Safe Practice and Effective Communication (SPEC) National Governance Group

Transcription

1 Safe Practice and Effective Communication (SPEC) National Governance Group Minutes of Meeting 21 st August 2018 including Action Points for followup Next meeting: 19 th November at Te Pou Wellington office pm Location: Salmond Room Te Pou o te Whakaaro Nui office - Wellington Date: 21 st August 2018 Date of next meeting: 19 th November 2018 Minutes taken by: Lois Boyd (Te Pou Contractor) Chaired as delegated in Jeff s absence Present: Kathy Moore (SPEC Master Trainer), Jane Bodkin, Senior Advisor Nursing (Chief Nurses Office, MOH), Lois Boyd, Contractor, Te Pou o te Whakaaro Nui, Valerie Williams, Kaimanaaki, Te Rau Matatini, Kerri Butler (Te Huarahi O Te Kete Pounamu rep), Anne Brebner (Northern Region Rep), Carolyn Swanson (Consumer Co-Lead, Te Pou o te Whakaaro Nui) Apologies: Jeff Hammond (Central region rep and SPEC Chair), Stu Bigwood (Southern Region Rep), Michael O Connell (Mid Central Region Rep), Dr John Crawshaw (Director and Chief Advisor of Mental Health, MOH), Dean Rangihuna (Consumer SPEC Trainer), ** Please address followups and enquiries about these minutes to the governance board member you received them from or Jeff Hammond SPEC Governance Chairperson or Lois Boyd SPEC Project Co-ordinator. The SPEC Governance group has sub-groups with co-opted members working on the ongoing development of SPEC. These include currently: Expert review group applications for Master trainer and training variations Jeff Hammond, Kathy Moore, Dean Rangihuna, Kerri Butler Training development sub group Kathy Moore, Lois Boyd, Valerie Williams, Dean Rangihuna Consumer sub group Kerri Butler, Carolyn Swanson and Dean Rangihuna Research/Programme Evaluation sub group: Jane Bodkin, Michael O Connell co-opts Tony Farrow and Brian McKenna 1

2 Agenda Item Discussion and Key Points Decisions and Followup Actions Overview and update Lois updated the group on progress since the last meeting including: A letter has been sent to the Clinical Directors and General Managers group asking them to nominate a replacement board member to represent them. There is no update at this stage on a portal to support the coordination of trainers. Information on requirements have been submitted to Te Pou. Lois/Jeff to followup regarding this Continues to be highlighted with Te Pou who are currently reviewing some of the systems that would support this. Capital Coast District Health Board have agreed to host a Training Forum in November. Further discussion regarding this today. Kathy and Lois have drafted a next version of Master Trainer competency. For further discussion at todays meeting. Bella Ansell from the Ministry of Health has provided an update on progressing national restraint measures. Invite Bella to the next meeting There is a working group headed by Te Pou to discuss scope and data definitions for restraint reporting in PRIMHD This process is likely to take months We are aligning the work with MOH and HQSC so there is no unnecessary clash of data definitions Te Pou are writing up a proposal currently 2

3 SPEC update was provided to Te Pou for Handover and can be found at: /882 An updated training register has been provided by Kathy and Lois is working on this for newsletter and other comms use. There have been two phone meetings regarding evaluation of SPEC. To be discussed further today, with Anne Brebner presenting information on her research proposal. Jeff advises he is continuing to work on securing a second trainer for the September Train the trainer and a consumer trainer. Programme content: Letters send and received re Maori content and association with SPEC. For further discussion today. Safety review: Lois discussed the research team assisting with a literature search on current international practice. Anne Brebner also mentioned that she has completed some background searching for her research that she could supply to the Te Pou team to inform this review. Anne and Lois to followup with Te Pou. 3

4 Agenda Item Discussion and Key Points Decisions and Followup Actions Consumer trainer development Figures presented showed that there are currently 6 consumer trainers and the group consensus was that this needs to increase significantly. There is current sector discussion and concern about the role of consumer trainers, with comment that the role has been misunderstood and that the consumer trainer roles are confined to training others and not a role in the practice setting. Governance board members to continue developing a consumer trainer position statement. Feedback to DHB s regarding the need for more consumer trainers to meet training best practice requirements. In line with the Nothing about us without us collaborative value, it s very important to have a consumer presence and perspective at every training event to both ensure that perspective is prominent in the training and promote change and least restrictive best practice directions. Discussion from the group and advice is that it would be useful to formalise the link between the consumer governance representatives and consumer trainers. It is also considered a matter of urgency to formulate appropriate support and peer supervision options for consumer trainers in relation to their role in SPEC. Caro raised the possibility of filming a video at the consumer trainer meeting proposed, that could be used in training and on the website. Lois to facilitate contact between consumer trainers to meet with SPEC governance group representatives to discuss the matters raised today. Lois to raise with Te Pou the possibility of a video from the consumer trainer meeting that would provide sound bites for training and? could be featured on the SPEC page of the Te Pou website. 4

5 Content review updates Followup discussion on Lois and Valerie s review of current Maori content in SPEC training. Concerns were raised that as SPEC is a mandatory training, some organisations were wanting to include broader cultural competency training in the SPEC curricula as a way of ensuring their staff received cultural training. In some DHB s cultural training is not mandatory. It was discussed that organisations need to provide staff training to address their obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and that such trainings may have the potential to contribute to least restrictive best practice but are not directly connected to the SPEC curriculum. The clear focus of SPEC is least restrictive practice approaches and any future content relating specifically to Maori would be to support least restrictive approaches and direction. Trainer Pathways A next draft of trainer pathways was presented and some feedback noted. To be ed to wider governance group to gain additional feedback before circulation to trainer groups. Lois will to group members and then to wider trainer groups. Discussion regarding SPEC Logo Discussion regarding options for a logo has been delegated to a sub group for report back at next meeting. Jeff and Lois to followup with sub group for further discussion 5

6 Research and Evaluation of SPEC There are many areas that could be the focus of SPEC evaluation and a sub group of Lois, Brian McKenna and Tony Farrow have discussed this and provided a summary of this discussion (attached to last meeting minutes). Since the last meeting Jeff, Lois, Tony and Brian have met with Anne Brebner who is basing her PhD research topic around the development of SPEC, for further discussion. The group discussed: 1/ fidelity of training content a) is it still best practice content or is some updating required? Anne has offered to contribute some of her background literature search information to answering this b) how confident can we be that what is being delivered is consistent across the country and in relation to the original training? Lois to ask Jeff about convening a meeting between a sub group to progress discussion and a resolution regarding this concern. 2/ impact on changing practice and supporting least restriction a) For the DHB s that have more recently introduced SPEC, what has been the impact on practice and levels of restriction? Board discussion centred on the importance of commissioning fidelity research and taking a research evaluation approach. This would include the development of a fidelity tool that could be used to audit 6

7 programmes and document improvements and the impact on both consumers and staff members. There was also discussion regarding Anne Brebners proposed research which will focus on documenting the journey that has seen SPEC move from a local to nationally endorsed training programme. There is international interest in a whole country developing one training process. Lois will raise with Te Pou the importance of fidelity research and ask if there is resource available to support this. Anne will keep in contact with Brian McKenna and Tony Farrow regarding the possibility of developing fidelity research and presenting ideas regarding this at the November meeting Anne will come back to the group with a final outline of her project and a request for support. 6 weeks. Next meeting 19 th November at Te Pou Wellington office pm 7