Guest guest Posted November 6, 2000 Report Share Posted November 6, 2000 Hi Glad to see that you have found us. Welcome to the group. We spoke on the phone the other day re the Omaha system following your presentation at conference. Thanks for the information that you sent. Hope to come on the 4th December but depends on the enthusiasm of management. I was very interested in your work and I have been directed to buy the book but I am not sure that that will be of particular use just now. We hope to look at the system in more detail next year following a review of health visiting in our area, (Newham, East London). Not sure about the term 'Nursing diagnosis' though, when applied to health visiting. In your adaptation of the system perhaps a different term could be found, although I understand the concept as you explained it! Omaha System > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have heard > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate conference. This > project involves a new means of identifying, measuring and documenting > outcomes in health visiting. I have attached a brief overview of the project > to this message. As we have had a number of requests since the conference > for more information we have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > on 4th Dec from 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > be a small administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter that > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 I was interested to read about your study. I am currently working on a health visiting study which has some points of similarity, and some aspects that are very different. It is based in a London Trust where a core minimum universal health visiting service is offered to all families with children under 5 years and an ‘extra health visiting’ (EHV) service to families whose needs are not met by the core service. If EHV is required, the reasons for intervention are recorded against a set of 18 criteria, divided into four main sections (child’s health, parents/carers’ health, social factors, housing factors). The complexity of the situation is estimated (low, medium or high) and a target gain (intended goal) identified. Taken together, these three dimensions (adapted from Ishmael and Duffy), identify the reason that EHV is initiated, give some idea of the processes needed in the intervention and the expected outcome in terms of a change in overall health situation or status. An audit of 60 EHV records selected randomly from health visitors’ caseloads in 1998 showed that, of the nine potential target gains, the three most commonly selected by health visitors to describe their interventions involved: - empowering the client/family to gain control over his/her life (27%); - enabling client and family adaptation to a life event (25%); - arresting or retarding the progress of a degenerating situation (20%). Only 35% of families had received EHV for less than 26 weeks; the service was continuing in 62% of cases, indicating something of the complex and long term nature of health visiting work. Despite a high number of intractible and difficult situations, 'target gains' were deemed to have been achieved in 57% of the families; in many cases it was too early in the process for an outcome to be expected. When planning our study we recognised that the health visitors tended to use the EHV terminology in different ways. However, that was generally felt to be a benefit in practice, because it allowed flexibility for practitioners to use the terms and phrases that felt most comfortable for themselves and whatever client they were working with. Our study focused on the idea of working in partnership with clients, but one of the aims is: " To explore the relationship between decision making and partnership working, and the health outcomes for clients, - by analysing the skills and knowledge that health visitors need to enable clients to be involved in decision making and partnership working in relation to ‘extra health visiting’ - by identifying auditable links between ways of working and health outcomes for families. " We have a research planning meeting with external advisers fixed for 4th December , or I would be interested in finding out more about your work; I hope your day goes well. Best wishes (Ref: Ishmael N & Duffy T (1995) Health visitor outcomes: an effective model VFM Update: Primary Focus 1: 14-15) " jean.christensen " wrote: > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have heard > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate conference. This > project involves a new means of identifying, measuring and documenting > outcomes in health visiting. I have attached a brief overview of the project > to this message. As we have had a number of requests since the conference > for more information we have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > on 4th Dec from 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > be a small administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter that > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 , your work sounds really interesting and I would love to know more about it at some point. How have hte health visitors taken to it? Well I expect. what was the instigating factor to start such a study in the first place and who's idea was it? Toity On Tue, 07 Nov 2000 11:00:39 +0100 Cowley <sarah@...> wrote: > I was interested to read about your study. I am currently working on a health visiting study which has some > points of similarity, and some aspects that are very different. > > It is based in a London Trust where a core minimum universal health visiting service is offered to all families with > children under 5 years and an extra health visiting (EHV) service to families whose needs are not met by the core > service. > > If EHV is required, the reasons for intervention are recorded against a set of 18 criteria, divided into four main > sections (childs health, parents/carers health, social factors, housing factors). The complexity of the situation > is estimated (low, medium or high) and a target gain (intended goal) identified. > > Taken together, these three dimensions (adapted from Ishmael and Duffy), identify the reason that EHV is initiated, > give some idea of the processes needed in the intervention and the expected outcome in terms of a change in overall > health situation or status. > > An audit of 60 EHV records selected randomly from health visitors caseloads in 1998 showed that, of the nine > potential target gains, the three most commonly selected by health visitors to describe their interventions involved: > - empowering the client/family to gain control over his/her life (27%); > - enabling client and family adaptation to a life event (25%); > - arresting or retarding the progress of a degenerating situation (20%). > > Only 35% of families had received EHV for less than 26 weeks; the service was continuing in 62% of cases, indicating > something of the complex and long term nature of health visiting work. > > Despite a high number of intractible and difficult situations, 'target gains' were deemed to have been achieved in 57% > of the families; in many cases it was too early in the process for an outcome to be expected. > > When planning our study we recognised that the health visitors tended to use the EHV terminology in different ways. > However, that was generally felt to be a benefit in practice, because it allowed flexibility for practitioners to use > the terms and phrases that felt most comfortable for themselves and whatever client they were working with. Our study > focused on the idea of working in partnership with clients, but one of the aims is: > > " To explore the relationship between decision making and partnership working, and the health outcomes for clients, > - by analysing the skills and knowledge that health visitors need to enable clients to be involved in decision making > and partnership working in relation to extra health visiting > - by identifying auditable links between ways of working and health outcomes for families. " > > We have a research planning meeting with external advisers fixed for 4th December , or I would be interested in > finding out more about your work; I hope your day goes well. > > Best wishes > > > > (Ref: Ishmael N & Duffy T (1995) Health visitor outcomes: an effective model VFM Update: Primary Focus 1: 14-15) > > " jean.christensen " wrote: > > > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have > heard > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate > conference. This > project involves a new means of identifying, > measuring and documenting > outcomes in health visiting. I have > attached a brief overview of the project > to this message. As we have > had a number of requests since the conference > for more information we > have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > on 4th Dec from > 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > be a small > administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter > that > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 Dear , Can I get a hold of a copy of this report as we are at present reviewing our record keeping system and I am keen to explore as many possibilities as possible. Re: Omaha System > I was interested to read about your study. I am currently working on a health visiting study which has some > points of similarity, and some aspects that are very different. > > It is based in a London Trust where a core minimum universal health visiting service is offered to all families with > children under 5 years and an 'extra health visiting' (EHV) service to families whose needs are not met by the core > service. > > If EHV is required, the reasons for intervention are recorded against a set of 18 criteria, divided into four main > sections (child's health, parents/carers' health, social factors, housing factors). The complexity of the situation > is estimated (low, medium or high) and a target gain (intended goal) identified. > > Taken together, these three dimensions (adapted from Ishmael and Duffy), identify the reason that EHV is initiated, > give some idea of the processes needed in the intervention and the expected outcome in terms of a change in overall > health situation or status. > > An audit of 60 EHV records selected randomly from health visitors' caseloads in 1998 showed that, of the nine > potential target gains, the three most commonly selected by health visitors to describe their interventions involved: > - empowering the client/family to gain control over his/her life (27%); > - enabling client and family adaptation to a life event (25%); > - arresting or retarding the progress of a degenerating situation (20%). > > Only 35% of families had received EHV for less than 26 weeks; the service was continuing in 62% of cases, indicating > something of the complex and long term nature of health visiting work. > > Despite a high number of intractible and difficult situations, 'target gains' were deemed to have been achieved in 57% > of the families; in many cases it was too early in the process for an outcome to be expected. > > When planning our study we recognised that the health visitors tended to use the EHV terminology in different ways. > However, that was generally felt to be a benefit in practice, because it allowed flexibility for practitioners to use > the terms and phrases that felt most comfortable for themselves and whatever client they were working with. Our study > focused on the idea of working in partnership with clients, but one of the aims is: > > " To explore the relationship between decision making and partnership working, and the health outcomes for clients, > - by analysing the skills and knowledge that health visitors need to enable clients to be involved in decision making > and partnership working in relation to 'extra health visiting' > - by identifying auditable links between ways of working and health outcomes for families. " > > We have a research planning meeting with external advisers fixed for 4th December , or I would be interested in > finding out more about your work; I hope your day goes well. > > Best wishes > > > > (Ref: Ishmael N & Duffy T (1995) Health visitor outcomes: an effective model VFM Update: Primary Focus 1: 14-15) > > " jean.christensen " wrote: > > > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have heard > > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate conference. This > > project involves a new means of identifying, measuring and documenting > > outcomes in health visiting. I have attached a brief overview of the project > > to this message. As we have had a number of requests since the conference > > for more information we have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > > on 4th Dec from 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > > be a small administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter that > > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 Thanks Toity; yes, it is an interesting study; just started in July and only funded for one year (we requested 18 months and thought that would be tight), so we have a huge amount to do. The idea for the study came directly from the health visitors and professional supervisors who audited the EHV process, which had been implemented about 3-4 years earlier. They elected to do the audit because they wanted to know how it was working in practice; they worked out how to do it themselves and wrote it up for internal management purposes then were in the process of disbanding their working group when I met with them and their Executive Nurse. The reason I was asked to meet with them was because the health visitors felt they spent a lot of time being research subjects and finding research subjects for researchers, but did not know enough about research themselves or have control over any of the projects. So, instead of disbanding the audit group, they continued to meet with me for several sessions (my time being funded through the university education contract with the Trust) working out what they wanted to look at in a study and how they might do that. There were lots of contenders; we had actually got half way through planning some research focused on 'participation' when a local charitable trust announced its key funding stream would focus on 'partnership' so we shifted the focus slightly! They allowed me my interest in outcomes; even agreed it is important. The audit group continue to be involved as key collaborators in the research, but it is still difficult to get other health visitors interested in participating (we want to interview them and their clients about EHV, as well as observing how they implement it: threatening!) . We hope to use this study as a basis for action research to develop the service according to the findings from this stage. best wishes Toity Deave wrote: > , your work sounds really interesting and I would love to know > more about it at some point. How have hte health visitors taken to it? > Well I expect. what was the instigating factor to start such a study > in the first place and who's idea was it? > > Toity > > On Tue, 07 Nov 2000 11:00:39 +0100 Cowley > <sarah@...> wrote: > > > I was interested to read about your study. I am currently working on a health visiting study which has some > > points of similarity, and some aspects that are very different. > > > > It is based in a London Trust where a core minimum universal health visiting service is offered to all families with > > children under 5 years and an extra health visiting (EHV) service to families whose needs are not met by the core > > service. > > > > If EHV is required, the reasons for intervention are recorded against a set of 18 criteria, divided into four main > > sections (childs health, parents/carers health, social factors, housing factors). The complexity of the situation > > is estimated (low, medium or high) and a target gain (intended goal) identified. > > > > Taken together, these three dimensions (adapted from Ishmael and Duffy), identify the reason that EHV is initiated, > > give some idea of the processes needed in the intervention and the expected outcome in terms of a change in overall > > health situation or status. > > > > An audit of 60 EHV records selected randomly from health visitors caseloads in 1998 showed that, of the nine > > potential target gains, the three most commonly selected by health visitors to describe their interventions involved: > > - empowering the client/family to gain control over his/her life (27%); > > - enabling client and family adaptation to a life event (25%); > > - arresting or retarding the progress of a degenerating situation (20%). > > > > Only 35% of families had received EHV for less than 26 weeks; the service was continuing in 62% of cases, indicating > > something of the complex and long term nature of health visiting work. > > > > Despite a high number of intractible and difficult situations, 'target gains' were deemed to have been achieved in 57% > > of the families; in many cases it was too early in the process for an outcome to be expected. > > > > When planning our study we recognised that the health visitors tended to use the EHV terminology in different ways. > > However, that was generally felt to be a benefit in practice, because it allowed flexibility for practitioners to use > > the terms and phrases that felt most comfortable for themselves and whatever client they were working with. Our study > > focused on the idea of working in partnership with clients, but one of the aims is: > > > > " To explore the relationship between decision making and partnership working, and the health outcomes for clients, > > - by analysing the skills and knowledge that health visitors need to enable clients to be involved in decision making > > and partnership working in relation to extra health visiting > > - by identifying auditable links between ways of working and health outcomes for families. " > > > > We have a research planning meeting with external advisers fixed for 4th December , or I would be interested in > > finding out more about your work; I hope your day goes well. > > > > Best wishes > > > > > > > > (Ref: Ishmael N & Duffy T (1995) Health visitor outcomes: an effective model VFM Update: Primary Focus 1: 14-15) > > > > " jean.christensen " wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > > > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have > > heard > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate > > conference. This > project involves a new means of identifying, > > measuring and documenting > outcomes in health visiting. I have > > attached a brief overview of the project > to this message. As we have > > had a number of requests since the conference > for more information we > > have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > on 4th Dec from > > 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > be a small > > administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > > > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter > > that > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2000 Report Share Posted November 7, 2000 Hi I hope you manage to persuade management to let you attend on 4th Dec. I knew that the term nursing diagnosis would cause problems for some health visitors. The original Omaha System refers to a problem classification scheme as the system was originally written for district nurses. As we do not only deal with problems, but also spend much of our time on health promotion, we neutralised the " problem " classification scheme. We also removed terms that were not likely to be used by health visitors and added terms that were felt were necessary for them (especially around growth and development, nutrition and child protection). We now feel that we have a classification scheme that reflects health visiting and are in the process of writing definitions for each one. We could not use the term problem classification scheme as we had neutralised them and so for a long time we pussy footed around by calling it " the focus of health visiting intervention " . Now we have started to call it what it is i.e. nursing diagnosis, and are also doing some work to get one of our terms " depression in post natal period " accepted as a nursing diagnosis by NANDA. I accept that some health visitors will never like the term nursing diagnosis and so I am open to suggestions for a more suitable term. Re: Omaha System Hi Glad to see that you have found us. Welcome to the group. We spoke on the phone the other day re the Omaha system following your presentation at conference. Thanks for the information that you sent. Hope to come on the 4th December but depends on the enthusiasm of management. I was very interested in your work and I have been directed to buy the book but I am not sure that that will be of particular use just now. We hope to look at the system in more detail next year following a review of health visiting in our area, (Newham, East London). Not sure about the term 'Nursing diagnosis' though, when applied to health visiting. In your adaptation of the system perhaps a different term could be found, although I understand the concept as you explained it! Omaha System > Hi everyone - my name is Christensen and I am a health visitor in > Swansea. I co-ordinate the Omaha research project that you may have heard > about when we presented it recently at the Harrogate conference. This > project involves a new means of identifying, measuring and documenting > outcomes in health visiting. I have attached a brief overview of the project > to this message. As we have had a number of requests since the conference > for more information we have decided to hold an Omaha System Information Day > on 4th Dec from 11.00a.m. until 3.00p.m. at Swansea University. There will > be a small administrative charge for attending of 10 pounds per person. If > anyone is interested in attending, I have attached an invitation letter that > has a section to be returned either by post, email or fax. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2000 Report Share Posted November 9, 2000 Hi Moira and Mark Thanks so much for your message of support. I remember you both well from the masterclass you attended on the Omaha System. remarked to me after the masterclass that she was really impressed at how quick the group from Hull picked up the Omaha System. I had an interesting discussion with Husband, Ros Bryar and your colleagues whilst I was in Harrogate. As you are using the Omaha System in its original format for your project I think it will be quite interesting for us to compare notes, as I feel we could learn a lot from each other. I hope that one of the things we might achieve from the information day is to set up some kind of electronic Omaha System Support Group so that everyone who uses the system in the UK can learn from and support each other. -Christensen- -----Original Message-----From: Moira Graham & Mark Lezemore [mailto:lezemore@...]Sent: 08 November 2000 22:00egroupsSubject: Omaha System Dear and everyone interested in the Omaha System, I am a health visitor working in Hull and one of a group of health visitors involved in a pilot study that aims to test the sensitivity of the Omaha System to capture the complexity and diversity of health visiting practice. Our initial introduction to the Omaha System was via Professor Dame June at a lecture and seminar she delivered at the Centre for Community Nursing at Hull University in January 2000. Following her lecture a number of people expressed an interest in the System and Ros Bryar arranged for a group of practitioners to attend a workshop on the System in Swansea. you may remember some of us from this workshop and I know that some of my colleagues met with you at Harrogate at the CPHVA Conference. To anyone contemplating going to Jean's Information Day on the Omaha System on the 4th December I would strongly urge you to go as it was excellent and I know we would not have understood the System as well without having had some real hands on experience. I think that you are becoming a U.K. expert on the interpretation of the system and a really good resource for all of us using it. I hope that we will be able to share our ongoing experiences of our project with people in Swansea and anyone else involved in this and similar work. your project is very interesting in that you are involved in developing a U.K. health visiting taxonomy. Here in Hull we have decided to stick with the System as it was originally developed ( nursing diagnosis and all !!). We would be interested in joining an Omaha Users Group so please keep us in Hull posted. Anyone interested in more information about our study can contact Husband who is leading the project on L.L.Husband@... Moira Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2001 Report Share Posted June 19, 2001 Hello everyone It is good to be back in touch with the SENATE again as I lost contact some time ago after changing my email address. -I am very interested in the outcome measurement tools that you mentioned and would like to see them. I am doing an MPhil on the effectiveness of health visitor interventions on parenting skills using the Omaha System and also co-ordinate a research project on the use of the Omaha System in health visiting. For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, the Omaha System is a structured documentation system that uses a standardised language. It was originally developed in the USA in the 1970's for home care nurses and so it is a well validated tool. We decided to try it out for health visiting in Swansea because it provided quantifiable evidence of the effectiveness of a service through measuring outcomes. I am pleased to say that we have just received funding from the National Assembly of Wales to develop a computerised version of the Omaha System. The system will be linked to Health Solutions Wales' Child Health 2000 System and also to a paediatric liaison health visitor who will make hospital discharge and A & E referrals electronically to the two pilot sites using Omaha System language. Home visits will be recorded on laptops in the client's home using the Omaha System. If you are interested in the system or in standardised language in general we have set up a listserve that you may wish to join. You can do this by sending an email to: majordomo@... In the body of the message type: subscribe omahasystemuk <your email address> end Once you have subscribed you may send a message to the group by sending an email to: omahasystemuk@... I hope that we can get some interesting discussions going! Christensen HV c/o Cwmbwrla Health Centre Caebricks Road Manselton Swansea SA5 8NS validity of American outcome measures Dear all I am writing to ask if anyone is willing and able to help me with examining the content validity of some American outcome measures for parental self-efficacy? These are the: The Toddler Care Questionnaire (Gross & Rocissano, 1988; Gross et al, 1994; Gross & Tucker, 1994) measures parents self efficacy in managing tasks and situations relevant to raising their toddler. The What being the Parent of a Baby is Like (WPL-R) questionnaire (Pridham & Chang, 1989) has been developed to measure self-perceptions of parenthood. This has been modified for use with parents of toddlers. The Norbeck Social Support Questionnaire (NSSQ) (Norbeck, 1983) measures the multiple components of social support and allows respondents to list and rate their own social support network members on functional properties of support (e.g. emotional & tangible support). These are currently being used in a positive parenting pilot study in Fleetwood, but we could really do with some other professional and expert views about their appropriateness within an British context of parenting support (as opposed to the American). For those who are willing to comment on the content of these measures I will forward these in the post if you could give me your postal addresses. Any support offered will be much appreciated. Many thanks and apologies for inconveniences on everyones time Whittaker Whittaker Senior Lecturer Dept of Nursing University of Central Lancashire Preston This message was sent by Easymail - http://www.easynet.co.uk/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.