedness and social networks; holistic and flexible service offers; and facilitating links to complementary and additional services. The reviewed studies described interventions and service developments with a view to address health and social inequalities for various population groups in the UK. Findings should be considered with an understanding that the nature of this review contained publication bias, excluding grey literature. There is a need for further research pertaining to the understanding and application of primary prevention approaches, and the ethical issues that can arise, including consideration for how these approaches are viewed, applied and evaluated.

Purpose Nursing teams supporting people with intellectual disabilities in inpatient settings are known to be vulnerable to burnout, compassion fatigue and vicarious trauma. Aspects such as resourcing, support, training and the fundamental challenges of supporting this patient group are known risk factors for these difficulties. The aim of this paper is to synthesise the literature on these issues and provide suggestions for operationalising solutions. Design/methodology/approach Literature on the experiences of nursing teams supporting people with intellectual disabilities in inpatient settings was considered, alongside the established offer of clinical psychologists working into these services. Findings There are common themes of staff’s emotional health and the impact this can have on patient care and the steps that managers and organisations can take to support their teams to remain emotionally healthy, compassionate and effective practitioners. Clinical psychology can play a role in offering this support only where services and teams are aware of the contribution they can make. Originality/value Clinical psychology has been undersold and under-represented in inpatient settings for people with intellectual disabilities, and this practice paper outlines the important contributions that they can make to the psychological well-being of all within the system, not just patients.