Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To examine the causes of variation for determining clinical eligibility for a national caregiver programme in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and so help inform standardization of clinical eligibility assessment for support and establish conditions for more consistent caregiver experiences across the USA.
Methods: We used mixed methods, including a national survey of caregiver support coordinators (CSCs) across VHA medical centres, semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 53 CSCs and interdisciplinary team members, and observations of four VHA medical centre sites.
Results: A majority (70%) of CSCs across VHA medical centres reported that they used interdisciplinary teams to conduct assessments. Interdisciplinary teams were seen to help mitigate potential harm to therapeutic relationships from eligibility decisions. Survey respondents reported using a range of assessment tools provided by the national VHA Caregiver Support Program office, but participants expressed concerns that the tools did not necessarily effectively assess clinical need. Some local sites had developed innovative person-centered approaches, in which the assessment process provided an opportunity to assess veterans' holistic clinical needs, in contrast to a programme-centered approach, which focused on assessing whether veterans/their caregivers meet eligibility criteria.
Conclusion: Discretion by those involved in making decisions on programme eligiblity is important for implementing a national social services programme based on clinical need. Interdisciplinary teams can help mitigate potential harm to therapeutic relationships. Discretion allows for innovation. This work has implications for setting policy in other programme contexts in which applying eligibility criteria requires clinical judgement.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1355819620983371 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!