In Attendance: Jasmyn, Mary, Augustina, Lillian, Dielle, Dayna, George, Nandini, Sanjeev, Sarah, Janet, Aristotle, Paul, Nikki
Action Items
Committees
Forward questions from Life Skills the Family Advisory Committee suggested adding to the WHODAS – Lillian
Review and provide feedback – George
Pass on Lillian’s contact information to education services for e-learning review – Sarah
Send out the fidelity table/materials for Steering Committee to take a look at – Janet/Jasmyn
Service Measures and Outcomes Terms of Reference
Take out the names - Janet
Circulate to SC for approval – Jasmyn
Submit REB amendments early July once engagement piece is decided – Jasmyn/Dielle/Chelsi
Other interested LHINs
Create executive summary for the ministry - PSSP
Book a time to have a conversation with sites expressing interest – SC
Connect with Lisa and the structured psychotherapy working group about the online platform/routine data – SC
Minutes
CIHR Annual Report
The annual report is nearly finished, it will be sent out by the end of the week
WHODAS/Life Skills Tools from Family Advisory Committee
The Family Advisory Committee had a meeting on Friday
They supported capturing the family interpretation of youth functioning
The WHODAS complements what we are collecting from patients, and they supported it generally
They saw some questions in Life Skills that might have a better emphasis on mental health
E.g. are they taking their medication, are they behaving offensively, etc.
The question was raised: if we use the WHODAS, can we add some questions from Life Skills?
o Lillian will send the actual questions they suggested to be added
o What the WHODAS taps into is broader
o We would struggle with what to do with that data
o We will discuss and give feedback and engage again about this
Family Advisory Data Cleaning Question
Hugh is also participating in another project
He brought back: there was frustration when they talked about collecting data for a couple of years, but when they went to analyze the data, they had to invest time in cleaning it as opposed to getting to the research results
He wanted Lillian to raise to the group: to think about data collection up front, to bring up this point
Response: Part of the platform we use (REDCap) does give the ability to do regular data quality checks, and we do that routinely
We wouldn’t wait until the end of the study to look at the quality of the data
Issues would be addressed ASAP if they came up
Family Advisory Question about SEE position evaluation in research
This is an important role in wrap around care model, but often youth aren’t ready to consider employment when they start
There are concerns about how that will be portrayed in the research
I.e. as it not being effective vs. having the patients not ready for that stage yet
Family and Youth Advisory Engagement Measures
Family Advisory Committee also reviewed engagement questionnaires
Simone will come to next Family Advisory Committee, they will ask questions, etc.
They understand and support the importance of collecting this data
Family Manual e-learning
Sarah requested: would Family Advisory Committee be up to taking a look at the family manual that has been made into e-learning for families?
Education services is in the pilot stage of developing the e-learning
Lillian says yes
Sarah will pass on Lillian’s contact information to education services to go from there
Fidelity Update
Almost decided on a scale and process for rating the items
It took while to get to this point
Started aligning with EPION scale, then EPION ended up using two versions of the scale so there wasn’t consistency with aligning with Ontario
Decided to align as much as possible with Don’s tool (November version)
There ended up being a January version as well
Had consensus rating meetings with Don after two sites – there were other differences in how we were rating
With EPION there was a lot of adapting to context
The tool should be consistently used
The group documented all of the changes
Collected data at two sites but haven’t reported it back yet
4 items we need SC input on – Ontario contextual differences, and need to decide how to rate the items
3 are medication issues (schizophrenia spectrum vs. broader diagnoses), 1 related to whether partnerships should be acceptable to deliver a component of the intervention
Janet will send out the table/materials later for Steering Committee to take a look at
May need to go back and ask more questions of the sites as well to re-rate
Service Measures and Outcomes Terms of Reference
The Terms of Reference was approved by the working group
Only comment – lists names of members, wonder if should take them out
Will take out the names
Circulate to SC for approval (Jasmyn will re-attach)
Thank you to Nandini!
Her last day June 20.
Before she leaves, she will introduce to the new assistant manager of special projects in the KE portfolio, who will be working with Sarah and likely the EPI-SET project
PSSP Update
Al Cudmore is the PSSP implementation support for the Waterloo Wellington site
He is already in contact with Kim from the site
Mary/Dayna have an orientation set for tomorrow to orient him to the project and answer questions
He has been sent relevant resources as well
He works in the office with Sandy (who does Niagara support)
Sudbury site update
Aristotle had a call on Monday with one of the LHIN directors
She thinks that there should be more emphasis on quality of care and accountability
Has an FTE for Sudbury contingent on them joining the EPI-SET project
Next steps – get in touch with Sudbury director level (who is on board) who would then work to get the Sudbury team on board
Waiting to hear back for another call, LHIN person will also be on that call for a warm handoff
Training could happen simultaneously with Waterloo Wellington
REB is already in place
Thunder Bay and other LHINS (Central west, TC, MH)
Other sites are also expressing interest in EPI-SET/NAVIGATE
There is only funding to do research with sites that expressed interest initially
Need to have a phase two, which likely needs to be at least partially resourced by the ministry
We need to sort out what a scaled back version looks like
o Measure fidelity
o ICES data comparison
o Not patient level data
o Keep people with lived experience involved, but may not measure their engagement in the same way
PSSP team will do an executive summary for the ministry and get it back to us
Resourcing will be on supporting ongoing implementation and sustainability
We should book a general time to have a conversation with a few sites who are expressing interest
o Timeframe, context, etc.
We should connect with Lisa and the structured psychotherapy working group about the online platform for routine data
PSSP and ECHO - sustainability resources
o ECHO ministry reports – super hub collates data and does reports
o Each ECHO provides ministry reports if not part of super hub
o No accountability piece yet where funding is tied to it
Need to make sure the current sites also continue to have the resources they need
Is this the time to reconsider how EPION budget is used?
o Mandate is training and quality of care
o Could be a conversation to have
o Can come on heels of QI survey from fidelity (part of EPION workplan)
Patient Measures and Outcomes
Depending on level/change in risk, amendments may or may not go to full board review. We should submit whenever the amendment is ready to go.
We will wait for engagement piece to submit everything early July
Contract amendments need to be re-signed with the three current sites
Recruiting timelines
We are revising to recruit within 1st year of treatment, as opposed to only at the first visit
We will also revise the assessment schedule to align with treatment timelines, as opposed to study recruitment timelines
Safety and risk assessment questions have come up from the sites/logistical planning
This should be developed in consultation with the sites
If the clients are at the clinic, we will contact a clinician for them to follow their usual protocol
If the clients aren’t in the clinic during the assessments, this process will be worked out further in consultation with the sites
Commentaires