Objective This study evaluated the impact of establishing a transition clinic in a regional Australian setting on the lives of young adults living with severe chronic kidney disease and their families. Design A qualitative design using the experience‐based co‐design framework. Setting Interviews were held at the Royal Hobart Hospital or the Menzies Institute for Medical Research. The co‐design workshop was held at the Royal Hobart Hospital. Participants Young people aged 17‐29 years living with a kidney transplant or stage 4‐5 chronic kidney disease, parents/carers and health professionals. Interventions Establishment of a young adult renal and transplant clinic. Main outcome measure Impact of a transition clinic in a regional setting on the lives of young adults living with chronic kidney disease and their families and suggestions for improvement. Results Four key themes were identified as follows: The Model of Care; Peer support; Transition towards self‐management: Building life skills; Suggestions for improvement and limitations of the service model. The non‐institutional, informal clinic setting and social/educational activities facilitated engagement, self‐management and peer support for young people and parents. Suggestions for improvement included involvement of older peers, additional life skills sessions and a youth worker. Conclusion This regional transition clinic is valued by the young people and their parents for generating peer support, building self‐management and life skills. Sustainability of the clinic depends upon having the appropriate expertise available, access to a suitable venue and offering a program that meets the needs of young people.

Introduction Mental health services are fragmented in Australia leading to a priority being placed on whole-of-community approaches and integration. We describe the LifeSpan suicide prevention intervention developed by the Black Dog Institute that draws upon nine evidence-based community-wide strategies. We examined the suicide prevention Collaborative group at each site. We evaluated how the social capital of the community and service providers changed, and how the brokerage roles of the Collaborative affected integration of effort. Methods This was a two phase, explanatory mixed methods study. Participants were LifeSpan Coordinators, The Collaborative and working group members at four LifeSpan sites in New South Wales (three metropolitan/regional, one regional/rural). Quantitative social network data was collected through an online survey and analysed using Gephi software. Qualitative data through focus groups and interviews with Lifespan Coordinators and community stakeholders. Results The social network survey was administered in three sites and was completed by 83 people. Data gave quantitative evidence of increased engagement across key stakeholders in each region who had not previously been working together. Nominations of other collaborators showed this network extended beyond the formal structures of The Collaborative. LifeSpan Coordinators were empirically identified as key players in the networks. Qualitative data was collected from 53 individuals (18 interviews and five focus groups) from across all sites. Participants identified benefits of this collaborative approach including greater capacity to run activities, better communication between groups, identification of “who’s who” locally, improvement in the integration of priorities, services and activities, and personal support for previously isolated members. LifeSpan Coordinators were key to the smooth running of The Collaborative. This may represent a risk to sustainability if they left. The collaboration model that suited metropolitan sites was difficult to sustain in rural sites, but gains were seen in better coordinated postvention efforts. Conclusion LifeSpan Coordinators were noted to be exceptional people who magnified the benefits of collaboration. Geographic proximity was a potent driver of social capital. Initial engagement with local stakeholders was seen as essential but time-consuming work in the implementation phase. Coordinators reported this important work was not always acknowledged as part of their formal role.

No abstract

BackgroundLifeSpan is a recently implemented suicide prevention initiative developed by the Black Dog Institute that draws upon nine evidence-based community-wide prevention strategies. We examined how the implementation of LifeSpan used the strategy of forming a suicide prevention Collaborative group (The Collaborative) at each site. We evaluated how this had affected the social capital of the community and the effectiveness of the group through the growth of the key stakeholders’ socio-professional network. MethodsThis was a mixed methods study. Participants were The Collaborative and working group members at four sites implementing the LifeSpan initiative in New South Wales. Quantitative social network data was collected through an online survey and qualitative data through focus groups with The Collaborative members and interviews with LifeSpan Coordinators.ResultsThere was clear quantitative evidence of increased engagement across key stakeholders in the region, who were not previously working together. This extended beyond the formal structure of The Collaborative. LifeSpan Coordinators were empirically identified as key players in the networks. Benefits of this collaborative approach included greater capacity to run activities, better communication between groups, identification of “who’s who” locally, improvement in the integration of priorities, services and activities, and personal support for previously isolated members. It was noted that the LifeSpan Coordinators were key to the smooth running of The Collaborative and its resulting combined effort, but this may represent a risk to its sustainability if they left. The model of collaboration that suited metropolitan sites was seen as difficult to sustain in one rural site but gains at this site were seen in better coordinated postvention efforts. Engagement was difficult with some clinically based services at some sites.ConclusionLifeSpan Coordinators were noted to be exceptional people that magnified the benefits of collaboration. Geographic proximity was also seen as a potent driver of social capital. Initial engagement with local stakeholders was seen as essential but time consuming (and “invisible”) work in the implementation phase.