Williams, Prof. Richard James Willson, (born 5 Feb. 1949), Professor of Mental Health Strategy, Welsh Institute for Health and Social Care, University of South Wales (formerly University of Glamorgan), 1998–2014, now Emeritus; Honorary Consultant Disaster Psychiatrist and Public Mental Health Physician, Extreme Events and Health Protection Section, Public Health England (formerly Health Protection Agency), since 2012

2007 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
Health Protection Agency ◽  
Protection Agency ◽  
South Wales ◽  
Health Strategy ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Health Physician

A case study evaluation of a community multidisciplinary team in South East England using a mixed-method approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 70 (suppl 1) ◽  
pp. bjgp20X711569
Author(s):  
Jessica Wyatt Muscat
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mixed Method ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Free Form ◽  
Normalisation Process Theory ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Mixed Method Approach ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Method Approach

BackgroundCommunity multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) represent a model of integrated care comprising health, social care, and the voluntary sector where members work collaboratively to coordinate care for those patients most at risk.AimThe evaluation will answer the question, ‘What are the enablers and what are the restrictors to the embedding of the case study MDT into the routine practice of the health and social care teams involved in the project?’MethodThe MDT was evaluated using a mixed-method approach with normalisation process theory as a methodological tool. Both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered through a questionnaire consisting of the NoMAD survey followed by free-form questions.ResultsThe concepts of the MDT were generally clear, and participants could see the potential benefits of the programme, though this was found to be lower in GPs. Certain professionals, particularly mental health and nursing professionals, found it difficult to integrate the MDT into normal working patterns because of a lack of resources. Participants also felt there was a lack of training for MDT working. A lack of awareness of evidence supporting the programme was shown particularly within management, GP, and nursing roles.ConclusionSpecific recommendations have been made in order to improve the MDT under evaluation. These include adjustments to IT systems and meeting documentation, continued education as to the purpose of the MDT, and the engagement of GPs to enable better buy-in. Recommendations were made to focus the agenda with specialist attendance when necessary, and to expand the MDT remit, particularly in mental health and geriatrics.

scholarly journals Maudsley International: improving mental health and well-being around the world

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 49-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Bouras ◽  
Silvia Davey ◽  
Tracey Power ◽  
Jonathan Rolfe ◽  
Tom Craig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Building Capacity ◽  
The Past ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The World ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Health And Well Being ◽  
And Training

Maudsley International was set up to help improve people's mental health and well-being around the world. A variety of programmes have been developed by Maudsley International over the past 10 years, for planning and implementing services; building capacity; and training and evaluation to support organisations and individuals, professionals and managers to train and develop health and social care provisions. Maudsley International's model is based on collaboration, sharing expertise and cultural understanding with international partners.

scholarly journals Lessons learned from SARS: The experience of the Health Protection Agency, England

Public Health ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 120 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
N.L. Goddard ◽  
V.C. Delpech ◽  
J.M. Watson ◽  
M. Regan ◽  
A. Nicoll
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Health Protection ◽  
Health Protection Agency ◽  
Protection Agency

Is co-production working well in recovery colleges? Emergent themes from a systematic narrative review

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Louise Bester ◽  
Anne McGlade ◽  
Eithne Darragh
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Social Care ◽  
The Body ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practitioner Attitudes ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Impact

Purpose “Co-production” is a process in health and social care wherein service users and practitioners work in partnership. Recovery colleges (RCs) are educational establishments offering mental health education; a cornerstone feature is that courses are designed and delivered in parity by both mental health practitioners and “peers” – people with lived experience of mental illness. This paper aims to consider, through the identification of key themes, whether co-production within RCs is operating successfully. Design/methodology/approach The paper is a systematic review of qualitative literature. Relevant concept groups were systematically searched using three bibliographic databases: Medline, Social Care Online and Scopus. Articles were quality appraised and then synthesised through inductive thematic analysis and emergent trends identified. Findings Synthesis identified three key themes relating to the impact of co-production in RCs: practitioner attitudes, power dynamics between practitioners and service users, and RCs’ relationships with their host organisations. As a result of RC engagement, traditional practitioner/patient hierarchies were found to be eroding. Practitioners felt they were more person-centred. RCs can model good co-productive practices to their host organisations. The review concluded, with some caveats, that RC co-production was of high fidelity. Originality/value RC research is growing, but the body of evidence remains relatively small. Most of what exists examine the impact of RCs on individuals’ overall recovery and mental health; there is a limited empirical investigation into whether their flagship feature of parity between peers and practitioners is genuine.

scholarly journals Research productivity of staff in NHS mental health trusts: comparison using the Leiden method

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex J. Mitchell ◽  
John Gill
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
National Health ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Clinical Services ◽  
Health And Social Care

Aims and methodTo examine research productivity of staff working across 57 National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts in England. We examined research productivity between 2010 and 2012, including funded portfolio studies and all research (funded and unfunded).ResultsAcross 57 trusts there were 1297 National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) studies in 2011/2012, involving 46140 participants and in the same year staff in these trusts published 1334 articles (an average of only 23.4 per trust per annum). After correcting for trust size and budget, the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust was the most productive. In terms of funded portfolio studies, Manchester Mental Health and Social Care Trust as well as South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust and Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust had the strongest performance in 2011/2012.Clinical implicationsTrusts should aim to capitalise on valuable staff resources and expertise and better support and encourage research in the NHS to help improve clinical services.

scholarly journals The impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, services and society

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 481-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Crowther ◽  
A. Taylor ◽  
R. Toney ◽  
S. Meddings ◽  
T. Whale ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mental Health Problems ◽  
Mechanisms Of Action ◽  
Advisory Panel ◽  
Health Staff ◽  
Mental Health Staff ◽  
Social Care Service ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Impact

AbstractAimsRecovery Colleges are opening internationally. The evaluation focus has been on outcomes for Recovery College students who use mental health services. However, benefits may also arise for: staff who attend or co-deliver courses; the mental health and social care service hosting the Recovery College; and wider society. A theory-based change model characterising how Recovery Colleges impact at these higher levels is needed for formal evaluation of their impact, and to inform future Recovery College development. The aim of this study was to develop a stratified theory identifying candidate mechanisms of action and outcomes (impact) for Recovery Colleges at staff, services and societal levels.MethodsInductive thematic analysis of 44 publications identified in a systematised review was supplemented by collaborative analysis involving a lived experience advisory panel to develop a preliminary theoretical framework. This was refined through semi-structured interviews with 33 Recovery College stakeholders (service user students, peer/non-peer trainers, managers, community partners, clinicians) in three sites in England.ResultsCandidate mechanisms of action and outcomes were identified at staff, services and societal levels. At the staff level, experiencing new relationships may change attitudes and associated professional practice. Identified outcomes for staff included: experiencing and valuing co-production; changed perceptions of service users; and increased passion and job motivation. At the services level, Recovery Colleges often develop somewhat separately from their host system, reducing the reach of the college into the host organisation but allowing development of an alternative culture giving experiential learning opportunities to staff around co-production and the role of a peer workforce. At the societal level, partnering with community-based agencies gave other members of the public opportunities for learning alongside people with mental health problems and enabled community agencies to work with people they might not have otherwise. Recovery Colleges also gave opportunities to beneficially impact on community attitudes.ConclusionsThis study is the first to characterise the mechanisms of action and impact of Recovery Colleges on mental health staff, mental health and social care services, and wider society. The findings suggest that a certain distance is needed in the relationship between the Recovery College and its host organisation if a genuine cultural alternative is to be created. Different strategies are needed depending on what level of impact is intended, and this study can inform decision-making about mechanisms to prioritise. Future research into Recovery Colleges should include contextual evaluation of these higher level impacts, and investigate effectiveness and harms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document