A seminar entitled Unmet psychosocial support needs in young adults caring for a parent with chronic illness presented by Dr Nick Hulbert-Williams will be held on Thursday the 12th of December at 4pm in Seminar Room 2, Medical and Biological Sciences Building, University of St Andrews. A wine reception will follow this seminar. For further information please visit the School of Medicine events webpage
SDHI is delighted to announce the following seminar ‘Community participation: Accessibility of public transportation for people with mobility impairments’ which will be led by Lia Poeder, Visiting Occupational Therapy Student, Washington University. This seminar will be held in Room 2F13, Dalhousie Building, University of Dundee at 3.00pm on Tuesday 17th December. For further information please see seminar flyer
SDHI is delighted to announce Thilo has been appointed Professor. Thilo has been co-director of SDHI since January 2011. His research focuses on the health, well-being and social participation of people with disabilities. He has received government and charity funding in the United States and the UK (US: Department of Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; UK: Chief Scientist Office, ESRC, EPSRC, SFC, KTP). Thilo is also co-founder of FRED – Family-Focused Research Education & Development
Thilo’s research focuses on three strands: Access and utilisation of health care services for people with disabilities; inclusive research design, methodology and routine data collection, and health promotion for people with disabilities. In each of these area, he has developed empirical work and published widely.
Since moving to Dundee, he has maintained and developed new national and international collaborations with colleagues from various social science and health-related disciplines to facilitate knowledge sharing and research at the intersection of disability and health.
If you missed today’s webinar on the ‘Spatial Dimensions of Repeat Prescribing Safety in UK General Practice: An Ethnographic Study‘ here is another opportunity to listen and view the presentation by Dr Suzanne Grant, Social Anthropologist and Lecturer in Population Health Science at the University of Dundee. To view the recording, click here. Please share the presentation link with your colleagues. Send comments and queries directly to the presenter at s.m.grant@ dundee.ac.uk or to the SDHI team at sdhi@ dundee.ac.uk
The Centre for Environmental Change and Human Resilience (CECHR) team host a seminar with Professor Phil Hanlon, Public Health at the University of Glasgow on his ‘Afternow‘ project on Thursday the 13th of February 2014 at 4pm in the Dalhousie Building (3G02 LT1). More information can be found on the website http://www.afternow.co.uk
Please register at firstname.lastname@example.org for the event
The Scottish Graduate School of Social Sciences has now released details for upcoming PhD studentships. if you wish to apply for an ESRC studentship through the Scottish Graduate School of Social Science please read the information below. It is essential that prospective students apply and NOT their potential academic supervisors following the process laid out in detail on the website. There are a number of Award Competitions annually through which studentships can be secured. They are:
The Pathway Competition
The Advanced Quantitative Methods (AQM) Competition
The Open Competition
The Collaborative Competition
The first three competitions are administered through one single process. ESRC studentships in the Pathway Competition are assigned to our 24 pathways and the pathways award them to applicants on the basis of academic merit. If an applicant is proposing using or developing advanced quantitative methods through their research then they may be considered in the AQM Competition in parallel to being considered in the Pathway Competition.
Applicants who are unsuccessful in securing a studentship through the Pathway Competition and/or the AQM Competition are then automatically considered within the Open Competition. ESRC studentships in the Open Competition are awarded by the Scottish Graduate School, again on the basis of academic merit, through a cross-pathway competition.
Check here for details and deadlines linked to the application process.
The Collaborative Award Competition is managed separately. Up to 9 PhD studentships in social science subjects will be co-funded. The awards will likely commence in October 2014.
Proposals from academics across the SGS-DTC accredited pathways are welcome.
‘Collaborative’ is defined broadly and covers collaboration with private sector companies, public sector bodies or voluntary organisations. The SGS-DTC Board has allocated up to 9 awards to the collaborative studentship competition for 2014.
Time Frame for Collaborative studentships
Deadline for applications: Mon 10 February 2014
Decisions communicated to applicants: Mon 10 March 2014
The application form is available for download here.
Interested parties should download and read the guidance notes.
SDHI Team Member, Deborah Baldie reports on findings from this study. For the full article, please see citation at the end as well as the links provided to the full publication.
A UK wide four country case study of patient choice of secondary care provider has recently been published in the Journal of Health Services Research. Researchers from SDHI worked with research teams across the UK to compare patients’ choices when referred to secondary care providers by their general practitioner (GP) to examine the changes that have resulted from the explicitly pro choice policy in England.
Interviews were conducted with providers of two high-volume surgical specialties, Ear, Nose and Throat and Orthopaedics, purchasers of these services and those responsible for referring to acute services.
Choice of provider
In England, patients had a choice of any provider, but in practice patients were only provided with a limited list of local providers. There was no national system for facilitating choice in the three other countries and therefore patients tended to be referred to the local provider and may have a choice of hospital sites managed by that provider. Referral further afield in all countries was very rare and only occurred in exceptional cases.
Choice of Specialist
Choice of specialists was reported to be available at the discretion of providers in England, Scotland and Wales but not Northern Ireland. The reason for restricting choice of specialist in all cases was reported to be the need to reduce or control waiting times. Most GPs in all cases were asked to refer to generic teams rather than individual consultants.
Choice of date and time of appointment
Choice of date and time of appointment was available to patients when they were referred to a provider in all cases through two key systems – partial and full booking. Data collected indicates that rather than enhance choice these systems operated primarily to manage waiting times.
Management of choice along the referral pathway
A range of triage systems to direct patients to appropriate secondary care services operated in orthopaedic services. They appeared to limit choice for patients, particularly in triage systems that had no access to the electronic booking system. GPs did however GPs often bypass the triage service if they felt this was clinically indicated.
Referrer’s communication of choices to patients
Interviewees’ understanding of the availability of choices was often confused and differed within sites. A common area of confusion concerned referral pathways and if triage systems existed and were mandatory or optional. Discussion of choice with patients tended to be very limited with GPs in England and most tended to limit choice to 5 local providers. In the three other countries discussion of choice was largely not commenced unless initiated by the patient. GPs indicated that lack of discussion of choice with patients was largely due to patients being confused by and not interested in choice.
While the explicit patient choice policy in England would suggest greater possibilities for choice compared with Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, in practice differences were more nuanced. All countries had some degree of choice of provider, limited choice of specialist but restricted choice of date and time of appointment or admission. Choices were far more limited in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The limited range of choices made available in these countries were seen to be affected by geography and population spread however even in urban areas in England, GPs reported patients preferring stay close to home and this acted as a further limiting factor.
Choice of time and date of appointment were was viewed as a very useful tool for managing capacity. Confusion over referral pathways and choice of specialist was there at times amongst GPs in all four countries. Patient experience of choice was therefore dependant to some extent on GPs’ knowledge. GPs reported having similar conversations with patients about choice in all four countries and tended to be led by what they thought best suited the needs of individual patients and patients’ appetite for choice which was perceived by GPs in all cases to be small.
Lack of difference between countries may because free choice of any provider in England was still bedding down at the time of this study. Other factors more closely related to GPs perceptions and knowledge of choices available indicated however that overall, a longer term culture shift on the part of GPs is needed in all four countries if patients are to be made fully aware of choices available to them.
Sanderson M , Allen P, Peckham S, Hughes D, Brown M, Kelly G, Baldie D, Mays N , Linyard A, Duguid A. Divergence of NHS choice policy in the UK: what difference has patient choice policy in England made?J Health Serv Res Policy 2013 18: 202 -208