跨服务实施创伤知情实践,以支持遭受多重不利的人:一项混合方法研究。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Michelle Farr, Emily Eyles, Tracey Stone, Maria Theresa Redaniel, Thomas Traub, Jason Burrowes, Rebecca Halsley, Katherine Williams, Aileen Edwards, Sabi Redwood
{"title":"跨服务实施创伤知情实践,以支持遭受多重不利的人:一项混合方法研究。","authors":"Michelle Farr, Emily Eyles, Tracey Stone, Maria Theresa Redaniel, Thomas Traub, Jason Burrowes, Rebecca Halsley, Katherine Williams, Aileen Edwards, Sabi Redwood","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-13339-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People facing multiple disadvantage have often experienced extensive trauma. Changing Futures Bristol was part of a national programme to improve outcomes for people who face multiple disadvantage, such as combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, mental ill-health, domestic violence and abuse or contact with the criminal justice system. Aims were to understand how services could be improved, with more trauma-informed approaches at individual, service and system levels. An in-depth mixed method evaluation of Changing Futures Bristol examined how trauma-informed approaches were implemented and linked across services supporting people experiencing multiple disadvantage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study followed a participatory action research approach, involving research conducted in collaboration with people who have experienced multiple disadvantage, and staff partners. Collaborators actively contributed to securing funding, research design, data analysis, and write-up. A staff survey was conducted using existing measures and some tailored questions, to assess perceptions of trauma-informed approaches, equality, diversity and inclusion, and co-production. One hundred and seventeen staff responded, with 30 staff completing the survey again after one year to track any changes. Twenty-three staff members were interviewed. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, guided by trauma-informed principles and implementation domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Movement toward more trauma-informed approaches was detected, although these changes were not found to be statistically significant after one year. Barriers included short-term funding and commissioning cycles and difficulties in staff retention, due to short-term contracts, vicarious trauma, stress and pressures of the job. Managers had to hold contradicting drivers to deliver targets and manage finances whilst creating space for relational support and trauma-informed practice. To create psychological safety, staff needed to feel trust and transparency. 73% of staff reported lived experience of at least one domain of multiple disadvantage or trauma. Support for staff is needed at all levels of the organisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A long-term, collaborative, and trauma-informed approach is needed at all levels, including leaders, managers, policymakers, and central government. Government and public service reforms that focus on cross-sector collaboration and devolution of power will support trauma-informed practices. Stable, long-term funding and planning will help create a motivated, skilled workforce that can build on existing good practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"1266"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487007/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing trauma-informed practice across services to support people experiencing multiple disadvantage: a mixed method study.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Farr, Emily Eyles, Tracey Stone, Maria Theresa Redaniel, Thomas Traub, Jason Burrowes, Rebecca Halsley, Katherine Williams, Aileen Edwards, Sabi Redwood\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12913-025-13339-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People facing multiple disadvantage have often experienced extensive trauma. Changing Futures Bristol was part of a national programme to improve outcomes for people who face multiple disadvantage, such as combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, mental ill-health, domestic violence and abuse or contact with the criminal justice system. Aims were to understand how services could be improved, with more trauma-informed approaches at individual, service and system levels. An in-depth mixed method evaluation of Changing Futures Bristol examined how trauma-informed approaches were implemented and linked across services supporting people experiencing multiple disadvantage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study followed a participatory action research approach, involving research conducted in collaboration with people who have experienced multiple disadvantage, and staff partners. Collaborators actively contributed to securing funding, research design, data analysis, and write-up. A staff survey was conducted using existing measures and some tailored questions, to assess perceptions of trauma-informed approaches, equality, diversity and inclusion, and co-production. One hundred and seventeen staff responded, with 30 staff completing the survey again after one year to track any changes. Twenty-three staff members were interviewed. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, guided by trauma-informed principles and implementation domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Movement toward more trauma-informed approaches was detected, although these changes were not found to be statistically significant after one year. Barriers included short-term funding and commissioning cycles and difficulties in staff retention, due to short-term contracts, vicarious trauma, stress and pressures of the job. Managers had to hold contradicting drivers to deliver targets and manage finances whilst creating space for relational support and trauma-informed practice. To create psychological safety, staff needed to feel trust and transparency. 73% of staff reported lived experience of at least one domain of multiple disadvantage or trauma. Support for staff is needed at all levels of the organisation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A long-term, collaborative, and trauma-informed approach is needed at all levels, including leaders, managers, policymakers, and central government. Government and public service reforms that focus on cross-sector collaboration and devolution of power will support trauma-informed practices. Stable, long-term funding and planning will help create a motivated, skilled workforce that can build on existing good practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9012,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1266\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12487007/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Health Services Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-13339-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-13339-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:面临多重劣势的人往往经历过广泛的创伤。布里斯托尔改变未来是一个国家方案的一部分,该方案旨在改善面临多重不利因素的人的结果,这些不利因素包括无家可归、滥用药物、精神疾病、家庭暴力和虐待或与刑事司法系统接触。目的是了解如何改进服务,在个人、服务和系统层面采用更多了解创伤的方法。对布里斯托尔变化的未来进行了深入的混合方法评估,研究了创伤知情方法是如何实施的,并将其与支持多重弱势群体的服务联系起来。方法:本研究采用参与式行动研究方法,包括与经历过多重不利因素的人以及工作人员合作进行的研究。合作者积极地为获得资金、研究设计、数据分析和论文撰写做出了贡献。利用现有措施和一些量身定制的问题进行了一项工作人员调查,以评估对创伤知情方法、平等、多样性和包容性以及合作制作的看法。117名员工做出了回应,其中30名员工在一年后再次完成调查,以追踪任何变化。采访了23名工作人员。在创伤知情原则和实施领域的指导下,对定性数据进行了专题分析。结果:虽然这些变化在一年后没有统计学上的显著性,但我们发现了更多创伤知情方法的变化。障碍包括短期供资和委托周期以及由于短期合同、间接的创伤、工作的紧张和压力而难以保留工作人员。管理人员必须控制矛盾的驱动因素,以实现目标和管理财务,同时为关系支持和创伤知情实践创造空间。为了创造心理安全感,员工需要感受到信任和透明。73%的员工报告至少经历过一个多重不利或创伤的领域。在组织的各个层面都需要对员工的支持。结论:各级领导、管理者、政策制定者和中央政府都需要一个长期的、协作的、了解创伤的方法。注重跨部门合作和权力下放的政府和公共服务改革将支持创伤知情做法。稳定、长期的资金和规划将有助于在现有良好做法的基础上,培养一支积极进取、技术熟练的劳动力队伍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implementing trauma-informed practice across services to support people experiencing multiple disadvantage: a mixed method study.

Background: People facing multiple disadvantage have often experienced extensive trauma. Changing Futures Bristol was part of a national programme to improve outcomes for people who face multiple disadvantage, such as combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, mental ill-health, domestic violence and abuse or contact with the criminal justice system. Aims were to understand how services could be improved, with more trauma-informed approaches at individual, service and system levels. An in-depth mixed method evaluation of Changing Futures Bristol examined how trauma-informed approaches were implemented and linked across services supporting people experiencing multiple disadvantage.

Methods: The study followed a participatory action research approach, involving research conducted in collaboration with people who have experienced multiple disadvantage, and staff partners. Collaborators actively contributed to securing funding, research design, data analysis, and write-up. A staff survey was conducted using existing measures and some tailored questions, to assess perceptions of trauma-informed approaches, equality, diversity and inclusion, and co-production. One hundred and seventeen staff responded, with 30 staff completing the survey again after one year to track any changes. Twenty-three staff members were interviewed. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, guided by trauma-informed principles and implementation domains.

Results: Movement toward more trauma-informed approaches was detected, although these changes were not found to be statistically significant after one year. Barriers included short-term funding and commissioning cycles and difficulties in staff retention, due to short-term contracts, vicarious trauma, stress and pressures of the job. Managers had to hold contradicting drivers to deliver targets and manage finances whilst creating space for relational support and trauma-informed practice. To create psychological safety, staff needed to feel trust and transparency. 73% of staff reported lived experience of at least one domain of multiple disadvantage or trauma. Support for staff is needed at all levels of the organisation.

Conclusions: A long-term, collaborative, and trauma-informed approach is needed at all levels, including leaders, managers, policymakers, and central government. Government and public service reforms that focus on cross-sector collaboration and devolution of power will support trauma-informed practices. Stable, long-term funding and planning will help create a motivated, skilled workforce that can build on existing good practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信