What do patients want and get from a primary care epilepsy specialist nurse service?

Patient satisfaction with information provided by epilepsy specialist nurses: Results of an online survey

The aim of this study was to investigate the perspective of Norwegian patients with epilepsy regarding the information that they have received about epilepsy-related issues and to determine whether there was a difference in information received between those who had been followed up by an epilepsy specialist nurse (ESN) and those who had not. Further, were there differences regarding satisfaction with the information between the two groups? We conducted an online survey in close collaboration with the Norwegian Epilepsy Association. A total of 1859 respondents (1182 patients with epilepsy and 677 carers for patients with epilepsy) completed a web-based questionnaire. They were asked about epilepsy-related issues on which they had received information, the extent to which they were satisfied with this information, and whether they were being followed up by an ESN or not. Significantly more patients followed up by an ESN had received information about the epilepsy diagnosis, antiseizure drugs (ASDs), routine use of ASD, and risk of seizure-related injuries as compared to those not followed up by an ESN. In addition, patients followed by an ESN were more likely to be satisfied with the information they received. Just above or under half of the respondents had received or were satisfied with information about depression, anxiety, premature death, and sexual wellbeing. Our results indicate that follow-up by ESNs results in improvements in the information provided to patients with epilepsy; ESNs should be an integral part of comprehensive epilepsy service.

Factors influencing the implementation of Epilepsy Specialist Nurse role: Using the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research

BACKGROUND

Research to support the added value of including Epilepsy Specialist Nurses as members of the multidisciplinary team is developing, yet little information exists on factors influencing the translation of these roles into practice.

AIM

To describe the enabling and inhibiting factors to the implementation of the Epilepsy Specialist Nurse role in the Republic of Ireland.

METHODS

A qualitative design involving semi-structure interviews, observation and analysis of documents, such as portfolios was used. The sample included 12 Epilepsy Specialist Nurses, 24 multidisciplinary team members, and 35 individuals with epilepsy and family members. Data were analysed using the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research. Reporting rigour is demonstrated using the COREQ checklist (See Appendix S1).

RESULTS

While there was overwhelming support for the role, barriers and enablers were identified across all domains of the Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research. Enablers included national policies and guidelines, leadership from senior nursing and medical colleagues, climate of learning and mentorship, networking opportunities, infrastructural supports and competence of Epilepsy Specialist Nurses. Barriers included the limited consideration of service expansion and the increasingly complex nature of clinical cases on workload capacity. Deficits in infrastructural supports, challenges in relation to role preparation, role implementation and role responsibility, including concerns around lone practitioner models and concerns that the role was a cost-saving measure, also emerged as potential barriers to future sustainability.

CONCLUSION

The Consolidation Framework for Implementation Research offers researchers a pragmatic typology for analysing interrelationships between enabling and inhibiting factors that impact implementation of advanced practice roles, across different evidence sources, disciplines and boundaries.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

In order to secure role sustainability, managers need to address the rate of service expansion, models of role development, deficits in supports and perceived motivations for role development on the quality, acceptability and sustainability of services provided.

Training nurses in a competency framework to support adults with epilepsy and intellectual disability: the EpAID cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

People with an intellectual (learning) disability (ID) and epilepsy have an increased seizure frequency, higher frequencies of multiple antiepileptic drug (AED) use and side effects, higher treatment costs, higher mortality rates and more behavioural problems than the rest of the population with epilepsy. The introduction of nurse-led care may lead to improvements in outcome for those with an ID and epilepsy; however, this has not been tested in a definitive clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether or not ID nurses, using a competency framework developed to optimise nurse management of epilepsy in people with an ID, can cost-effectively improve clinical and quality-of-life outcomes in the management of epilepsy compared with treatment as usual.

DESIGN

Cluster-randomised two-arm trial.

SETTING

Community-based secondary care delivered by members of community ID teams.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were adults aged 18-65 years with an ID and epilepsy under the care of a community ID team and had had at least one seizure in the 6 months before the trial.

INTERVENTIONS

The experimental intervention was the Learning Disability Epilepsy Specialist Nurse Competency Framework. This provides guidelines describing a structure and goals to support the delivery of epilepsy care and management by ID-trained nurses.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the seizure severity scale from the Epilepsy and Learning Disabilities Quality of Life questionnaire. Measures of mood, behaviour, AED side effects and carer strain were also collected. A cost-utility analysis was undertaken along with a qualitative examination of carers' views of participants' epilepsy management.

RESULTS

In total, 312 individuals were recruited into the study from 17 research clusters. Using an intention-to-treat analysis controlling for baseline individual-level and cluster-level variables there was no significant difference in seizure severity score between the two arms. Altogether, 238 complete cases were included in the non-imputed primary analysis. Analyses of the secondary outcomes revealed no significant differences between arms. A planned subgroup analysis identified a significant interaction between treatment arm and level of ID. There was a suggestion in those with mild to moderate ID that the competency framework may be associated with a small reduction in concerns over seizure severity (standard error 2.005, 95% confidence interval -0.554 to 7.307; p = 0.092). However, neither subgroup showed a significant intervention effect individually. Family members' perceptions of nurses' management depended on the professional status of the nurses, regardless of trial arm. Economic analysis suggested that the competency framework intervention was likely to be cost-effective, primarily because of a reduction in the costs of supporting participants compared with treatment as usual.

LIMITATIONS

The intervention could not be delivered blinded. Treatment as usual varied widely between the research sites.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, for adults with an ID and epilepsy, the framework conferred no clinical benefit compared with usual treatment. The economic analysis suggested that there may be a role for the framework in enhancing the cost-effectiveness of support for people with epilepsy and an ID. Future research could explore the specific value of the competency framework for those with a mild to moderate ID and the potential for greater long-term benefits arising from the continuing professional development element of the framework.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN96895428.

FUNDING

This trial was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Rising to the challenge: Epilepsy specialist nurses as leaders of service improvements and change (SENsE study)

PURPOSE

To report the leadership role and change activities of epilepsy specialist nurses (ESNs) in Ireland; findings from the SENsE study.

METHOD

A mixed methods study design was used, involving 12 epilepsy specialist nurses working in five units in Ireland, 24multidisciplinary team members working with them, and 35 people with epilepsy and their family members. Data were collected using individual and focus group interviews, observation and documentary analysis.

RESULTS

Five key areas in which ESNs demonstrated leading on the change agenda were identified. These included: Initiating new clinical practice developments; Building capability within the multidisciplinary team; Developing education programmes and resources for people with epilepsy, family and the public; Exerting influence through membership of committees and lobbying; and Advancing the ESN role.

CONCLUSION

Though the epilepsy specialist nurse role was first established in the UK in 1988, much of the literature that discusses or describes the ESN role is founded on anecdotal evidence, or focusses on their clinical expertise. Findings from this study provide empirical evidence that the ESNs were involved as key players in leading changes within the services, in the education of others, and the continuous advancement of epilepsy care.

Patients with epilepsy care experiences: Comparison between services with and without an epilepsy specialist nurse

The aim of this study was to determine whether there were differences in experiences of care, satisfaction with care and quality of life between those who were in receipt of care from a service with an epilepsy specialist nurse (ESN) and those who were receiving care from a service that did not include an ESN. A comparative design was used, which involved the completion of a confidential, self-completed survey. The survey was administered to a nonprobability convenience sample of patients with epilepsy who were attending services with an ESN (n = 244) and services where the treatment team did not include an ESN (n = 261) from each of the four health areas in Ireland. This study found that, in comparison to people with epilepsy (PWE) who attended a service without an ESN, PWE who attended a service with an ESN reported receiving greater amount of information, were more involved in their care, perceived care to be better coordinated, and had greater confidence in the information provided and greater comfort in discussing issues with an ESN. They also reported higher rates of satisfaction with the emotional and practical support offered. Thus, it may be concluded that models of care involving the input of ESNs enhance the quality of epilepsy care and care processes. The findings also emphasize the need to have an ESN as part of the multidisciplinary team.

Systematic review of unmet healthcare needs in patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Patients with epilepsy (PWE) are more likely to have unmet healthcare needs than the general population. This systematic review assessed the reasons for unmet needs in PWE.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were searched using keywords relating to unmet healthcare needs, treatment barriers, and access to care. The search included all countries, adult and pediatric populations, survey and qualitative studies, but excluded non-English articles and articles published before 2001. Reasons for unmet needs were extracted.

RESULTS

Nineteen survey and 22 qualitative studies were included. Three survey and five qualitative studies excluded patients with comorbidities. There were twice as many studies on unmet mental healthcare needs than unmet physical care needs in PWE. Poor availability of health services, accessibility issues, and lack of health information contributed to unmet needs in both Western and developing countries. Lack of health services, long wait lists, uncoordinated care, and difficulty getting needed health information were prevalent in the United States (US) as well as countries with a universal healthcare system. However, unmet needs due to costs of care were reported more commonly in studies from the US.

SIGNIFICANCE

This systematic review identified reasons for unmet needs in PWE across different countries, which will inform specific interventions required to address these unmet needs. Unmet needs may have been underestimated due to exclusion of PWE with comorbidities in some studies. Additional studies are needed to understand the contribution of comorbidities on unmet needs and their interaction with caregiver and family factors.

Improving outcomes in adults with epilepsy and intellectual disability (EpAID) using a nurse-led intervention: study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Background

In adults with intellectual disability (ID) and epilepsy there are suggestions that improvements in management may follow introduction of epilepsy nurse-led care. However, this has not been tested in a definitive clinical trial and results cannot be generalised from general population studies as epilepsy tends to be more severe and to involve additional clinical comorbidities in adults with ID. This trial investigates whether nurses with expertise in epilepsy and ID, working proactively to a clinically defined role, can improve clinical and quality of life outcomes in the management of epilepsy within this population, compared to treatment as usual. The trial also aims to establish whether any perceived benefits represent good value for money.

Methods/design

The EpAID clinical trial is a two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial of nurse-led epilepsy management versus treatment as usual. This trial aims to obtain follow-up data from 320 participants with ID and drug-resistant epilepsy. Participants are randomly assigned either to a ‘treatment as usual’ control or a ‘defined epilepsy nurse role’ active arm, according to the cluster site at which they are treated. The active intervention utilises the recently developed Learning Disability Epilepsy Specialist Nurse Competency Framework for adults with ID. Participants undergo 4 weeks of baseline data collection, followed by a minimum of 20 weeks intervention (novel treatment or treatment as usual), followed by 4 weeks of follow-up data collection. The primary outcome is seizure severity, including associated injuries and the level of distress manifest by the patient in the preceding 4 weeks. Secondary outcomes include cost-utility analysis, carer strain, seizure frequency and side effects. Descriptive measures include demographic and clinical descriptors of participants and clinical services in which they receive their epilepsy management. Qualitative study of clinical interactions and semi-structured interviews with clinicians and participants’ carers are also undertaken.

Discussion

The EpAID clinical trial is the first cluster randomised controlled trial to test possible benefits of a nurse-led intervention in adults with epilepsy and ID. This research will have important implications for ID and epilepsy services. The challenges of undertaking such a trial in this population, and the approaches to meeting these are discussed.

Trial registration

International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: ISRCTN96895428 version 1.1. Registered on 26 March 2013.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1429-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

'If you're gonna die, you're gonna die': Young adults' perceptions of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To explore the views and experiences of young adults with epilepsy on the risks associated with, and information giving in relation to sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP).

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 27 young adults (aged 18-29 years) with epilepsy.

RESULTS

Participants reported everyday experiences of seeking to control the risk of seizure occurrence or injury from seizures. In contrast, SUDEP was reported in more fatalistic terms as a risk that was considered to be largely unpreventable. Participants stated that information on SUDEP should be given to those with epilepsy, in a consultation, at or soon after the diagnosis, though clinical judgement on patients' readiness was considered important in timing decisions. Many had a limited, sometimes incorrect understanding of SUDEP, yet were satisfied with the information they had received. Very few engaged in independent information seeking on SUDEP, and many deliberately avoided searching for further information.

DISCUSSION

Our findings suggest that SUDEP was bracketed off from other aspects of participants' epilepsy, in terms of the meanings attributed to it, perceptions of risk status and ways of coping. SUDEP is a case through which to consider how people give meaning to information about risk of sudden death related to chronic conditions.

Lost opportunities to improve health literacy: observations in a chronic illness clinic providing care for patients with epilepsy in Cape Town South Africa

Low health literacy (LHL) is reported globally as a barrier to achieving quality of life of patients with epilepsy. In South Africa, despite reports that epilepsy is poorly managed and understood, little attention has been paid to promote health literacy of patients suffering from the condition and those providing their care. We used observation to gain a picture of interactions between patients with epilepsy and health care providers in a chronic illness clinic serving the marginalized population groups in Cape Town. The observation data were compiled into descriptive field notes which were content analyzed. Our findings revealed some patient and health care provider health literacy-related factors affecting the understanding of epilepsy and treatment outcomes. There were also some lost opportunities where health literacy could have been promoted. However, these results cannot be generalized, but they highlight a true picture of contextual health system factors that need to be addressed.

What is the impact of advanced primary care nursing roles on patients, nurses and their colleagues? A literature review

OBJECTIVES

To review and draw together the existing research evidence to assess the impact of advanced primary care nursing roles, particularly first contact nursing roles, for patients, nurses themselves and their colleagues in order to highlight salient issues for policy, practice and research.

BACKGROUND

Internationally, nurses' roles continue to expand in response to doctor shortages and policy drives to provide effective and efficient health services. A body of research exists from which to evaluate the impact of advanced nursing roles on various dimensions of healthcare delivery and organisation.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

Medline, CINAHL, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, British Nursing Index, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, National Research Register, and PsycINFO databases were searched, including relevant websites. Studies were included if published in English and relevant to the primary/community care setting. Of a total of 211 papers identified, 88 were of relevance and included in the review.

RESULTS

Nurses working in many advanced primary care roles such as acute/minor illness, minor injury and long-term conditions provide safe and effective care, and patient satisfaction is generally high. Many factors influence patient satisfaction with, and access to, such services but are little understood. Evidence on cost-effectiveness, efficiency and impact on other health care professionals is inconclusive though research suggests the introduction of extended roles can create uncertainty and intra-/inter-professional tensions.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is of variable quality, often ignoring potentially important effect mediators such as the experience and educational level of advanced nurses, the effect of service 'maturation', organisational characteristics and differing patient preferences. The complex range of factors that influence patient satisfaction, access and outcomes of care need further investigation. Recent UK developments in nurse prescribing and the introduction of a national post-registration competency framework may improve working relations and patient understanding and experience of advanced nursing roles in primary care.

Stigma and safe havens: a medical sociological perspective on African-American female epilepsy patients

PURPOSE

Very little is known about the attitudes and behaviors of minorities with epilepsy. This pilot study explored access to health care, help-seeking behaviors, and adherence to treatment among African-American females with epilepsy.

METHODS

Ethnographic interviews were conducted with 10 African-American female adults.

RESULTS

Findings indicate four major obstacles to care: limited financial resources, lack of knowledge about epilepsy among African-Americans, poor patient-provider communication, and lack of social support. Social support impacted individuals seeking surgery, and also affected purchasing medication, adherence to medical treatment, and needed transportation. Lack of knowledge and misinformation about epilepsy in the African-American community and poor communication with physicians contribute to the social stigma felt by these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The behavioral epidemiology of epilepsy among African-Americans is lacking. This disease exacerbates health disparities for this population. These findings point to a need for a safe haven for these individuals.

The role of the clinical nurse specialist in epilepsy

PURPOSE

To review and describe the key roles of the UK clinical nurse specialist in epilepsy (CNSE), and to identify the specialist nurses' contribution to care through an exploration of CNSE's perceptions of their roles.

METHOD

Using the Delphi technique [Applied Project Design and Analysis, 3rd ed., Churchill Livingstone, London, 2000, p. 243] a national survey of all known UK CNSEs was completed. One hundred and thirty questionnaires identifying nine key hypotheses central to the role of the CNSE were distributed and 76 valid questionnaires returned.

RESULTS

The response rate was 63% and was geographically representative of the UK population of CNSEs. CNSEs were employed in a range of hospital and community settings with differing patient groups. Seventy-two percent of respondents held higher academic nursing qualifications but only 36% had previous epilepsy or neurology experience. Thirty percent of respondents had been employed in the role of CNSE for more than 5 years and 84% were employed as a G or H grade nurse. Only 39% of CNSEs held nurse-led clinics and of those 32% were responsible for all decisions made during their clinic. Furthermore, 40% of CNSEs saw new patients who had not previously been reviewed by one of the medical team. The level of responsibility for drug management was mainly at a monitoring and advisory level but a small number of CNSEs held much greater responsibility. The responses to the nine hypotheses were compared using cross tabulations.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the study and the review of the CNSE in the UK revealed that the key roles of the CNSE were difficult to define. Yet, the respondents identified that there were common core features central to their contribution to care as specialist nurses.