ORCID Profile
0000-0003-1736-7506
Current Organisation
University of Nottingham
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 13-10-2015
Publisher: CRC Press
Date: 19-04-2016
DOI: 10.1201/B13022-32
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 26-07-2017
Publisher: BMJ
Date: 07-2020
DOI: 10.1136/BMJOPEN-2020-038430
Abstract: The BRIGhTMIND study aims to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and mechanism of action of connectivity guided intermittent theta burst stimulation (cgiTBS) versus standard repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in adults with moderate to severe treatment resistant depression. The study is a randomised double-blind controlled trial with 1:1 allocation to either 20 sessions of (1) cgiTBS or (2) neuronavigated rTMS not using connectivity guidance. A total of 368 eligible participants with a diagnosis of current unipolar major depressive disorder that is both treatment resistant (defined as scoring 2 or more on the Massachusetts General Hospital Staging Score) and moderate to severe (scoring 16 on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17)), will be recruited from primary and secondary care settings at four treatment centres in the UK. The primary outcome is depression response at 16 weeks (50% or greater reduction in HDRS-17 score from baseline). Secondary outcomes include assessments of self-rated depression, anxiety, psychosocial functioning, cognition and quality of life at 8, 16 and 26 weeks postrandomisation. Cost-effectiveness, patient acceptability, safety, mechanism of action and predictors of response will also be examined. Ethical approval was granted by East Midlands Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee (ref: 18/EM/0232) on 30 August 2018. The results of the study will be published in relevant peer-reviewed journals, and then through professional and public conferences and media. Further publications will explore patient experience, moderators and mediators of outcome and mechanism of action. ISRCTN19674644
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 28-06-2018
Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Date: 15-06-2018
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 04-08-2017
Abstract: Although investment in staff development is a prerequisite for high-quality and innovative care, the training needs of front line care staff involved in direct care have often been neglected, particularly within dementia care provision. The Care Certificate, which was fully launched in England in April 2015, has aimed to redress this neglect by providing a consistent and transferable approach to the training of the front line health and social care workforce. This article describes the early stages of an 18-month evaluation of the Care Certificate and its implementation funded by the Department of Health Policy Research Programme.
Publisher: National Institute for Health and Care Research
Date: 09-2020
DOI: 10.3310/HTA24450
Abstract: Hip and knee replacements are regularly carried out for patients who work. There is little evidence about these patients’ needs and the factors influencing their return to work. There is a paucity of guidance to help patients return to work after surgery and a need for structured occupational advice to enable them to return to work safely and effectively. To develop an occupational advice intervention to support early recovery to usual activities including work that is tailored to the requirements of patients undergoing hip or knee replacements. To test the acceptability, practicality and feasibility of this intervention within current care frameworks. An intervention mapping approach was used to develop the intervention. The research methods employed were rapid evidence synthesis, qualitative interviews with patients and stakeholders, a prospective cohort study, a survey of clinical practice and a modified Delphi consensus process. The developed intervention was implemented and assessed during the final feasibility stage of the intervention mapping process. Orthopaedic departments in NHS secondary care. Patients who were in work and intending to return to work following primary elective hip or knee replacement surgery, health-care professionals and employers. Occupational advice intervention. Development of an occupational advice intervention, fidelity of the developed intervention when delivered in a clinical setting, patient and clinician perspectives of the intervention and preliminary assessments of intervention effectiveness and cost. A cohort study (154 patients), 110 stakeholder interviews, a survey of practice (152 respondents) and evidence synthesis provided the necessary information to develop the intervention. The intervention included information resources, a personalised return-to-work plan and co-ordination from the health-care team to support the delivery of 13 patient and 20 staff performance objectives. To support delivery, a range of tools (e.g. occupational checklists, patient workbooks and employer information), roles (e.g. return-to-work co-ordinator) and training resources were created. Feasibility was assessed for 21 of the 26 patients recruited from three NHS trusts. Adherence to the defined performance objectives was 75% for patient performance objectives and 74% for staff performance objectives. The intervention was generally well received, although the short time frame available for implementation and concurrent research evaluation led to some confusion among patients and those delivering the intervention regarding its purpose and the roles and responsibilities of key staff. Implementation and uptake of the intervention was not standardised and was limited by the study time frame. Evaluation of the intervention involved a small number of patients, which limited the ability to assess it. The developed occupational advice intervention supports best practice. Evaluation demonstrated good rates of adherence against defined performance objectives. However, a number of operational and implementation issues require further attention. The intervention warrants a randomised controlled trial to assess its clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to improve rates and timing of sustained return to work after surgery. This research should include the development of a robust implementation strategy to ensure that adoption is sustained. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN27426982 and PROSPERO CRD42016045235. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment Vol. 24, No. 45. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Publisher: Emerald
Date: 12-12-2020
DOI: 10.1108/JMHTEP-12-2019-0064
Abstract: There has been little research into the use and efficacy of Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) across UK workplaces. This paper aims to investigate the implementation of MHFA across six UK organisations, identifying key barriers and facilitators. Twenty-seven workplace representatives were recruited from six organisations through purposive s ling and took part in semi-structured interviews exploring their experiences of workplace MHFA. The data underwent thematic analysis, identifying key themes around implementation. Implementation varied across organisations, including different reasons for initial interest in the programme, and variable ways that MHFA-trained employees operated post-training. Key barriers to successful implementation included negative attitudes around mental health, the perception that MHFA roles were onerous, and employees’ reluctance to engage in the MHFA programme. Successful implementation was perceived to be based on in idual qualities of MHFA instructors and good practice demonstrated by trained in iduals in the workplace. The role of the inner organisational setting and employee characteristics were further highlighted as barriers and facilitators to effective implementation. MHFA is a complex intervention, presenting in different ways when implemented into complex workplace settings. As such, traditional evaluation methods may not be appropriate for gaining insights into its effectiveness. Future evaluations of workplace MHFA must consider the complexity of implementing and operationalising this intervention in the workplace. This study is the first to highlight the factors affecting successful implementation of MHFA across a range of UK workplaces.
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Louise Thomson.