Suchergebnisse

• Summary Social workers and probation officers are frequently called upon to make judgements about the likelihood of re-offending. However, whilst the use of risk assessment instruments is now commonplace, the cognitive processes through which these judgements are made are rarely explicit. • Findings This study used the repertory grid method to elicit the constructs of judgements about re-offending of 15 experienced probation officers. Primary factors in their judgements were related to: (1) responsibility and risk taking behaviour; (2) criminal history; (3) self-awareness; and (4) stability. Personality characteristics, substance misuse and family dysfunction were also important. The findings are discussed in relation to two theoretical frameworks for understanding decision making: heuristics and biases and image theory, which focuses on values. • Application It is suggested that the design and implementation of assessment tools should be undertaken in the light of the constructs used in making professional judgements which inform the relevant decision making.

Context: The development of a consolidated knowledge base for social work requires rigorous approaches to identifying relevant research. Method: The quality of 10 databases and a web search engine were appraised by systematically searching for research articles on resilience and burnout in child protection social workers. Results: Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) had greatest sensitivity, each retrieving more than double than any other database. PsycINFO and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL) had highest precision. Google Scholar had modest sensitivity and good precision in relation to the first 100 items. SSCI, Google Scholar, Medline, and CINAHL retrieved the highest number of hits not retrieved by any other database. Conclusion: A range of databases is required for even modestly comprehensive searching. Advanced database searching methods are being developed but the profession requires greater standardization of terminology to assist in information retrieval.

Abstract
Decision making is an intrinsic and complex aspect of social work practice, requiring consideration of diverse but connected aspects. Decisions are often required as to whether a situation requires protective state intervention or whether it reaches the criteria for public or charitable services. Such instances of deciding whether or not a situation is 'on one side of the line or the other' are referred to in this article as 'threshold judgements'. This article draws on experiences and material from a range of social work contexts to explore generalisable theory-informed understandings of 'threshold judgements' and 'threshold decisions' to develop knowledge and skills on this topic. The article outlines signal detection theory and evidence accumulation ('tipping point') theory and discusses these as ways to understand the key concepts underpinning threshold decisions in social work. We then argue that although these threshold concepts are a necessary part of decision making in social work, as in many other aspects of life, they are not sufficient. Operationalising such decisions requires some form of sense-making. Naturalistic decision making and heuristic models of judgement are discussed as frameworks for practice which seem to be useful in this context.

Background: Rate of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantations is increasing in patients with advanced heart failure. Despite clear guideline recommendations, discussions addressing deactivation occur infrequently. Aim: The aim of this article is to explore patient and professional factors that impact perceived likelihood and confidence of healthcare professionals to discuss ICD deactivation. Methods and Results: Between 2015 and 2016, an international sample of 262 healthcare professionals (65% nursing, 24% medical) completed an online factorial survey, encompassing a demographic questionnaire and clinical vignettes. Each vignette had 9 randomly manipulated and embedded patient-related factors, considered as independent variables, providing 1572 unique vignettes for analysis. These factors were determined through synthesis of a systematic literature review, a retrospective case note review, and a qualitative exploratory study. Results showed that most healthcare professionals agreed that deactivation discussions should be initiated by a cardiologist (95%, n = 255) or a specialist nurse (81%, n = 215). In terms of experience, 84% of cardiologists (n = 53) but only 30% of nurses (n = 50) had previously been involved in a deactivation decision. Healthcare professionals valued patient involvement in deactivation decisions; however, only 50% (n = 130) actively involved family members. Five of 9 clinical factors were associated with an increased likelihood to discuss deactivation including advanced age, severe heart failure, presence of malignancy, receipt of multiple ICD shocks, and more than 3 hospital admissions during the previous year. Furthermore, nationality and discipline significantly influenced likelihood and confidence in decision making. Conclusions: Guidelines recommend that healthcare professionals discuss ICD deactivation; however, practice is suboptimal with multifactorial factors impacting on decision making. The role and responsibility of nurses in discussing deactivation require clarity and improvement. ; Funding Agencies|HFA Nurse Fellowship training grant; Public Health Agency NI (Research & Development Division)