20.08.2013 Views

DClinPsy Portfolio Volume 1 of 3 - University of Hertfordshire ...

DClinPsy Portfolio Volume 1 of 3 - University of Hertfordshire ...

DClinPsy Portfolio Volume 1 of 3 - University of Hertfordshire ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

However, the comments section involved some discussion by Psychology and ‘Other’ as<br />

to how <strong>of</strong>fering refreshments can be a way <strong>of</strong> conveying respect to the service user and<br />

therefore can be important. The ‘Other’ group rated the question regarding having a<br />

named person responsible for the running <strong>of</strong> the ward round as least important.<br />

The comments section demonstrated that participants had different views regardless <strong>of</strong><br />

pr<strong>of</strong>essional group e.g. one nurse’s comment suggested that the ward round should be<br />

more holistic and less medically dominated whereas another nurse suggested that ward<br />

rounds should only involve the medical team, with multi-disciplinary meetings held at<br />

another time, and that the Consultant Psychiatrist should chair.<br />

Another reason for a difference in what factors the pr<strong>of</strong>essionals deemed important is that<br />

the best practice guidelines used for this study were originally put together by a service<br />

user group whose perspective may be different. For example, with regards refreshments,<br />

some nurses’ comments expressed the likelihood <strong>of</strong> refreshments being used as weapons.<br />

This perspective would be different to the service users that would have been focusing on<br />

making the guidelines empowering.<br />

Methodological issues and limitations<br />

The questionnaire that was devised specifically for this study was not sufficiently piloted<br />

due to time and sample constraints. Piloting was done by asking a few Psychologists to<br />

complete the questionnaire although further piloting may have enabled an improvement<br />

in the wording. For example, one <strong>of</strong> the questions in the second part <strong>of</strong> the questionnaire<br />

asked two questions in one when asking if patients and their family/friends are seen<br />

within 15 minutes <strong>of</strong> their appointment, i.e. not separating patients from family, when<br />

one may be more likely to be seen on time than the other.<br />

Due to the small sample size in each pr<strong>of</strong>essional group, we were not able to statistically<br />

analyse the data further. Moreover, two pr<strong>of</strong>essionals did not adequately complete the<br />

details about their discipline, thus reducing the data.<br />

71

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!