The Northern Region Clinical Practice Committee (NRCPC) conducts hospital-based health technology assessments (HTA) to provide advice to hospital managers regarding both the implementation of new technologies and the configuration of existing services. To assist in the comparison of dissimilar health technologies applied across different disciplines and different hospitals, the NRCPC developed a prioritization tool. This abstract reports the use of the tool over the 17-year period that the committee has been in operation.

The score given to each HTA depends on cost-utility, predicted health improvements and the quality of evidence. In addition to the scoring tool, editorial notes are provided to contextualize the agreed score and to explain the NRCPCs interpretation of the evidence.

Most of the time hospital managers have made decisions concordant with the recommendations of the NRCPC; submissions are recommended to be implemented, declined, or receive interim approval with data collection. The latter often occurs when there are uncertainties about efficacy, but no (or very few) safety concerns, or where there are uncertainties about whether the proposed costs are reproducible in the hospital setting. In these cases, management responses often require submitters to undertake a limited number of cases and collect data for audit over a one-to two-year period. Low-scoring submissions are often declined, whereas high-scoring submissions have not been declined to date. The interim approval (with data collection) strategy has had variable outcomes based on the willingness of the implementing clinicians to collect accurate data about both costs and outcomes. From 2005 to 2022, the NRCPC received 146 submissions. This poster reports graphical representations of the decisions made over the NRCPCs period of operation.

The NRCPC scoring tool has been successful to date in providing a framework for decision makers to allow consistent, unbiased and objective assessments of dissimilar technologies. Prioritization tools in hospital-based HTA are beneficial to decision makers in hospital settings.

Psychodynamic psychiatry training seminars are a blended supervision and experiential style approach to training health care professionals in reflective practice and formulation. They apply psychodynamic theory through case formulations, seminars, and Balint groups so that health care staff can improve their communication style, formulation skills and enhance their appreciation for patients with complex mental health problems. Our aim is to evaluate the provision of our psychodynamic psychiatry training sessions for psychiatry trainees in the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, and to evaluate the perceived benefits of attending in terms of personal and professional development.

The evaluation used a standardized mixed-methods approach, with the sample consisting of psychiatry core trainees as part of the regional MRCPsych course. Sessions were delivered via an online format. The evaluation period was between November 2021 and January 2023. Data were gathered via a survey tool, adapted from the literature using Likert scales and free text questions to identify barriers and facilitators to the sessions.

The survey collated data from thirty-seven core trainees ranging between CT1 to CT3. The majority of participants (> 90%) scored the sessions positively across the board in terms of the content of session material, length of training, and quality of delivery. The majority of attendees felt the sessions focused on the relevant clinical issues (97%), were relevant to their training (95%), and felt the group was a safe place to express and process anxieties and frustrations about their work (89%). Notably, the majority either agreed or strongly agreed the group had changed the way they think and practice (91%), including an appreciation of the emotional and symbolic aspects of patients' presentations (89%).

This evaluation reports early findings on psychodynamic psychiatry teaching for psychiatry trainees. Overall, the participants felt the sessions were relevant to their training and improved their personal and professional development. Key benefits of the sessions included increased insight into the emotional and symbolic aspects of the patient's symptoms and clinical issues, team working through cohesion, and the humanity of the doctor in the clinical relationship with the patient. This suggests that the sessions provide a much-needed space to process and reflect on the often-intense demands of clinical work and training. The main theme within barriers to the group processes was external in terms of other clinical demands requiring prioritization.

Psychodynamic psychiatry training seminars are a blended supervision and experiential style approach to training health care professionals in reflective practice and formulation. They apply psychodynamic theory through case formulations, seminars, and Balint groups so that healthcare staff can improve their communication style, formulation skills and enhance their appreciation for patients with complex mental health problems. Our aim is to evaluate the provision of our psychodynamic psychiatry training sessions for healthcare staff in the Cambridge University Hospitals (CUH) NHS Foundation Trust, and to evaluate the perceived benefits of attending in terms of personal and professional development.

Convenience sampling was used to recruit CUH doctors, nurses, and healthcare assistants at all stages of training as part of their in-house teaching schedule. Sessions were delivered via an online format or in person. The evaluation period was between October 2021 and July 2022. Data were gathered via a survey tool, adapted from the literature using Likert scales and free text questions to identify barriers and facilitators to the sessions

Thirty-three participants responded to our survey, with the sample consisting of gastroenterology (n = 4), acute medicine (n = 6), and emergency medicine doctors (n = 10). The sample also included emergency department nurses (n = 8) and health care assistants (n = 5). included. Most respondents (>90%) described the experience of the sessions including the material covered as ‘Positive’ or ‘Very Positive’. All participants felt they were able to express themselves in the session and the majority (>97%) felt that the sessions were relevant to their training needs and focused on the right issues. Notably, most participants (>88%) felt the sessions enhanced their ability to recognise the importance of the therapeutic relationship, the emotional significance of symptoms as well as the impact of group dynamics on patient's presentations.

Our findings suggest that these psychodynamic psychiatry training seminars provide an effective, safe, non-judgemental space for experimentation and interdisciplinary discussion to support healthcare staff management of complex patients. Our results support the expansion of this low-cost, high-value intervention for both the well-being and professional development of healthcare staff.

Balint groups explore the clinician-patient relationship, with benefits for empathy, resilience, and interpersonal skills. Their use with medical students is increasing, but more research is needed to understand how their benefit, feasibility and accessibility can be optimised. We aimed to explore this over a one-year pilot of a medical student Balint group programme.

An explanatory sequential mixed methods design was used. Eight medical student Balint groups ran for six weeks during 2022–2023, with 90 students participating. Students completed quantitative and qualitative feedback at the end of each cohort. Themes were identified using qualitative content analysis. Balint group leaders kept reflective session notes and used these alongside student feedback to undertake a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis of the programme.

Students reported a neutral to slightly positive experience of the groups. Strengths were coded as containment, learning, and community identity. Students identified weaknesses due to pace, facilitation, and anxiety. Threats to the future success of the Balint group programme were related to engagement and the group being perceived as inauspicious and intimidating. Potential opportunities to develop the Balint group programme included widening participation and sharpening focus. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats identified by the group leaders were in line with those of the students, but also acknowledged the broad range of ethico-legal material discussed by students, timetabling and organisational challenges. A range of opportunities were identified for how the Balint group programme could optimally enrich the clinical curriculum.

Integrating successful Balint groups into the medical school curriculum is challenging on individual and organisational levels. However, students perceive value in these groups, and they provide a unique space to combine learning and emotional support with personal, professional and community development. Ongoing consideration is needed to optimally and sustainably incorporate Balint groups within the undergraduate medical curriculum.

Development of an eating disorder in childhood has been shown to predict sleep disturbance in adulthood. Both the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the wider scientific literature support interventions to help support patients with their sleep. The aim of this project was to evaluate the perceived benefits of the Sleep and Dreams Group to adult patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) on a specialist eating disorders unit.

Adult patients with severe AN on an inpatient specialist eating disorders unit attended a 6 session, once weekly group on a voluntary basis. The therapeutic group included psychoeducation around sleep hygiene, and an experiential component focusing on sleep/dreaming context of inpatient treatment of severe AN.

All participants(n = 6) either agreed or strongly agreed that their understanding of sleep and dreams had improved. Quality of sleep strongly improved in 20% of participants, however, the remainder reported no significant change in this domain. Despite this, 80% of participants agreed or strongly agreed they got what they wanted from the group, finding the content of the psychoeducation material slightly positive or very positive. The total program length was thought to be appropriate, with 80% describing this as very positive.

The impact of the group on quality of sleep was variable, these results indicate that the value of the group to participants was found in the intergroup processes as evidenced by positive evaluation. This is of particular relevance to severe AN, where interpersonal deficits are often seen and from a treatment perspective in addressing the isolating nature of the disorder. Suggestions for improvement included bolstering the interactive component, and assessing participants regarding eligibility for dream discussion to aid formulation work of the unit.