Interview study of risk attitudes of front-door/AC physios & patients
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Qualitative investigation of physiotherapists’ and patients’ perceptions of, and attitudes towards, risk, in an Ambulatory Care and Front-Door setting
IRAS ID
262236
Contact name
Sheila Greenfield
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Birmingham
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 0 months, 0 days
Research summary
Ambulatory Care refers to the provision of acute, hospital-level healthcare, without the use of an inpatient bed overnight. Front-door services are those that are accessed by patients in the early stages of an unplanned admission, if they cannot be discharged directly home, but are not anticipated to require a prolonged hospital stay. Both service types are designed to reduce unnecessary hospital admissions, and thus require decisions about discharge and/or location of care to be made, potentially after only a short time in which the healthcare professional and patient interact. In the case of both 'admit or discharge' and location of care decisions, all the available options carry a component of risk, therefore this study will aim to understand how patients and physiotherapists feel about risk, and how they reach these decisions. Physiotherapists are to be interviewed as they often make recommendations about patients' safety if they are to be discharged, or managed without a hospital admission.
This interview-based study, will comprise one-to-one, semi-structured interviews. Participants will be patients who have been treated in an ambulatory care or front-door service within the NHS, and physiotherapists who work in the same types of services. Inclusion criteria will be that participants are adults, who can understand and communicate in English, and that they have been treated (for patients) or work (for physiotherapists) in an ambulatory care or front-door service.
It is hoped that, as a result of this study, further understanding of the decision-making process and attitudes towards risk and these decisions will be developed. This may help to improve decision-making and communication around these decisions.
REC name
North West - Liverpool Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
20/NW/0268
Date of REC Opinion
5 Jun 2020
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion