PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Louise Locock

Publications and source records attributed to Louise Locock.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

'Just a bystander'? Men's place in the process of fetal screening and diagnosis.

Despite increasing research into men's experience of pregnancy and fatherhood, experiences of men whose partner is undergoing fetal screening and diagnosis have been less well-studied. This paper begins to fill a gap in the literature by identifying several potentially conflicting male roles in screening, diagnosis and subsequent decision-making. Drawing on a wider qualitative study in the UK of experiences of antenatal screening, it is suggested men may play inter-linked roles: as parents, bystanders, protectors/supporters, gatherers and guardians of fact, and deciders or enforcers. These may be roles they have chosen, or which are assigned to them intentionally or unintentionally by others (their female partner, health professionals). Men's status and feelings as fathers are sometimes overlooked or suppressed, or may conflict with their other roles, particularly when screening detects possible problems with the baby. The paper concludes by discussing these findings in the context of the wider literature on men and pregnancy.

Congenital Abnormalities↗
PubMed2003

Waiting times. Catch up, keep up.

Trusts vary greatly on their progress in achieving waiting-list targets, particularly for 2005. A study of trusts with a range of performances identified four key criteria: information use, managerial focus, capacity and long-term efficiency. Actions that help a trust 'catch up' rarely help them 'keep up; strategies may need to change once waiting lists have fallen markedly. Flexibility, forward planning and 'expecting the unexpected' are characteristics of successful trusts.

Efficiency, Organizational↗
PubMed2003

Redesigning mental health services: lessons on user involvement from the Mental Health Collaborative.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the involvement of mental health service users in the redesign of in-patient mental health services in six Trusts participating in a multi-regional NHS modernization programme. DESIGN: Semi-structured interviews and observation of team meetings undertaken as part of an action research study. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Users, clinical, medical and managerial staff from six mental health trusts which participated in the Northern & Yorkshire and Trent regions' Mental Health Collaborative (MHC). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Whilst there were some problems, user involvement was undoubtedly a strength of the MHC in comparison to other modernization programmes within the NHS we have studied. However, the particular challenges posed by the specific context of acute mental health services should not be overlooked. The initial approach taken in each of the sites was to simply invite a user or user representative to join the local project team. In the course of events, various changes were made to this initial mechanism for involving users in the ongoing work of the teams. These changes--and setbacks in some sites--make drawing firm conclusions as to the effectiveness of the various strategies employed problematic. However, our qualitative data suggest a number of broad lessons that will assist both those leading and participating in other redesign initiatives to maximize the benefits to be gained from service user involvement.

Community Participation↗
PubMed2003

Redesigning health care: new wine from old bottles?

One of the latest remedies for poor quality services is seen as being redesign of the health care system. Redesign is charged with political meaning, representing a radical challenge to practitioners and managers. But is it really a new approach? Although it draws on theories of re-engineering and total quality management, it is a pragmatic blend of components of both. Early findings suggest that quality improvement has been achieved but this has not been as extensive as anticipated. Redesign is in danger of being seen as the new magic bullet and thus may be being set up to fail. It may prove to be one more in a succession of discarded change management fads.

Health Care Reform↗
PubMed2002

No magic targets! Changing clinical practice to become more evidence based.

This article focuses on the diffusion and adoption of innovations in clinical practice. The authors are specifically interested in underresearched questions concerning the latter stages of the creation, diffusion, and adoption of new knowledge, namely: What makes this information credible and therefore utilized? Why do actors decide to use new knowledge? And what is the significance of the social context of which actors are a part?

Bibliometrics↗