Research output per year
Research output per year
Abstract
Objectives To investigate experiences of implementing a new rapid sexual health testing, diagnosis and treatment service.
Design A theory-based qualitative evaluation with a focused ethnographic approach using non-participant observations and interviews with patient and clinic staff. Normalisation process theory was used to structure interview questions and thematic analysis.
Setting A sexual health centre in Bristol, UK.
Participants 26 patients and 21 staff involved in the rapid sexually transmitted infection (STI) service were interviewed. Purposive sampling was aimed for a range of views and experiences and sociodemographics and STI results for patients, job grades and roles for staff. 40 hours of observations were conducted.
Results Implementation of the new service required co-ordinated changes in practice across multiple staff teams. Patients also needed to make changes to how they accessed the service. Multiple small ‘pilots’ of process changes were necessary to find workable options. For example, the service was introduced in phases beginning with male patients. This responsive operating mode created challenges for delivering comprehensive training and communication in advance to all staff. However, staff worked together to adjust and improve the new service, and morale was buoyed through observing positive impacts on patient care. Patients valued faster results and avoiding unnecessary treatment. Patients reported that they were willing to drop-off self-samples and return for a follow-up appointment, enabling infection-specific treatment in accordance with test results, thus improving antimicrobial stewardship.
Conclusions The new service was acceptable to staff and patients. Implementation of service changes to improve access and delivery of care in the context of stretched resources can pose challenges for staff at all levels. Early evaluation of pilots of process changes played an important role in the success of the service by rapidly feeding back issues for adjustment. Visibility to staff of positive impacts on patient care is important in maintaining morale.
Design A theory-based qualitative evaluation with a focused ethnographic approach using non-participant observations and interviews with patient and clinic staff. Normalisation process theory was used to structure interview questions and thematic analysis.
Setting A sexual health centre in Bristol, UK.
Participants 26 patients and 21 staff involved in the rapid sexually transmitted infection (STI) service were interviewed. Purposive sampling was aimed for a range of views and experiences and sociodemographics and STI results for patients, job grades and roles for staff. 40 hours of observations were conducted.
Results Implementation of the new service required co-ordinated changes in practice across multiple staff teams. Patients also needed to make changes to how they accessed the service. Multiple small ‘pilots’ of process changes were necessary to find workable options. For example, the service was introduced in phases beginning with male patients. This responsive operating mode created challenges for delivering comprehensive training and communication in advance to all staff. However, staff worked together to adjust and improve the new service, and morale was buoyed through observing positive impacts on patient care. Patients valued faster results and avoiding unnecessary treatment. Patients reported that they were willing to drop-off self-samples and return for a follow-up appointment, enabling infection-specific treatment in accordance with test results, thus improving antimicrobial stewardship.
Conclusions The new service was acceptable to staff and patients. Implementation of service changes to improve access and delivery of care in the context of stretched resources can pose challenges for staff at all levels. Early evaluation of pilots of process changes played an important role in the success of the service by rapidly feeding back issues for adjustment. Visibility to staff of positive impacts on patient care is important in maintaining morale.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e050109 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | BMJ Open |
| Volume | 11 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 22 Oct 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Funding Funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) West at University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol in partnership with Public Health England (PHE). Award number P315. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or PHE.
Publisher Copyright:
© Authors 2021
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'What can be learnt from a qualitative evaluation of implementing a rapid sexual health testing, diagnosis and treatment service?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.-
Impact of rapid near-patient STI testing on service delivery outcomes in an integrated sexual health service in the United Kingdom: a controlled interrupted time series study
Walter, S. R., Jackson, J., Myring, G., Redaniel, M. T., Margelyte, R., Gardiner, R., Clarke, M., Crofts, M., McLeod, H. S. T., Hollingworth, W., Phillips, D., Muir, P., Steer, J., Turner, J., Horner, P. J. & de Vocht , F., 11 Jan 2023, In: BMJ Open. 13, 1, p. e064664Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review
Open AccessFile54 Downloads (Pure) -
Unity Sexual Health rapid testing, diagnostic and treatment service evaluation: study protocol
Walter, S. R., Macleod, J. A. A., Horner, P. J., Hollingworth, W., Redaniel, M. T., Jackson, J., Lorenc, A., Kesten, J., Brangan, E., Mohiuddin, S. G., Crofts, M., Muir, P., Steer, J., Turner, J., Phillips, D., Wheeler, H., Clarke, M., Hartman, C. & Holly, J., 17 Jan 2020, (Unpublished) 36 p. NHS National Institute for Health Research.Research output: Other contribution
File