REDUCE Research Programme - KCL T.Chalder

Sly Saint

Sly Saint

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
found this in a job advert

REDUCE Research Programme - Clinical Psychologist interested in Health
King's College London - Department of Psychological Medicine/Academic Psychiatry
A Clinical Psychologist with an interest in research is required for a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grant for Applied Research (PGfAR) ‘Reducing the impact of diabetic foot ulcers on patients and the NHS’ (“REDUCE”). The aim of the programme is to reduce the impact on patients and the health service, through a complex intervention (REDUCE) which is based on a cognitive behavioural model and targets the psychological and behavioural risk factors associated with ulcer recurrence and healing.

The post holder will be based at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, on the Denmark Hill campus, and will support the co-investigator, Professor Trudie Chalder. They will support the development of the REDUCE healthcare professional manual and training programme. They will deliver dedicated training and supervision to healthcare professionals who will deliver REDUCE as part of the pilot trial and main clinical and cost-effectiveness trial. They will assess pre- and post-training knowledge of healthcare professionals who deliver REDUCE, and will develop an intervention fidelity tool to ensure the intervention is delivered as intended.
Click to expand...
Key responsibilities:

  1. To support the co-investigator, Professor Trudie Chalder, as part of the NIHR PGfAR ‘Reducing the impact of diabetic foot ulcers on patients and the NHS’ (“REDUCE”) programme.
  2. To work closely with the programme principal investigators at the University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Nottingham and co-investigators at collaborating universities across England, Wales and Scotland.
  3. To be the key contact for the training and supervision of healthcare professionals who will deliver REDUCE as part of the pilot trial and main clinical and cost-effectiveness trial.
  4. To develop and deliver a structured and manualised training programme to support healthcare professionals in their delivery of REDUCE, assessing pre- and post-training, and ensuring that their training is standardised and can be replicated.
  5. To develop and test an intervention fidelity tool to ensure the intervention is delivered as intended, and to undertake assessments of knowledge and fidelity.
  6. In conjunction with Professor Chalder, the programme principal investigators, co-investigators and researchers, ensure successful completion of the training package and the programme within the stated programme timelines.
Click to expand...

https://www.jobs.ac.uk/job/CBG891/r...me-clinical-psychologist-interested-in-health

eta:
the paper from 2012 that the intervention is based on
Development and preliminary evaluation of a psychosocial intervention for modifying psychosocial risk factors associated with foot re-ulceration in diabetes
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0005796712000447?via=ihub

sci-hub.tw/10.1016/j.brat.2012.02.013
 
Last edited:
Sadly I read somewhere that the incidence of amputations (leg or part leg) had significantly increased recently, due to peopel not able to get adequate nursing care for them during lockdown). I am not sure any online CBT would have helped with that.
 
Sly Saint said:
I don't understand why the patients GPs couldn't just give them an information sheet with that on.......why does it need a course of CBT(?)
Click to expand...
Agree - I think it would be practice nurse role for regular reviews. And making those appointments 20 minutes instead of 10 so the nurse could have a chat and bring in the messages and build up a relationship with the patients would be more effective.
 
RuthT said:
Can we apply for a study of her research methodology, acronym DEFUND?
Click to expand...
I would argue for REFUND. Refund it all, give back all the money they wasted. Take it straight from the departments' future funds, they wasted those resources willingly and blatantly, do not deserve stewardship over those any longer. This was blatant misuse of public resources for entirely ideological purposes.
 
Sly Saint said:
I don't understand why the patients GPs couldn't just give them an information sheet with that on.......why does it need a course of CBT(?)
Click to expand...
How will CBT practitioners find employment otherwise? They would, obviously, but now there's more of it. Lifetime employment, to boot, since these people will be doing the exact same things 30 years from now that they were doing 30 years ago. Lifetime employment with no accountability or even anyone demanding any results is very rare these days. They don't even have to do anything on a daily basis, no one expects any of this to deliver anything. It's quite a niche they carved out for themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top