Publication - Minutes

National Advisory Board for Rehabilitation: December 2020

Published: 22 Mar 2021
Date of meeting: 10 Dec 2020
Date of next meeting: 20 Jan 2020
Location: Video conference, Microsoft Teams

Minutes from the meeting of the group on 10 December 2020.

Published:
22 Mar 2021
National Advisory Board for Rehabilitation: December 2020

Attendees and apologies

Present:

  • Carolyn McDonald  (Chair) (CM), SG – Chief Nursing Officer’s Directorate
  • Bette Locke (BL), SG - Chief Nursing Officer’s Directorate and Clinical Priorities Policy 
  • Susan Wallace (SW), SG – Clinical Priorities Policy
  • Jan Beattie  (JB), SG – Chief Nursing Officer and Primary Care Directorate
  • Melanie Weldon (MW), SG – Health Inequalities Policy
  • Laurie Eyles (LE), SG – Health Improvement Policy
  • Dr Nadine Cossette (NC), Liaison psychiatrist, Royal Infirmary Edinburgh
  • Emma Stirling (ES), Allied Health Professions Directors (Scotland) Group 
  • Phil Mackie (PM), Public Health Scotland     
  • Angela Gall (AG), British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine 
  • Marianne Hayward (MH), Health and Social Care, South Lanarkshire HSCP Chief Officers Group
  • Alex McMahon (AM), Scottish Executive Nurse Directors 
  • Malcolm Daniel (MD), Consultant in Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Glasgow Royal Infirmary
  • Dr Tara Quasim (TQ), Senior Lecturer in Anaesthesia and Critical Care, University of Glasgow 
  • Lisa Powell (LP), Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) 
  • Caroline Deane (CD), workforce lead, Scottish Care
  • Sara Redmond (SR), Health and Social Care Alliance
  • Maureen Berry (MB), Healthcare Improvement Scotland
  • Jemma McGuffie (JM), SG – Clinical Priorities Policy 

Apologies:

  • Dr Alastair Cook (AC), SG – Mental Health Policy    
  • Nicola Dickie (ND), COSLA 
  • Jacques Kerr (JK), SG - Senior Medical Officer, Directorate for Health Performance and Delivery    

Items and actions

Welcome, introductions and apologies - Carolyn McDonald

CM welcomed all members and members provided introductions and a background on their role within the Board.

Apologies were noted as above.

Overview of the Rehabilitation Framework and background to establishment of the Group (for discussion) - Carolyn McDonald

CM provided an overview of the Recovery and Rehabilitation Framework and rationale for establishing the advisory board.

SR asked if there is a budget allocated to the implementation of the Framework. CM advised that the Rehabilitation Framework has been included within the Programme for Government. A budget will be confirmed once the work required to implement the framework has been scoped, along with required resource. 

Terms of reference (for decision) - Carolyn McDonald

Board members were asked to consider the terms or reference and were to provide initial views. 

PM commented that the role of the Board should be more explicit and the purpose clearly set within the context of providing expert advice and leadership in relation to the Rehabilitation Framework. 

PM asked if co-ordination and evaluation of the implementation of the Framework should be a role for the Advisory Board and that it would be useful to understand the mechanism by which all policy teams have a link to the delivery of the Framework. The group discussed whether there was scope in seeking input from COSLA in regards the role of integration boards and local government.  

Action:

  • the group to send any comments on the terms of reference to the Secretariat

Quality Improvement Approach to delivery of the Framework (for decision) - Bette Locke

BL outlined the overarching aim of the Rehabilitation and Recovery Framework. Members were reminded that the overall vision of the Framework is that all people who have rehabilitation needs are able to access the services that they require; whether they have been directly and indirectly affected by COVID-19. 

BL asked members to think about; evaluation of the impact of the work undertaken on the implementation of the Framework, what does success look like in terms of this piece of work and the benefits of using a quality improvement approach to set out our aim and provide a mechanism to measure and monitor progress and demonstrate improvements. 

BL informed members that the three main questions are; what are we trying to accomplish, what are the changes that we need to put in place to deliver improvement and how do we do it. 
Data to measure improvement was discussed and how we might collect data in a meaningful way to measure progress.  

BL discussed the driver diagram and invited comments on the workstreams, timeframe and engagement. BL highlighted the importance of services being person led, accessible and equitable. 

AM highlighted the importance of establishing what the problem is that we are trying to fix and understanding what people with rehabilitation needs require. 

TQ noted that when we think about rehabilitation we need to think about the patient’s baseline and where they need to get to. 

JB commented that we need to distinguish between patients’ needs and service needs and to be clear about that the focus of the work – is to meet the needs of the services or the user? 

SR commented that the Alliance has recently undertaken a rapid programme of engagement to support the mobilisation recovery group and that the findings of that are relevant to help understand the problems people are experiencing. The three things that were outlined by BL were highlighted as priorities people have shared within that report. 

MD advised that the aim should have a clearer focus on the needs of people with rehabilitation needs. 

Members commented that data is vital as is QI needs to address equitable access. 

Action:

  • members to send comments to BL regarding the driver diagram

Sub-Groups (for decision) - Bette Locke

Bette discussed the paper circulated prior to the meeting. Key questions to consider are set out in the paper:

  • the National Advisory Board is asked to consider and approve
  • the five workstreams (including working titles) outlined above
  • the establishment of five sub-groups to deliver the workstreams outlined above

Members provided comments, and a question around resource and timescales in delivery of the work of each sub group was also raised. 

Action:

  • members to send thoughts on work sub-groups could delivery quickly and what initial priorities might be

Date of next meeting - Carolyn McDonald

Wednesday 20 January 2021, 11:00-12:30

AOB

None

Actions:

  • to circulate paper on Your COVID Recovery to members - Clinical Priorities Unit
  • to send on comments on the terms of reference to Clinical Priorities box/ Secretariat - in particular commenting on the following questions - are there any key policy areas not represented on the group? Is the Terms of Reference reflective of the groups objectives? - all
  • to send further comments about the driver diagram reference to Clinical Priorities team/ Secretariat and Bette Locke - all
  • to have one to one follow up conversations with members - Bette and members
  • to send thoughts on work sub-groups could deliver quickly and what initial priorities might be to Bette Locke, copying in Clinical Priorities mailbox - members