3/10/20 1 2 This presentation will: Review planning and - - PDF document

3 10 20
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

3/10/20 1 2 This presentation will: Review planning and - - PDF document

3/10/20 1 2 This presentation will: Review planning and implementation of Tier 3 and 1 PBS Implementing a PBS continuum in a adaptations in a large public sector psychiatric hospital. large public psychiatric hospital Describe the


slide-1
SLIDE 1

3/10/20 1

Implementing a PBS continuum in a large public psychiatric hospital

1 Meredith Ronan, Psy.D. 17th International APBS Conference Miami, Florida March 13, 2020

1

This presentation will:

  • Review planning and implementation of Tier 3 and 1 PBS

adaptations in a large public sector psychiatric hospital.

  • Describe the unique challenges of designing and

implementing a positive practice model in a public sector psychiatric setting, particularly related to staff engagement and promoting culture change.

  • Assess empirical and qualitative outcome data to gauge

utility and value of PBS programming (Tier 1 and 3) in inpatient psychiatric facilities.

2

2

Worcester State Hospital

3

3

Worcester Recovery Center and Hospital (WRCH)

4

4

Patient Population

  • 2 Court evaluation Units and 8 Continuing Care

units (26 patients per unit)

  • Length of stay- average 200 days
  • Demographics: ~25% Women, 75% Men

▫ Diverse population

  • Diagnostically:

▫ Severe and persistent mental illnesses ▫ Complex co-morbidities (physical/medical/cognitive)

5

5

Primary Components of Clinical Care

  • Multidisciplinary treatment teams include

psychiatry, psychology, social work,

  • ccupational therapy, peer specialists, and

nursing.

  • Medication administration and education.
  • Opportunities for individual and group

therapeutic interventions including a variety of evidence-based treatments.

6

6

slide-2
SLIDE 2

3/10/20 2

PBS Consultation Service

  • Introduced September 2015 through a

collaboration of Clinical/Hospital Administration and Psychology and Nursing departments.

  • Aim to reduce rates of aggression/violence and
  • ccurrence of restraint and seclusions
  • Focus on patients with the most challenging

behaviors and intensive treatment needs in the state/DMH system.

7

7

Overview and Rationale

  • Challenging behavior is a significant concern in

inpatient settings.

  • Associated with a range of negative outcomes:

Patients:

  • Restrictive practices
  • Prolonged hospitalization
  • Poor quality of life

Staff:

  • Injury
  • High stress
  • Burnout
  • Low job satisfaction

8

8

Program Development

  • Year 1 (September 2015-August 2016):

▫ Developed PBS consultation program and began individual case intervention. ▫ Developed collaborations with four continuing care units

  • Year 2 (September 2016-August 2017):

▫ Established a postdoc program and served two more continuing care units

  • Year 3 (September 2017-August 2018):

▫ Expanded individual consultation/intervention services to two more units ▫ Began planning for Hospital-Wide Tier 1 (Primary Prevention).

  • Year 4 (September 2018-August 2019):

▫ Ongoing maintenance of individual PBS caseload, including increased consultation capacity. ▫ Continued planning and began implementation of Hospital-Wide PBS implementation.

  • Year 5 (September 2019-present)

▫ Reduced caseload capacity due to loss of postdoctoral position and part-time funding for psychologist. ▫ Ongoing planning and implementation of Hospital-Wide PBS, including intensive training and support with nursing department.

9

9

PBS Program Initiation

  • Initial efforts were heavily focused on:

▫ Getting buy-in from staff (i.e., nursing) ▫ Collecting behavioral data to inform decision-making and PBS planning ▫ Working directly with patients to engage and model specific intervention strategies.

  • Significantly divergent from implicit models of care,

beliefs about psychopathology, and challenging behavior.

  • Shift from viewing problem as originating within the

person and treated at the individual levelà recognizing and emphasizing the role of environment and context.

10

10

PBS Consultant Psychologist

Clinical Treatment Team

Psychologists Psychiatrists Social Workers Occupational Therapists Medical Providers

Direct Care Staff

1st Shift Nurses (4) 2nd Shift Nurses (3-4) 3rd Shift Nurses (2-3) 1st Shift MHWs (8-12) 2nd Shift MHWs (8-10) 3rd Shift MHWs (6)

Human Rights Officers Patients Guardians (Family or Legal) Administration

Nurse Managers Nurse Supervisors

11

11

DMH – Dirty Words

  • Behavior

Problem

  • Behavioral

Willful

  • Behavior Plan

Coercion

  • Reinforcement

Reward

  • Consequence

Punishment

  • Positive

Good

  • Attention

Problematic

12

12

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3/10/20 3

Patient Demographics

  • 45 patients served throughout 4 ½ years of service
  • Age range: 16-66
  • Diverse representation of gender, race/ethnicities,

and primary/preferred languages

  • Primary psychiatric diagnoses:

▫ schizophrenia spectrum disorder ▫ autism spectrum disorder ▫ post-traumatic stress disorder ▫ borderline personality disorder ▫ developmental/intellectual disability ▫ neuro-cognitive disorders ▫ obsessive compulsive disorder

13

13

Patient Demographics

  • Numerous lifetime psychiatric hospitalizations

(15+), and some have been continuously institutionalized for 10 or more years.

  • Have displayed behaviors that posed a high risk to

staff and were described as having been unsuccessfully managed at other settings/facilities.

  • Many are the highest users of specialized staffing

statuses (e.g., 3:1, 2:1, 1:1, Constant Observation (CO)). ▫ 20% require some special status daily or at all times, ▫ 40% have been on status at some point in time or for partial hours of the day ▫ 40% have not typically required special staffing (other than 15” checks).

14

14

Challenging Behaviors

  • Primarily include aggressive behaviors (i.e.,

verbal and/or physical attempts or actual assaults).

  • 75% of the cases in the program have physical

aggression as the primary target behavior.

  • Self-injurious behaviors and intrusive behaviors

have also been targets for intervention.

15

15

ASSESSMENT INTERVENTION IMPLEMENTATION OUTCOMES

  • Record review
  • Collateral (staff)

interviews

  • Patient interview
  • Data collection/analysis

◆ Environment ◆ ◆ System ◆

§ Family § Facility § Community § State

◆ Individual ◆

§ Physical factors § Interpersonal § Programmatic § Staff approach PROACTIVE REACTIVE

§ Skill development

→ Individual therapy → Communication → Coping skills

  • History
  • Antecedents/Consequences
  • Ecological factors
  • Functional analysis

§ Response strategies (reduce severity

  • f behavior)

§ What needs to be done and who is responsible? § Training & supporting staff § Shifting traditional perceptions and responses to challenging behavior

Data-based Decision Making

16

Proactive Strategies

  • Goals:

▫ Improve the person’s overall quality of life ▫ Give the person more control over his or her life ▫ Teach the person skills (e.g., communication, coping/tolerating distressing experiences) ▫ Reduce the need for restrictive/reactive strategies

  • Includes :

▫ Ecological/Environmental Strategies ▫ Positive Programming ▫ Focused Support Strategies (LaVigna and Willis, 2009)

17

Ecological/Environmental Strategies

  • Interventions designed to reduce triggers or antecedents to problematic

behaviors by making changes environment to better fit the person’s characteristics and needs.

  • Challenging behavior often occurs because there is a mismatch

between needs and environment:

  • Physical Factors:

▫ Setting, light, noise, crowding

  • Interpersonal Factors:

▫ Communication/culture ▫ Social interactions ▫ Clear and consistent expectations

  • Programmatic Factors:

▫ Choice, predictability and control ▫ Activity Scheduling ▫ Instructional methods

(LaVigna and Willis, 2009)

18

slide-4
SLIDE 4

3/10/20 4

Positive Programming

  • Interventions designed to teach skills and competencies to

facilitate behavioral changes for the purpose of social integration. ▫ Functional skills

– Useful: if the person does not learn, someone will have to do it for them – Fun: does it allow access to something the person wants

▫ Functionally equivalent skills (e.g., communication skills)

– Challenging behavior has a function – The problem is not the function, it’s the behavior (work to separate the two)

▫ Functionally related skills

– Discrimination – Choice – Predictability and control

▫ Coping skills

– Desensitization – Relaxation training

(LaVigna and Willis, 2009)

19

Focused Support Strategies

  • A strategy to reduce and, if possible, eliminate the need for

a reactive strategy. May include: ▫ Time-based schedules: Activity being delivered by a schedule/clock not based on behavior (noncontingent) – Increase the density of time-based preferred events – Can also be looked at as an ecological change (more permanent) vs. support strategy (temporary). ▫ Contingency-based reinforcement: Positive reinforcement plans designed with the person to increase the frequency of an adaptive behavior. ▫ Differential schedules of reinforcement. ▫ **VERY DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT IN SETTING

(LaVigna and Willis, 2009)

20

Reactive Strategies

GOAL: Interrupt the behavioral chain/de-escalate

  • Facilitative Strategies
  • Redirection
  • Proximity control (e.g., closeness may increase or decrease

behavior)

  • Introduce humor
  • Stimulus change (e.g., choice of alternate locations)
  • Counterintuitive Strategies:

▫ Diversion to a Preferred Activity or Event

  • Emergency Physical Containment:

▫ Is emergency physical intervention absolutely necessary

(LaVigna and Willis, 2009)

21

Key Components

  • Understanding the meaning of behavior; why

is it occurring?

Behavioral Assessment Data-based decision making Proactive Strategies

  • Supporting staff to support patients
  • Enhancing psychosocial perspective/

approach of team

Staff/team interventions

  • Are we making valid interpretations/

judgments?

  • Whole-person approach
  • Improving quality of life

22

Definitions/Terms

  • Restraint or Seclusion Episode (R/S)

▫ Medication ▫ Physical Hold ▫ Open Door Seclusion ▫ Mechanical Restraint (4 or 5 point)

23

Case Illustrations- Patient 1

24

211.2 164.8 188.8 81.0 50.8 15.0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6*

Monthly Attempted Assaults by Year of Hospitalization

24

slide-5
SLIDE 5

3/10/20 5

Case Illustrations- Patient 2

25

19.7 10.0 13.7 3.3 8.5 4.1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Attempted Assault Assault with Contact Year 1 Year 1 Year 2 Year 2 Year 3 Year 3

Monthly Attempted and Actual Assaults by Year of Hospitalization

25

Case Illustrations- Patient 2

26

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Hold 25 12 8 Seclusion 3 8 1 Mechanical 29 9 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Episode

Restraint/Seclusion Episodes by Type and Year

26

Case Illustrations- Patient 3

27

5 10 15 20 25 30 Episode

R/S Episodes by Type and Month

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7

Mechanical Restraint Seclusion Physical Hold

27

Case Illustrations- Patient 4

28

Year 1 ( *6 mos) Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 (*2 mos) Hold 17 8 1 Mechanical 22 49 35 1

10 20 30 40 50 60

Count

R/S Episodes by Year and Type

28

Case Illustrations- Patient 4

29

Holds Mechanical Total Pre- PBS Plan 25 63 88 Post-PBS Plan 1 43 44 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Episodes

R/S Episodes by Type - Pre and Post PBS

29

Case Illustrations- Patient 5

30

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Phys ical 19 10 Seclusion 1 Mechanical 5 1

5 10 15 20 25

Episode

R/S By Type and Year

30

slide-6
SLIDE 6

3/10/20 6

Case Illustrations- Patient 6

31

0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 140.0 160.0 180.0

Average Duration (Minutes) Per R/S Episode

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Months

31

Limited Resources

32

Ne Need Re Resources

32

Tier 3: INTENSIVE Tertiary Interventions ~5% Tier 2: STRATEGIC/TARGETED Secondary Interventions ~15% Tier 1: SYSTEM-WIDE/UNIVERSAL Primary Interventions ~80% of the population (ALL)

Continuum of Prevention and Intervention

Tiers of Intervention and Support

33

33

PBS Generally PBS At WRCH

INTENSIVE ~5% STRATEGIC ~15% SYSTEM-WIDE ~80% of the population (ALL)

Highly specialized and individualized multi-modal assessment and interventions for individuals with high risk behaviors who require the most support. Examples include:

  • Individualized and function-

based positive behavior support plans

  • Supports developed through

wraparound process Current PBS work consists of almost entirely intensive (Tier 3) interventions.

  • Individual PBS Plan with

strategies used for patients with longstanding challenging behavior/s (e.g., assaultive).

  • Includes:
  • Comprehensive

behavioral assessment

  • Collecting and monitoring
  • f data
  • Development and

implementation of individualized intervention strategies

  • Training staff

34

34

PBS Generally PBS At WRCH

INTENSIVE ~5% STRATEGIC ~15% SYSTEM-WIDE ~80% of the population (ALL)

Targeted strategies put in place for individuals who are at increased risk or for whom Tier 1 interventions are not effective. Examples include:

  • Check in/Check out
  • Skill-based groups
  • Mentoring

Some strategic strategies exist at WRCH, though they aren’t currently thought of as being a part

  • f PBS.

Tier 2 at WRCH might include:

  • Anger management, DBT,

sensory or other groups

  • Standard practice response to

substance use

  • Individual check-ins or diary

cards 35

35

PBS

Generally PBS At WRCH

INTENSIVE ~5% STRATEGIC ~15% SYSTEM-WIDE ~80% of the population (ALL)

Proactive and preventative interventions implemented to support all patients and staff.

  • Establish, teach, post, and

reinforce a small number of positively stated setting-wide expectations (e.g., Be Safe, Be Responsible, Be Respectful).

  • Increase structure and

engagement in activities.

  • Continuum of responses to

problem behavior. Proactive and preventative interventions implemented for all.

  • Establish, teach, post, and

reinforce a small number of positively stated hospital-wide expectations.

  • Continuum of responses to

challenging/aggressive behavior.

  • Increased structure and

engagement in activities. 36

36

slide-7
SLIDE 7

3/10/20 7

Targeted Positive Outcomes

  • Improved quality of life

▫ e.g., more adaptive behaviors, engagement in meaningful activities, shorter inpatient LOS

  • Improved quality of care

▫ e.g., provision of more choice, activities, interaction, and staff assistance

  • Improved staff outcomes

▫ e.g., decreases in staff injuries, trauma and stress, increases in job satisfaction

  • Decreases in inappropriate/unsafe behaviors

▫ e.g., aggressive and disruptive

  • Reduction in restrictive practices

▫ e.g., restraint/ seclusions, prolonged hospitalizations

  • Reduced need for more intensive and expensive

interventions ▫ e.g.,2:1, 1:1, Continuous Observation

37

37

Universal/ Primary Prevention All patients, all staff, all settings Systems Practices

  • Leadership team with active

administrator participation

  • Efficient routine, schedule, and

structure for conducting efficient team meetings

  • Commitment statement for

establishing a positive hospital-wide social culture

  • Procedures for on-going data-based

monitoring, evaluation, and dissemination

  • Procedures for selection, training,

and coaching personnel

  • Procedures for evaluation of

personnel related to PBS implementation

  • Set of hospital-wide positive

expectations and behaviors are defined and taught

  • Procedures for establishing

expectations and routines that are consistent with hospital-wide expectations

  • Continuum of procedures for

encouraging expected behavior

  • Continuum of procedures for teaching

and coaching skills for expected behavior

  • Procedures for encouraging hospital-

family partnerships

Adapted from: Part 1 PBIS Implementation Foundations, 2015

38

38

Hospital-Wide PBS (HW-PBS)

  • An organization-wide initiative focused on positive culture change,

with the goal of supporting positive behavior to, in turn, cultivate a more respectful and nurturing environment for staff and patients.

  • Working towards creating a shared understanding of how we want

to interact (what we say, how we act) with one another (staff-staff; staff- patient; patient-patient) by developing a set of positively stated hospital wide values/expectations.

  • Proactively teach and model the expectations/skills. When we

don't see respectful behavior, the reason is a lack of skills and/or an inability to use skills in that situation/environment.

  • Notice and richly reinforce when prosocial and valued behaviors
  • ccur for staff and patients.
  • Establish a consistent continuum of responses (and

consequences) when behaviors divert from expectations/values.

  • Increase structure, predictability and support in the

environment. 39

39

HW-PBS Leadership Team

  • A primary focus of hospital-wide implementation has been

establishing cross-sectional representation with an intricate multidisciplinary system.

  • Current team includes the following discipline

representatives: ▫ Psychology (PBS, Psych IV, Director of Psychology) ▫ Social Work ▫ Psychiatry ▫ Rehabilitation (Rehab Counselor (in past also had Occupational Therapist) ▫ Nursing (1st shift Nurse, 2nd shift Mental Health Worker) ▫ Peer Specialist ▫ Administration (Assistant COO) ▫ Staff Development

40

40

Goal 1: Establish Hospital Wide Expectations/Values

  • Starting with the value of RESPECT, we

met with ALL staff (beginning at the top) in order to:

▫ Get buy-in at all levels of the organization (goal of 80%) ▫ Promote a common vision/values (what are the

  • utcomes we want?)

▫ Develop a common language ▫ Begin to set the stage for a common experience ▫ Create space to process experience and share perspective

41

41

Respect Exercise

  • Met with approximately 30 different groups and

departments in the hospital to complete an exercise on respect.

  • This included:
  • Executive Leadership
  • Clinical (psychology, social work, psychiatry,

rehab)

  • Operations (facilities, kitchen, housekeeping)
  • Nursing (nursing and mental health workers)

42

42

slide-8
SLIDE 8

3/10/20 8

Respect Exercise

# Total Staff #Attended % Attended Hospital- Wide Exercise 797 675 85%

85% 15% 43

43

4 Core Values/Expectations

44

44

Goal 2: Behavioral Expectation Matrix

  • Define behavioral expectations/examples of the

values by specific location/situation.

▫ Collect responses and distill down most popular responses into simplified language. ▫ Develop visual representations of expectations for each key situations/locations and get printed and laminated by Business Center. ▫ Post visually in a matrix format in each of the specific locations to ensure shared understanding and frequent reference.

  • The expectations become the basis for skills

education and coaching both for staff and for patients.

45

45

MEDICATION LINE/WINDOW EXPECTATIONS

RESPECT Give space to each other RESPONSIBILITY Be patient SAFETY Get the correct medications COMMUNICATION Be polite - Hello, Goodbye, Please, Thank

you

46

46

MEALTIME EXPECTATIONS

RESPECT Speak Softly and Help Mealtime Be Peaceful RESPONSIBILITY Arrive On Time, Wait Your Turn, & Help Clean Up SAFETY Only Eat Your Own Food in Dining Room/C-Pod COMMUNICATION Work with Each Other and Be Polite

(Please, Thank you)

47

47

Concierge Area

  • For the Concierge Area, the approach was a bit more

intensive, as it was acknowledged that the expectations were different depending on an individual’s role. Specifically: ▫ Three separate versions were created:

– 1) Expectations Around the Concierge Area (for ALL) – 2) All Staff Expectations to Concierge Staff – 3) Assigned Concierge Staff Responsibilities).

▫ Process and specific expectations were presented at a full department heads leadership meeting, multiple program meetings, and in relevant department meetings. ▫ Pre and post data collection procedures

48

48

slide-9
SLIDE 9

3/10/20 9

EXPECTATIONS AROUND THE CONCIERGE CIRCLE

RESPECT

  • Be Kind to Each Other and Gentle

with Property RESPONSIBILITY

  • Wait Patiently
  • Understand Staff May Be Busy

SAFETY

  • Keep Noise Low and Area Clear

COMMUNICATION

  • Be Specific and Polite with Requests

and Responses 49

49

ALL STAFF EXPECTATIONS TO CONCIERGE STAFF

RESPECT Respect the Role and Responsibilities

  • f the Concierge Staff

(* EYES and EARS of the Unit and Central Communication Point) RESPONSIBILITY

  • Check-in with Concierge

Before/After Meeting with a Patient

  • Help Support Staff and

Patients SAFETY

  • Help Keep Noise Low and Area Clear

COMMUNICATION

  • Say Hello, Know Each Other’s

Names

  • Increase Open Communication

with Concierge Staff (e.g., where meeting, when done, if any issues/concerns) 50

50

ASSIGNED CONCIERGE STAFF RESPONSIBILITIES

RESPECT

  • Maintain Confidentiality
  • All Personal Matters Should Be

Discussed in Private RESPONSIBILITY

  • Be Present and Focused
  • Monitor Wings and Safety Check

Person SAFETY

  • Know Where Patients/Staff Are
  • Help Keep Noise Low and Area Clear

COMMUNICATION

  • Be Friendly and Greet Others
  • Validate Needs/Offer Support
  • Be Specific with Responses and

Follow Through 51

51

Rate of greeting increased between pre- and post- data collection

Pre: mean = 30.6%, sd = 39.2% Post: mean = 44.2%, sd = 42.0% Welch’s t test p = 0.007 95 confidence interval for increase: 3.7% - 23.4%

52

52

PHONE USE EXPECTATIONS

RESPECT Give personal space Treat phone gently RESPONSIBILITY Share phone Respect time limits SAFETY Use phone safely Try to keep area clear COMMUNICATION Use a soft voice Be courteous with language

53

53

Goal 3: Teaching Skills

  • Develop curriculum to teach expectations to ALL patients.

▫ Includes concepts and skill level instruction

  • Behavioral expectations are taught directly and redundantly

and in ALL settings and apply to all staff and all patients

▫ Introductory events (teaching hospital expectations and rules) ▫ On-going direct instruction (specific content/skill demonstration and role-play) ▫ Teach in setting where behaviors are expected to occur (in the dining room, in meetings, in groups, in the medication line, etc.) ▫ Embed in the curricula of existing evidence-based-practice recovery skills groups ▫ Provide booster trainings to be easily used/applied as the need arises within any particular setting (patient milieu, meeting type, etc.) ▫ Keep it out there (visual displays – posters, agenda covers, daily announcements) ▫ Support and encourage repetition that is essential for learning new skills 54

54

slide-10
SLIDE 10

3/10/20 10

Goal 3: Teaching Skills

  • Develop plan/curriculum to train staff how to

teach skills to patients (coaching sessions)

▫ During the past year (January 2019-present) a focus on strengthening the coaching sessions (8 per week).

  • The primary goals of these sessions are to

support staff skill development and improve the quality of staff interactions with patients to increase safe and therapeutic outcomes.

▫ Given this will be a central avenue to roll out teaching/coaching, there were many aspects of it that needed to be addressed and improved.

55

55

Coaching Session Attendance

56

% Staff Attended Ju ly % Staff Attended Oct %Staff Attended Nov %Staff Attended Dec %Staff Attended Jan %Staff Attended Feb Average 60.7% 48.0% 48.6% 27.3 % 68.7% 79 .6% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% AVERAGE 1st and 2nd Shift Attendance

56

Coaching Session Attendance

57

Mar-May 2019 Ju l-19 Jan-20 Feb-20 Nurses 19.2% 41.5% 51.7% 68.5% MHW 57.4 % 70.0% 85.9% 87.7% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Attendance by Position and Month

57

Goal 4: Define Consistent Responses

  • Define consistent responses to behaviors that

deviate from expectations.

  • Create a continuum of procedures for:

▫ Encouraging expected behavior ▫ Discouraging misbehavior

  • Often traditional “consequences” have not been

effective because they have not been aligned with:

▫ Hospital-wide expectations ▫ Clearly defined rules ▫ A system for teaching expectations and rules ▫ A system for rewarding appropriate behavior

58

58

Goal 5: Positive Reinforcement

  • Develop structured reinforcement/recognition

systems

  • Procedures and practices for reinforcement/recognition

(staff and patients)

  • Determine ways to recognize positive behavior
  • Keep ratios of reinforcement to correction high (4:1)
  • Develop specific ways to reinforce behavior (and

train/coach staff). ▫ For example: name behavior and expectation observed, give positive verbal/social acknowledgment, other specific reward systems.

  • Structured social reinforcement strategies are similar to

informal strategies but involve an organization-wide approach to noticing and recognizing the skilled behaviors

59

59

Goal 6: Professional Development

  • Develop and embed ongoing professional

development

  • PBS Values and behavioral expectations are

integrated in staff orientation and annual training.

  • Performance Evaluations (EPRS) include the

PBS related performance (skills, behaviors) expectations and EPRS reviews are an

  • pportunity for supervisors to reinforce

behavioral performance and re-teach skills as needed.

60

60

slide-11
SLIDE 11

3/10/20 11

Continual/ongoing processes/targets:

  • Develop systematic way to report and review

the data. Also develop specific procedures for:

▫ Ongoing monitoring and evaluation of data ▫ Using data to make decisions ▫ Sustaining implementation fidelity

  • Coordinate and with other hospital

committees and initiatives. These include: Diversity and Inclusion Committee, SHIFT, Culture

  • f Safety, Employee Recognition, Communications

Performance Improvement, Mandt

61

61

Diversity & Inclusion Committee Staff Development Patient Events Committee CULTURE CHANGE

  • Clear expectations
  • Proactive teaching & modelling
  • Positive reinforcement
  • Effective responses

Employee Recognition Culture of Safety

Coordination

62

62

Data-Based Decision Making

Fidelity Data

Did we implement the systems and strategies we agreed upon?

Outcome Data

Are we making progress toward our goals? 63

63

Fidelity Data

  • The Facility-Wide Tiered Fidelity Instrument (FW-

TFI) is an adaptation (to juvenile justice 24 hour facilities) of the gold standard Tiered Fidelity Instrument that is utilized in schools (Jolivette, Swoszowski, & Ennis, 2017).

▫ This is the closest instrument that applies to an inpatient hospital (additional adaptations needed).

  • Provides an assessment and fidelity total score and

rating across various modules, the TFI also serves to prioritize action planning efforts.

  • Assessment:

▫ Baseline: facilitated by Susannah Everett, Ph.D. and WRCH PBS Leadership team on 2/7/2019 ▫ Annual re-evaluation occurred with Susannah Everett, Ph.D., Katherine Meyer, Ph.D., and WRCH PBS Leadership team on 2/20/2020. 64

64

FW-TFI

65

Teams Implementatio n Evaluation Overall Baseline (2/2019) 50% 28% 30% 31% Follow-up (2 /202 0) 75% 44% 60% 53 % 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Percentage

Hospital Wide PBS Implementation Fidelity Assessment

65

FW-TFI Walkthrough Tool

Purpose

  • The Walkthrough Tool is a component of the

Tiered Fidelity Instrument (TFI), the purpose of which is to provide a reliable, efficient measure

  • f staff and patient awareness and application of

the core features of hospital-wide positive behavior support.

  • Assessment will serve to measure progress and

implementation fidelity.

66

66

slide-12
SLIDE 12

3/10/20 12

FW-TFI Walkthrough Tool

  • At each assessment point, a set number of staff (10-15 total)

and patients (3-5 total) will be interviewed on each unit (10). To ensure representation from different disciplines/positions and shifts (1st and 2nd), the staff surveyed on each unit will include the following targets are outlined below:

1st Shift 2nd Shift Total MHW 3 3 6 RN 1 1 2 Rehab/OT 1

  • 1

SW/Psychology 1

  • 1

Psychiatry/Medicine 1

  • 1

Other (housekeeping, peers, etc.)

  • ptional

67

67

Walkthrough Preparation

  • Informed Consent: Prior to starting the interview, staff and patients

should be notified of the following information: ▫ We are doing a survey as part of an effort to roll out a hospital-wide initiative on positive behavior/culture change. Its purpose is to check in

  • n how we are doing with implementation and help us make

improvements accordingly. It involves a few brief questions that take a minute or two to answer. We are talking to staff from all departments that work on the units, as well as patients. ▫ Your participation will help us assess progress of the program; the questions being asked are in no way intended to evaluate you/your performance, or that of your unit. ▫ Participation is completely voluntary. Your decision to participate or decline to participate will have NO impact on your employment/performance evaluation, etc. (FOR PATIENTS: will have NO impact on your treatment or discharge) ▫ Responses are anonymous. We are not recording any identifying information, so the information you share will have no way of being traced back to you. 68

68

FW-TFI: Walkthrough: Staff

  • What are the HW-PBS values/behavioral

expectations?

  • Have you coached any of the HW-PBS

expectations to patients in the past 2 months?

  • Have you noticed or acknowledged patients for

displaying any of the HW-PBS expectations in the past 2 months?

  • Have others noticed and acknowledged you for

implementing PBS or the HW-PBS expectations in the past 2 months?

69

69

FW-TFI: Walkthrough: Patients

  • What are the HW-PBS values/behavioral

expectations?

  • Have staff coached you on any of the HW-PBS

expectations in the past 2 months?

  • Have staff noticed and acknowledged you for

displaying any of the HW-PBS expectations on unit in the past 2 months?

  • Have staff noticed an acknowledged you for

displaying any of the HW-PBS expectations off unit in the past 2 months?

70

70

WRCH Staff- Walkthrough Baseline

  • 89 total requests
  • 70 participated

▫ 44 MHW/RN (62.9%) ▫ 17 Clinical Staff (24.3%) ▫ 9 Leadership Staff (12.9%)

  • Total Hospital Pool: 603

▫ 437 MHW/RN (72.4%) ▫ 125 Clinical Staff (20.7%) ▫ 41 Leadership Staff (6.8%)

  • 1st shift: 48 (68.6%)
  • 2nd shift: 21 (30%)
  • Avg number of

expectations: 1.08 ▫ 0: 36 (51.4%) ▫ 1: 12 (17.1%) ▫ 2: 8 (11.4%) ▫ 3: 8 (11.4%) ▫ 4: 6 (8.6%) 71

71

Values/Expectations Named

Resp ect Resp

  • nsibilit

y Safety Commu nicati

  • n

Other Hospital W ide 38 .6 % 15.7% 31.4% 30 .0% 30 .0% MHW/RN 31.8% 13.6% 31.8% 25.0% 36 .4 % Clin ical S taff 41.2% 23 .5% 23 .5% 35.3% 5.9 % Leadership 66 .7% 11.1% 44 .4 % 44 .4 % 44 .4 % 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

72

72

slide-13
SLIDE 13

3/10/20 13

Coached Expectations

Coached Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibil

ity Safety Commu nic ation Other Hospital W ide 91.4% 71.4 % 32 .9% 48 .6 % 41.4% 2.9% MHW/RN 93 .2 % 63 .6 % 31.8% 56.8% 40.9 % 4.5% Clin ical S taff 82 .4 % 82 .4 % 41.2% 41.2% 41.2% 0.0% Leadership 100.0% 88.9% 22 .2 % 22 .2 % 44 .4 % 0.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

73

73

Noticed and Acknowledged Others

Noticed Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibili

ty Safety Commu nica tion Other Hospital W ide 90.0% 61.4% 28 .6 % 40.0% 40.0% 8.6% MHW/RN 95.5% 56.8% 31.8% 40.9 % 29 .5% 11.4% Clin ical S taff 76.5% 64 .7% 23 .5% 35.3% 58.8 % 5.9 % Leadership 88.9% 77.8% 22 .2 % 44 .4 % 55.6% 0.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

74

74

Others Noticed and Acknowledged Me

Noticed Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibili

ty Safety Commu nica tion Other Hospital W ide 62 .9 % 32 .9% 15.7% 28 .6 % 20 .0% 8.6% MHW/RN 70.5% 38 .6 % 15.9 % 36 .4 % 22 .7% 9.1% Clin ical S taff 47.1% 17.6 % 11.8% 17.6 % 17.6 % 11.8% Leadership 55.6% 33 .3% 22 .2 % 11.1% 11.1% 0.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

75

75

WRCH Patients- Walkthrough Baseline

  • 29 patients asked: 20 participated, 9 declined
  • Average Length of Stay: 23.7 months (Range:

<1-72 months)

  • Average number of expectations: 0.4

▫ 0: 14 (70%) ▫ 1: 4 (20%) ▫ 2: 2 (10%)

76

76

Taught Values (Patients)

Taught Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibil

ity Safety Commu nic ation Other Hospital W ide 70.0% 35.0% 10.0% 25.0% 25.0% 10.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Hospital Wide 78

78

Values Noticed On Unit (Patients)

Noticed Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibil

ity Safety Commu nic ation Other Hospital W ide 60.0% 30 .0% 5.0% 30 .0% 15.0% 15.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Hospital Wide 79

79

slide-14
SLIDE 14

3/10/20 14

Values Noticed Off Unit (Patients)

Taught Any? Resp ect Resp

  • nsibil

ity Safety Commu nic ation Other Hospital W ide 20 .0% 10.0% 10.0% 5.0% 15.0% 5.0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Hospital Wide 80

80

Outcome Data Variables

  • Restraint and Seclusion Use (restraint database)
  • Patient Assault (incident database)
  • Staff Injury (IA data)
  • Patient Engagement (MHIS Recovery-Skills group data)
  • Length of Stay (UM Admission/Discharge data)
  • Consideration of Staff Satisfaction/Retention

variables

  • Other data sources specific to implementation

process (e.g., Concierge area).

81

81

Potential Initial Positive Impact?

82

82

Thank you!

  • Email contact:
  • Meredith.Ronan@state.ma.us

83

83

References

84

  • Bowers, L. (2014). Safewards: a new model of conflict and containment on

psychiatric wards. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 21(6): 499–508.

  • Jolivette, K., Swoszowski, N.C., & Ennis, R. P. (2017). Facility-wide PBIS

Tiered Fidelity Inventory. OSEP Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports. www.pbis.org

  • LaVigna, G. W., and Willis, T. J. (2009). Institute for Applied Behavioral

Analysis, Positive Practices and Behavioral Support.

  • Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports Implementation Blueprint:

Part 1- Foundations and Supporting Information. Technical Assistance Center

  • n Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, U.S. Department of

Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Version 18, October 2015

  • Tolisano, P., Sondik, T. M., & Dike, C. C. (2017). A positive behavioral approach

for aggression in forensic psychiatric settings., Journal of American Academy

  • f Psychiatry law, 45, 31-9.

84