The CORE study protocol: A stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to test a co-design technique to optimise psychosocial recovery outcomes for people affected by mental illness in the community mental health setting

BMJ Open

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2015, Pages

  Palmer, Victoria J ^a   Chondros, Patty ^a   Piper, Donella ^b   Callander, Rosemary ^c   Weavell, Wayne ^d   Godbee, Kali ^a   Potiriadis, Maria ^a   Richard, Lauralie ^a   Densley, Konstancja ^a   Herrman, Helen ^e   Furler, John ^a   Pierce, David ^f   Schuster, Tibor ^g   Iedema, Rick ^h   Gunn, Jane ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND   (Australia)

^c Carer Research and Evaluation Unit   (Australia)

^d Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council ^*  (Australia)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^g MURDOCH CHILDREN'S RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Australia)

^h UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CAREGIVER; COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DISEASE SEVERITY; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; MEDICAL STAFF; MENTAL DISEASE; MENTAL HEALTH; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL BEING; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SELF EVALUATION; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; COMMUNITY CARE; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; MENTAL DISORDERS; METHODOLOGY; NEW ZEALAND; PSYCHIATRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

ADULT; AUSTRALIA; CAREGIVERS; COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MENTAL DISORDERS; MENTAL HEALTH; MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; NEW ZEALAND; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PSYCHIATRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESEARCH DESIGN; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84926432159     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20446055     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006688     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Carman K, Dardess P, Maurer M, et al. Patient and family engagement: a framework for understanding the elements and developing interventions and policies. Health Aff 2013;32:223-31.
2. Coulter A, Locock L, Ziebland S, et al. Collecting data on patient experience is not enough: they must be used to improve care. BMJ 2014;348:g2225.
3. Bate P, Robert G. Bringing user experience to healthcare improvement: the concepts, methods and practices of experience-based design. Oxford: Radcliffe, 2007:224.
4. Robert G. Participatory action research: using experience-based co-design to improve the quality of healthcare services. In: Ziebland S, Coulter A, Calabrese JD, Locock L. eds. Understanding and using health experiences: improving patient care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
5. Bate P, Robert G. Experience-based design: from redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:307-10.
6. Bate P, Robert G. Toward more user-centric OD: lessons from the field of experience-based design and a case study. J Appl Behav Sci 2007;43:41-66.
7. Boyd H, McKernon S, Mullin B, et al. Improving healthcare through the use of co-design. J N Z Med Assoc 2012;125:76-87.
8. Browne G, Hemsley M. Consumer participation in mental health in Australia: what progress is being made? Australas Psychiatry 2008;16:446-9.
9. Rosenberg S, Rosen A. It 's raining mental health commissions: prospects and pitfalls in driving mental health reform. Australas Psychiatry 2012;20:85-90.
10. Bowen S, McSeveny K, Lockley E, et al. How was it for you? Experiences of participatory design in the UK health service. CoDesign 2013;9:230-46.
11. Tan L, Szebeko D. Co-designing for dementia: the Alzheimer 100 project. Australasi Med J 2009;1:185-98.
12. Tsianakas V, Maben J, Wiseman T, et al. Using patients' experiences to identify priorities for quality improvement in breast cancer care: patient narratives, surveys or both? BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12:271-81.
13. Tsianakas V, Robert G, Maben J, et al. Implementing patient-centred cancer care: using experience-based co-design to improve patient experience in breast and lung cancer services. Support Care Cancer 2012;20:2639-47.
14. Wiseman T, Tsianakas V, Maben J, et al. Improving breast and lung cancer services in hospital using experience based co-design (EBCD). BMJ Support Palliat Care 2011;1:A9-A10.
15. Locock L, Robert G, Boaz A, et al. Testing accelerated experience-based co-design: a qualitative study of using a national archive of patient experience narrative interviews to promote rapid patient-centred service improvement. Health Serv Deliv Res 2014;2:1-150.
16. Locock L, Robert G, Boaz A, et al. Using a national archive of patient experience narratives to promote local patient-centered quality improvement: an ethnographic process evaluation of 'accelerated' experience-based co-design. J Health Serv Res Policy 2014;19:200-7.
17. Tollyfield R. Facilitating an accelerated experience-based co-design project. Br J Nurs 2014;23:134-9.
18. Piper D, Iedema R, Gray J, et al. Utilizing experience-based co-design to improve the experience of patients accessing emergency departments in New South Wales public hospitals: an evaluation study. Health Serv Manage Res 2012;25:162-72.
19. Iedema R, Merrick E, Piper D, et al. Codesigning as a discursive practice in emergency health services: the architecture of deliberation. J Appl Behav Sci 2010;46:73-91.
20. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Patient-centred care: improving quality and safety through partnerships with patients and consumers/Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Darlinghurst, NSW: Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, 2011.
21. Garrubba M, Melder A. Consumer co-design in the emergency department: a systematic review Melbourne Australia. Centre for Clinical Effectiveness Monash Innovation and Quality Monash Health, 2013.
22. The King's Fund. Experience Based Co-Design Toolkit. United Kingdom: The King's Fund, 2013.
23. Spaniol L, Koehler M, Hutchinson D. The recovery workbook: practical coping and empowerment strategies for people with psychiatric disabilities. Revised ed 2009.
24. Barbic S, Krupa T, Armstrong I. A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a modified recovery workbook Program: preliminary findings. Psychiatr Serv 2009;60:491-7.
25. Cook J, Copeland M, Floyd C, et al. A randomized controlled trial of effects of wellness recovery action planning on depression, anxiety, and recovery. Psychiatr Serv 2012;63:541-7.
26. Fukui S, Starnino V, Susana M, et al. Effect of Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) participation on psychiatric symptoms, sense of hope, and recovery. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2011;34:214-22.
27. Dunn E, Rogers S, Dori S, et al. Results of an innovative university-based recovery education program for adults with psychiatric disabilities. Adm Policy Ment Health 2008;35:357-69.
28. Alvarez-Jimenez M, Bendall S, Lederman R, et al. On the HORYZON: moderated online social therapy for long-term recovery in first episode psychosis. Schizophr Res 2013;143:143-9.
29. Lloyd-Evans B, Mayo-Wilson E, Harrison B, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of peer support for people with severe mental illness. BMC Psychiatry 2014;14:39.
30. Chinman M, George P, Dougherty R, et al. Peer support services for individuals with serious mental illnesses: assessing the evidence. Psychiatr Serv 2014;65:429-41.
31. Simpson EL, House AO. Involving users in the delivery and evaluation of mental health services: systematic review. BMJ 2002;325:1265.
32. Penn DL, Uzenoff SR, Perkins D, et al. A pilot investigation of the Graduated Recovery Intervention Program (GRIP) for first episode psychosis. Schizophr Res 2011;125:247-56.
33. DoH. Closing the gap: priorities for essential change in mental health. London: Crown, 2014.
34. Centre for Mental Health, Department of Health, Mind, NHS Confederation Mental Health Network, Rethink Mental Illness, Turning Point. No Health Without Mental Health: implementation framework. London: Mental Health Strategy Branch, 2012.
35. MHCC. Changing directions, changing lives: the mental health strategy for Canada. Calgary, Canada: Mental Health Commission of Canada, 2012.
36. New Freedom Commission on Health. Achieving the promise: transforming mental health care in America. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services, 2003.
37. COAG. The roadmap for National Mental Health Reform 2012-2022. Canberra: Council of Australian Governments, 2012.
38. DoHA. A national framework for recovery-oriented mental health services: policy and theory. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing, 2013.
39. th National Mental Health Plan - an agenda for collaborative government action in mental health 2009-2014. Canberra: Australian Government, 2009.
40. Mental Health Consumer Outcomes Task Force. Mental health statement of rights and responsibilities. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Community Services and Health, 2012.
41. Australian Government. Implementation guidelines for non-government community services. Commonwealth of Australia, 2010.
42. Australian Government. Implementation guidelines for public mental health services and private hospitals. Commonwealth of Australia, 2010.
43. New Zealand Ministry of Health. Rising to the challenge. The Mental Health and Addiction Service Development Plan 2012-2017. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Health, 2012.
44. Davidson L, Roe D. Recovery from versus recovery in serious mental illness: one strategy for lessening confusion plaguing recovery. J Ment Health 2007;16:459-70.
45. Andresen R, Caputi P, Oades L. Do clinical outcome measures assess consumer-defined recovery? Psychiatry Res 2010;177:309-17.
46. Anthony WA. Recovery from mental illness: the guiding vision of the mental health system in the 1990s. Psychosoc Rehabil 1993;16:11-23.
47. Drake R. Recovery and severe mental illness: description and analysis. Can J Psychiatry 2014;59:236-42.
48. Kidd S, Kenny A, McKinstry C. From experience to action in recovery-oriented mental health practice: a first person inquiry. Action Research, 2014.
49. Fairhurst K, Weavell W. Co-designing mental health services - providers, consumers and carers working together. Aust J Psychosoc Rehabil 2011;54:54-8.
50. Paton N, Callander R, Cavill M, et al. Collaborative quality improvement: consumers, carers and mental health service providers working together in service co-design. Australas Psychiatry 2013;21:78-9.
51. Callander R, Ning L, Crowley A, et al. Consumers and carers as partners in mental health research: reflections on the experience of two project teams in Victoria, Australia. Int J Ment Health Nurs 2011;20:263-73.
52. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials 2013. 2013-01-09 09:40:48.
53. Hemming K, Girling A, Haines T, et al. Protocol: Consort extension to stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. 2014.
54. Mdege ND, Man MS, Taylor CA, et al. Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:936-48.
55. Brown C, Hofer T, Johal A, et al. An epistemology of patient safety research: a framework for study design and interpretation. Part 2. Study design. Qual Saf Health Care 2008;17:163-9.
56. Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:54.
57. Feldman H, McKinlay S. Cohort versus cross-sectional design in large field trials: precision, sample size, and a unifying model. Stat Med 1994;13:61-78.
58. Vuchinich S, Flay B, Aber F, et al. Person mobility in the design and analysis of cluster-randomized cohort prevention trials. Preventative Sci 2012;13:300-13.
59. Hirano K, Imbens G, Ridder G, et al. Combining panel data sets with attrition and refreshment samples. Econometrica 2001;69:1645-59.
60. Clavier C, SénéChal Y, Vibert S, et al. A theory-based model of translation practices in public health participatory research. Sociol Health Illn 2012;34:791-805.
61. Palmer V, Gunn J, Herrman H, et al. Getting to the CORE of the links between engagement, experience and recovery outcomes. New Paradigm 2015:41-5.
62. DoH. Reforming community support services for people with a mental illness: reform framework for Psychiatric Disability Rehabilitation and Support Services. Victoria: Department of Health, 2013.
63. Furimsky I, Cheung AH, Dewa CS, et al. Strategies to enhance patient recruitment and retention in research involving patients with a first episode of mental illness. Contemp Clin Trials 2008;29:862-6.
64. Zullino D, Conus P, Borgeat F, et al. Readiness to participate in psychiatric research. Can J Psychiatry 2003;48:480-4.
65. Senturia YD, McNiff Mortimer K, Baker D, et al. Successful techniques for retention of study participants in an inner-city population. Control Clin Trials 1998;19:544-54.
66. Candilis PJ, Geppert CM, Fletcher KE, et al. Willingness of subjects with thought disorder to participate in research. Schizophr Bull 2006;32:159-65.
67. Schäfer I, Burns T, Fleischhacker WW, et al. Attitudes of patients with schizophrenia and depression to psychiatric research: a study in seven European countries. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2011;46:159-65.
68. Morse EV, Simon PM, Besch CL, et al. Issues of recruitment, retention, and compliance in community-based clinical trials with traditionally underserved populations. Appl Nurs Res 1995;8:8-14.
69. Poythress NG. Obtaining informed consent for research: a model for use with participants who are mentally ill. J Law Med Ethics 2002;30:367.
70. Goodrick D, Bhagwandas R. Evaluation of Mental Health Experience Co-Design. Melbourne, Victoria, 2011.
71. Corrigan PW, Salzer M, Ralph RO, et al. Examining the factor structure of the recovery assessment scale. Schizophr Bull 2004;30:1035-41.
72. McNaught M, Caputi P, Oades LG, et al. Testing the validity of the recovery assessment scale using an Australian sample. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2007;41:450-7.
73. Lusczakoski K, Olmos-Gallo PA, McKinney CJ, et al. Measuring recovery related outcomes: a psychometric investigation of the recovery markers inventory. Community Ment Health J 2014;50:896-902.
74. Drapalski AL, Medoff D, Unick GJ, et al. Assessing recovery of people with serious mental illness: development of a new scale. Psychiatr Serv 2012;63:48-53.
75. O'Connell M, Tondora J, Croog G, et al. From rhetoric to routine: assessing perceptions of recovery-oriented practices in a state mental health and addiction system. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2005;28:378-86.
76. Campbell-Orde T, Chamberlin J, Carpenter J, et al. Measuring the promise: a compendium of recovery measures, volume II. Cambridge: Human Services Research Institute, 2009.
77. da Rocha NS, Power MJ, Bushnell DM, et al. The EUROHIS-QOL 8-Item Index: comparative psychometric properties to its parent WHOQOL-BREF. Value Health 2012;15:449-57.
78. Schmidt S, Mühlan H, Power M. The EUROHIS-QOL 8-item index: psychometric results of a cross-cultural field study. Eur J Public Health 2006;16:420-8.
79. Crowe T, Deane F, Oades L, et al. Effectiveness of a collaborative recovery training program in Australia in promoting positive views about recovery. Psychiatr Serv 2006;57:1497-500.
80. Woertman W, de Hoop E, Moerbeek M, et al. Stepped wedge designs could reduce the required sample size in cluster randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:752-8.
81. Team RC. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2014.
82. Hussey MA, Hughes JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28:182-91.
83. Bower P, Brueton V, Gamble C, et al. Interventions to improve recruitment and retention in clinical trials: a survey and workshop to assess current practice and future priorities. Trials 2014;15:399.
84. Granirer D. Stand up for mental health. Vancouver, Canada: David Granirer, 2014. http://standupformentalhealth.com/ (accessed 18 Sept 2014).
85. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP, 2013.
86. Picker Institute. Friends and Family Test Resources. Oxford, UK: Picker Institute Europe, 2012. http://www.pickereurope.org/fftresources/ (accessed 15 Aug 2014).
87. Qualtrics. Qualtrics Software Version 2013 of the Qualtrics Research Suite. Provo, UT: Qualtrics, 2005.
88. Gaglio B, Shoup JA, Glasgow RE. The RE-AIM framework: a systematic review of use over time. Am J Public Health 2013;103:e38-46.
89. Grant A, Treweek S, Dreischulte T, et al. Process evaluations for cluster-randomised trials of complex interventions: a proposed framework for design and reporting. Trials 2013;14:15.
90. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 1999;89:1322-7.
91. Oakley A, Strange V, Bonell C, et al. Health services research: process evaluation in randomised controlled trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2006;332:413.
92. White I, Carpenter J, Horton N. Including all individuals is not enough: lessons for intention-to-treat analysis. Clin Trials 2012;9:396-407.
93. The DAMOCLES Study Group. A proposed charter for clinical trial 2005 data monitoring committees: helping them do their job well. Lancet 2005;365:711-22.