Search

Introduction: In this viewpoint we highlight a gap in the literature relating to the involvement of professional stakeholders in healthcare evaluation research. Method: Using the Dementia—PersonAlised Care Team (D‐PACT) project as an example, we illustrate how professional stakeholder work can serve various functions, from understanding commissioning and policy context to contributing to detail of intervention components. Outcome: We argue that identifying these project‐specific functions can help researchers to effectively plan when, how and for whom they will engage in professional stakeholder work across the course of an evaluation. In addition, we call for further evidence‐based guidance and sufficient allocation of resources (provided by those funding research projects) to support effective stakeholder work. Conclusion: Such support will not only enhance evaluation findings but also promote continued learning on best practice for professional stakeholder work. Patient or Public Contribution: Public and patient involvement contributors were involved in the main D‐PACT study design, development of data collection tools and interpretation of study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Reflexivity', as used by Margaret Archer, means creative self‐mastery that enables individuals to evaluate their social situation and act purposively within it. People with complex health and social needs may be less able to reflect on their predicament and act to address it. Reflexivity is imperative in complex and changing social situations. The substantial widening of health inequities since the introduction of remote and digital modalities in health care has been well‐documented but inadequately theorised. In this article, we use Archer's theory of fractured reflexivity to understand digital disparities in data from a 28‐month longitudinal ethnographic study of 12 UK general practices and a sample of in‐depth clinical cases from 'Deep End' practices serving highly deprived populations. Through four composite patient cases crafted to illustrate different dimensions of disadvantage, we show how adverse past experiences and structural inequities intersect with patients' reflexive capacity to self‐advocate and act strategically. In some cases, staff were able to use creative workarounds to compensate for patients' fractured reflexivity, but such actions were limited by workforce capacity and staff awareness. Unless a more systematic safety net is introduced and resourced, people with complex needs are likely to remain multiply disadvantaged by remote and digital health care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are 14,228 care homes in England with a population of approximately 372,035 residents, many of whom are living with frailty or multiple and complex comorbidities. Policy and international literature advocate that care homes provide high‐quality person‐centred care that meets each person's specific needs. This study aims to provide an exploration of person‐centred care in care homes in the South West of England from the perspective of all those involved. Methods: A qualitative multiple case study design was used across seven care homes in a region of South West England. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 61 participants (residents, family and health and care professionals). Nonparticipant observations were undertaken in communal areas to understand the practices and cultures of the care homes. All data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings: The findings are presented as six themes, they are adjusting to the transition into a care home; people at the centre of care; the place we call home with the people we call family; working across the boundaries of care; supporting, valuing and empowering care home teams; and managing complex and challenging moments of care. Conclusion: This study demonstrates a whole system understanding of person‐centred care across seven care homes. The main components of person‐centred care appear to be relational. These relationships take place in cultures and systems that are complex and challenging with care boundaries that need to be navigated. Navigating these care boundaries requires a people‐centred care approach built on partnerships and mutual respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper evaluates the introduction of ten Community Health and Well-being Workers (CHWW) in four pilot sites across Cornwall. The period evaluated was from the initial start in June 2022 until June 2023, covering the project setup and implementation across a range of Primary Care Networks (PCNs) and Voluntary sector partners (VSCO). Methods: All ten CHWWs and their managers at each site were interviewed (n = 16) to understand the barriers and enablers to implementation and wider learning that could be captured around the project setup. Qualitative methods were used for data collection, including semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Transcripts were thematically analysed for cross-cutting themes, as well as site-specific effects. Results: In terms of learning, we cover the following key areas, which were of most importance to the successful implementation of the pilot: The CHWWs were introduced into an already established, successful social prescribing (SP) system by the time the CHWW project began. CHWWs can access some of the same training and office space as SPs, with overlapping meeting schedules allowing them joint input on some topics. It seemed that all the pre-work in terms of relationships and learning about a similar role helped a rapid implementation. Each site's CHWW management structure uses the same line management as the SPs. Roles were clustered together to remove duplication, maximise coverage and triaging of residents. The largest barrier to overcome was integrating VSCO staff into NHS systems. Conversely, hosting CHWWs within an NHS organisation has pros and cons, namely better access to NHS data and staff, but longer lead-in time for registration on systems, and more bureaucracy for procurement/spend. Conclusions: Looking to the future, the pilot's success has spread the programme to other integrated care areas in the country, with ongoing plans for further rollout and evaluation in the coming years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Triage and clinical consultations increasingly occur remotely. We aimed to learn why safety incidents occur in remote encounters and how to prevent them. Setting and sample UK primary care. 95 safety incidents (complaints, settled indemnity claims and reports) involving remote interactions. Separately, 12 general practices followed 2021-2023. Methods Multimethod qualitative study. We explored causes of real safety incidents retrospectively ('Safety I' analysis). In a prospective longitudinal study, we used interviews and ethnographic observation to produce individual, organisational and system-level explanations for why safety and near-miss incidents (rarely) occurred and why they did not occur more often ('Safety II' analysis). Data were analysed thematically. An interpretive synthesis of why safety incidents occur, and why they do not occur more often, was refined following member checking with safety experts and lived experience experts. Results Safety incidents were characterised by inappropriate modality, poor rapport building, inadequate information gathering, limited clinical assessment, inappropriate pathway (eg, wrong algorithm) and inadequate attention to social circumstances. These resulted in missed, inaccurate or delayed diagnoses, underestimation of severity or urgency, delayed referral, incorrect or delayed treatment, poor safety netting and inadequate follow-up. Patients with complex pre-existing conditions, cardiac or abdominal emergencies, vague or generalised symptoms, safeguarding issues, failure to respond to previous treatment or difficulty communicating seemed especially vulnerable. General practices were facing resource constraints, understaffing and high demand. Triage and care pathways were complex, hard to navigate and involved multiple staff. In this context, patient safety often depended on individual staff taking initiative, speaking up or personalising solutions. Conclusion While safety incidents are extremely rare in remote primary care, deaths and serious harms have resulted. We offer suggestions for patient, staff and system-level mitigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guidance and policy on personalised (or person‐centred) care of older people living in care homes advocates that all residents must have their preferences considered, and that all care provided must be reasonably adjusted to meet the person's specific needs. Despite this, research that considers what matters to residents in terms of the care they receive is limited. Objectives: Our review aims to explore care home residents' lived experiences of personalised care and understand what really matters to them. Methods: Six electronic databases (CINHAL, Medline (Ovid), Embase, PubMed, Web of Science & PsychInfo) and Google Scholar (grey literature) were searched to identify qualitative studies relating to personalised care in care home settings, which also included resident (voices) quotes. The literature review and synthesis are reported using eMERGe guidance. Results: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria for our meta‐ethnography. Four conceptual categories (the challenge of fitting into institutional care, the passing of time, holding onto a sense of self and a desire to feel at home) and two key concepts (creating a culture of purposeful living and caring and forming and maintaining meaningful & empowering relationships) were identified. Finally, a conceptual framework of understanding represents what personally matters to residents in terms of their care. Conclusion: Our meta‐ethnography, guided by residents' lived experiences of personalised care, offers a new perspective of what personally matters to residents in terms of the care they receive. The conceptual framework of understanding highlights the importance of moving from an institutional position of doing for residents to a person‐centred position of doing with residents. Implications for practice: Our findings highlight the importance of understanding the differences between personalised and person‐centred care for policy and practice. Further considerations are required on how this might be applied through nurse and care home professionals' education and work practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Contemporary general practice includes many kinds of remote encounter. The rise in telephone, video and online modalities for triage and clinical care requires clinicians and support staff to be trained, both individually and as teams, but evidence-based competencies have not previously been produced for general practice. Aim: To identify training needs, core competencies, and learning methods for staff providing remote encounters. Design and setting: Mixed-methods study in UK general practice. Method: Data were collated from longitudinal ethnographic case studies of 12 general practices; a multi-stakeholder workshop; interviews with policymakers, training providers, and trainees; published research; and grey literature (such as training materials and surveys). Data were coded thematically and analysed using theories of individual and team learning. Results: Learning to provide remote services occurred in the context of high workload, understaffing, and complex workflows. Low confidence and perceived unmet training needs were common. Training priorities for novice clinicians included basic technological skills, triage, ethics (for privacy and consent), and communication and clinical skills. Established clinicians' training priorities include advanced communication skills (for example, maintaining rapport and attentiveness), working within the limits of technologies, making complex judgements, coordinating multi-professional care in a distributed environment, and training others. Much existing training is didactic and technology focused. While basic knowledge was often gained using such methods, the ability and confidence to make complex judgements were usually acquired through experience, informal discussions, and on-the-job methods such as shadowing. Whole-team training was valued but rarely available. A draft set of competencies is offered based on the findings. Conclusion: The knowledge needed to deliver high-quality remote encounters to diverse patient groups is complex, collective, and organisationally embedded. The vital role of non-didactic training, for example, joint clinical sessions, case-based discussions, and in-person, whole-team, on-the-job training, needs to be recognised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Practitioner understanding of patients' preferences, wishes and needs is essential for personalised health care i.e., focusing on 'what matters' to people based on their individual life situation. To develop such an understanding, dementia practitioners need to use communication practices that help people share their experiences, preferences, and priorities. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, dementia support is likely to continue to be delivered both remotely and in-person. This study analysed multiple sources of qualitative data to examine the views of practitioners, people living with dementia and carers, and researchers on how an understanding of what matters to people living with dementia can be developed remotely via telephone and video call. Access to environmental stimuli, the remote use of visual tools, peoples' tendency to downplay or omit details about their troubles and carers' ability to disclose privately were interpreted, through thematic analysis, to be factors affecting how practitioners sought to develop understanding remotely. Cumulatively, findings show that while remote support created unique challenges to practitioners' ability to develop understanding for personalised care, practitioners developed adaptive strategies to overcome some of these challenges. Further research should examine how, when and for whom these adapted practices for remote personalised care work, informing the development of evidence-based guidance and training on how practitioners can remotely develop the understanding required for personalised care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper explores the extent to which the implementation and evaluation of a collaborative care model of face-to-face service delivery for people with severe mental illness was viable during the first UK lockdown associated with COVID-19. The PARTNERS2 cluster randomised controlled trial and process evaluation were co-designed with service users and carers. The aim of this paper is to explore whether digital adaptation of the PARTNERS model for people with severe mental illness during the COVID-19 lockdown was equitable, in terms of fostering collaboration and trust in a vulnerable population. Results: We collected qualitative data from multiple sources during lockdown and subsequently constructed case-studies of participating secondary care workers. We adopted Bauman's notions of liquid modernity to inform our analysis, and identified that digital adaptation during lockdown was only successful where organisational policies, care partner skills and service users' existing resources were optimal. Conclusion: PARTNERS2 can be delivered digitally by a care partner to support people with severe mental illness to identify and work towards their goals when existing resources are optimal. However, at a time of increased need, we identified that people who are very unwell and living with limited access to resources and opportunities, remained disenfranchised at great cost. Trial registration: ISRCTN 95702682, registered 26.10.2017 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Individuals living with severe mental illness can have significant emotional, physical and social challenges. Collaborative care combines clinical and organisational components. Aims: We tested whether a primary care-based collaborative care model (PARTNERS) would improve quality of life for people with diagnoses of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or other psychoses, compared with usual care. Method: We conducted a general practice-based, cluster randomised controlled superiority trial. Practices were recruited from four English regions and allocated (1:1) to intervention or control. Individuals receiving limited input in secondary care or who were under primary care only were eligible. The 12-month PARTNERS intervention incorporated person-centred coaching support and liaison work. The primary outcome was quality of life as measured by the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). Results: We allocated 39 general practices, with 198 participants, to the PARTNERS intervention (20 practices, 116 participants) or control (19 practices, 82 participants). Primary outcome data were available for 99 (85.3%) intervention and 71 (86.6%) control participants. Mean change in overall MANSA score did not differ between the groups (intervention: 0.25, s.d. 0.73; control: 0.21, s.d. 0.86; estimated fully adjusted between-group difference 0.03, 95% CI −0.25 to 0.31; P = 0.819). Acute mental health episodes (safety outcome) included three crises in the intervention group and four in the control group. Conclusions: There was no evidence of a difference in quality of life, as measured with the MANSA, between those receiving the PARTNERS intervention and usual care. Shifting care to primary care was not associated with increased adverse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many male prisoners have significant mental health problems, including anxiety and depression. High proportions struggle with homelessness and substance misuse. Aims: This study aims to evaluate whether the Engager intervention improves mental health outcomes following release. Method: The design is a parallel randomised superiority trial that was conducted in the North West and South West of England (ISRCTN11707331). Men serving a prison sentence of 2 years or less were individually allocated 1:1 to either the intervention (Engager plus usual care) or usual care alone. Engager included psychological and practical support in prison, on release and for 3–5 months in the community. The primary outcome was the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM), 6 months after release. Primary analysis compared groups based on intention-to-treat (ITT). Results: In total, 280 men were randomised out of the 396 who were potentially eligible and agreed to participate; 105 did not meet the mental health inclusion criteria. There was no mean difference in the ITT complete case analysis between groups (92 in each arm) for change in the CORE-OM score (1.1, 95% CI –1.1 to 3.2, P = 0.325) or secondary analyses. There were no consistent clinically significant between-group differences for secondary outcomes. Full delivery was not achieved, with 77% (108/140) receiving community-based contact. Conclusions: Engager is the first trial of a collaborative care intervention adapted for prison leavers. The intervention was not shown to be effective using standard outcome measures. Further testing of different support strategies for prison with mental health problems is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are long‐standing concerns that people experiencing homelessness may not recover well if left unsupported after a hospital stay. This study reports on a study investigating the cost‐effectiveness of three different 'in patient care coordination and discharge planning' configurations for adults experiencing homelessness who are discharged from hospitals in England. The first configuration provided a clinical and housing in‐reach service during acute care and discharge coordination but with no 'step‐down' care. The second configuration provided clinical and housing in‐reach, discharge coordination and 'step‐down' intermediate care. The third configuration consisted of housing support workers providing in‐reach and discharge coordination as well as step‐down care. These three configurations were each compared with 'standard care' (control, defined as one visit by the homelessness health nurse before discharge during which patients received an information leaflet on local services). Multiple sources of data and multi‐outcome measures were adopted to assess the cost utility of hospital discharge service delivery for the NHS and broader public perspective. Details of 354 participants were collated on service delivery costs (salary, on‐costs, capital, overheads and 'hotel' costs, advertising and other indirect costs), the economic consequences for different public services (e.g. NHS, social care, criminal justice, housing, etc.) and health utilities (quality‐adjusted‐life‐years, QALYs). Findings were complex across the configurations, but, on the whole, there was promising evidence suggesting that, with delivery costs similar to those reported for bed‐based intermediate care, step‐down care secured better health outcomes and improved cost‐effectiveness (compared with usual care) within NICE cost‐effectiveness recommendations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Approximately 15 million people in the UK live with obesity, around 5 million of whom have severe obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥35kg/m2). Having severe obesity markedly compromises health, well-being and quality of life, and substantially reduces life expectancy. These adverse outcomes are prevented or ameliorated by weight loss, for which sustained behavioural change is the cornerstone of treatment. Although NHS specialist 'Tier 3' Weight Management Services (T3WMS) support people with severe obesity, using individual and group-based treatment, the current evidence on optimal intervention design and outcomes is limited. Due to heterogeneity of severe obesity, there is a need to tailor treatment to address individual needs. Despite this heterogeneity, there are good reasons to suspect that a structured group-based behavioural intervention may be more effective and cost-effective for the treatment of severe obesity compared to usual care. The aims of this study are to test the feasibility of establishing and delivering a multi-centre randomised controlled clinical trial to compare a group-based behavioural intervention versus usual care in people with severe obesity. Methods: This feasibility randomised controlled study is a partially clustered multi-centre trial of PROGROUP (a novel group-based behavioural intervention) versus usual care. Adults ≥18 years of age who have been newly referred to and accepted by NHS T3WMS will be eligible if they have a BMI ≥40, or ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidity, are suitable for group-based care and are willing to be randomised. Exclusion criteria are participation in another weight management study, planned bariatric surgery during the trial, and unwillingness or inability to attend group sessions. Outcome assessors will be blinded to treatment allocation and success of blinding will be evaluated. Clinical measures will be collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months post-randomisation. Secondary outcome measures will be self-reported and collected remotely. Process and economic evaluations will be conducted. Discussion: This randomised feasibility study has been designed to test all the required research procedures and additionally explore three key issues; the feasibility of implementing a complex trial at participating NHS T3WMS, training the multidisciplinary healthcare teams in a standard intervention, and the acceptability of a group intervention for these particularly complex patients. Trial registration: ISRCTN number 22088800. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic-related rise in remote consulting raises questions about the nature and type of risks in remote general practice. Aim: To develop an empirically based and theory-informed taxonomy of risks associated with remote consultations. Design & setting: Qualitative sub-study of data selected from the wider datasets of three large, multi-site, mixed-method studies of remote care in general practice before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Method: Semi-structured interviews and focus groups, with a total of 176 clinicians and 43 patients. Data were analysed thematically, taking account of an existing framework of domains of clinical risk. Results: The COVID-19 pandemic brought changes to estates (for example, how waiting rooms were used), access pathways, technologies, and interpersonal interactions. Six domains of risk were evident in relation to the following: (1) practice set-up and organisation (including digital inequalities of access, technology failure, and reduced service efficiency); (2) communication and the clinical relationship (including a shift to more transactional consultations); (3) quality of clinical care (including missed diagnoses, safeguarding challenges, over-investigation, and over-treatment); (4) increased burden on the patient (for example, to self-examine and navigate between services); (5) reduced opportunities for screening and managing the social determinants of health; and (6) workforce (including increased clinician stress and fewer opportunities for learning). Conclusion: Notwithstanding potential benefits, if remote consultations are to work safely, risks must be actively mitigated by measures that include digital inclusion strategies, enhanced safety-netting, and training and support for staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tackling problematic polypharmacy requires tailoring the use of medicines to individual circumstances and may involve the process of deprescribing. Deprescribing can cause anxiety and concern for clinicians and patients. Tailoring medication decisions often entails beyond protocol decision-making, a complex process involving emotional and cognitive work for healthcare professionals and patients. We undertook realist review to highlight and understand the interactions between different factors involved in deprescribing and to develop a final programme theory that identifies and explains components of good practice that support a person-centred approach to deprescribing in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy.Methods: The realist approach involves identifying underlying causal mechanisms and exploring how, and under what conditions they work. We conducted a search of electronic databases which were supplemented by citation checking and consultation with stakeholders to identify other key documents. The review followed the key steps outlined by Pawson et al. and followed the RAMESES standards for realist syntheses.Results: We included 119 included documents from which data were extracted to produce context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) and a final programme theory. Our programme theory recognises that deprescribing is a complex intervention influenced by a multitude of factors. The components of our final programme theory include the following: a supportive infrastructure that provides clear guidance around professional responsibilities and that enables multidisciplinary working and continuity of care, consistent access to high-quality relevant patient contextual data, the need to support the creation of a shared explanation and understanding of the meaning and purpose of medicines and a trial and learn approach that provides space for monitoring and continuity. These components may support the development of trust which may be key to managing the uncertainty and in turn optimise outcomes. These components are summarised in the novel DExTruS framework.Conclusion: Our findings recognise the complex interpretive practice and decision-making involved in medication management and identify key components needed to support best practice. Our findings have implications for how we design medication review consultations, professional training and for patient records/data management. Our review also highlights the role that trust plays both as a central element of tailored prescribing and a potential outcome of good practice in this area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) are the “gold standard” for measuring the effectiveness of an intervention. However, they have their limitations and are especially complex in prison settings. Several systematic reviews have highlighted some of the issues, including, institutional constraints e.g., “lock-downs,” follow-ups, contamination of allocation conditions and a reliance on self-report measures. In this article, we reflect on our experiences and will describe two RCTs. People in prison are a significantly disadvantaged and vulnerable group, ensuring equitable and effective interventions is key to reducing inequality and promoting positive outcomes. We ask are RCTs of complex interventions in prisons a sisyphean task? We certainly don’t think so, but we propose that current accepted practice and research designs may be limiting our understanding and ability to test complex interventions in the real-world context of prisons. RCTs will always have their place, but designs need to be flexible and adaptive, with the development of other rigorous methods for evaluating impact of interventions e.g., nonrandomized studies, including pre-post implementation studies. With robust research we can deliver quality evidence-based healthcare in prisons – after all the degree of civilization in a society is revealed by entering its prisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose: Adults lacking capacity are under-represented in research; therefore, the evidence-base surrounding their support needs is inferior compared to other populations. Involving this group in research is fraught with challenges, including researcher uncertainties about how to carry out capacity judgements. Whilst ethical guidelines and principles provide overarching guidance, there is a lack of detailed guidance and evidence-based training, incorporating practical 'on the ground' strategies and advice on communication practices. Experiences and reflections on research procedures used to gauge and address capacity are under reported, resulting in a lack of shared knowledge within the field. Design: To help address this, we engaged in researcher (co)meta-reflection on the informed capacity judgement procedure for initial consent, within our current, person-centred dementia intervention feasibility study. Our objective was to identify areas to improve our approach, but to also put forward suggestions for wider change within ethical research practice. Results: Findings reveal challenges and facilitators relating to six areas: 'Conducting time sensitive research whilst remaining person-centred and building relationships'; 'Information sharing and supporting communication'; 'Applying the process flexibly'; 'The role of the carer and the consultee process'; 'Judging assent and dissent' and 'Researcher related factors'. We questioned our 'capacity to make capacity judgements' in terms of both our skills and research time constraints. Conclusions: Based on our experiences, we argue for greater open discussion between researchers, Patient and Public Involvement contributors and Research Ethics Committees at initial project planning stages. We recommend training and guidance focuses on building researcher skills in applying a standard process flexibly, emphasising naturalistic, conversational approaches to capacity judgement. A crucial consideration for funders is how this time-intensive and sensitive work should be factored into bid application templates and funding grants. Learnings from this article have potential to inform evidence-based guidance and training for researchers, consultees, funders, reviewers and ethics committees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People in prison experience a range of physical and mental health problems. Evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of prison-based interventions presents a number of methodological challenges. We present a case study of an economic evaluation of a prison-based intervention ("Engager") to address common mental health problems. Methods: Two hundred and eighty people were recruited from prisons in England and randomised to Engager plus usual care or usual care. Participants were followed up for 12 months following release from prison. The primary analysis is the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of Engager compared to usual care from a National Health Service (NHS) perspective with QALYs calculated using the CORE 6 Dimension. A cost-consequences analysis evaluated cross-sectoral costs and a range of outcomes. Results: From an NHS perspective, Engager cost an additional £2737 per participant (95% of iterations between £1029 and £4718) with a mean QALY difference of − 0.014 (95% of iterations between − 0.045 and 0.017). For the cost-consequences, there was evidence of improved access to substance misuse services 12 months post-release (odds ratio 2.244, 95% confidence Interval 1.304–3.861). Conclusion: Engager provides a rare example of a cost-utility analysis conducted in prisons and the community using patient-completed measures. Although the results from this trial show no evidence that Engager is cost-effective, the results of the cost-consequences analysis suggest that follow-up beyond 12 months post-release using routine data may provide additional insights into the effectiveness of the intervention and the importance of including a wide range of costs and outcomes in prison-based economic evaluations. Trial registration: (ISRCTN11707331). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Dementia - Personalised Care Team' (D-PACT) is a five-year NIHR funded programme, using realist methods to develop and evaluate a complex, person-centred intervention for people with dementia and their carers. During the early project stages, we engaged with multiple stakeholders, including people with dementia and their carers, to develop an initial programme theory (IPT) – into an elaborated programme theory (EPT), by helping to uncover intervention mechanisms leading to outcomes in specific contexts. Realist research methods for developing programme theories are under-reported. In addition, there is a paucity of practical guidance on how to engage underserved and vulnerable populations in complex interventions programme theory development. We attend to these gaps, providing a worked example of how we meaningfully engaged people living with dementia and carers, alongside field experts, as stakeholders in this process. Our IPT theory building included multi-stakeholder primary research exercises and meetings with PPI contributors and an Expert Reference Group. We adapted interview schedules, and used visual resources and scenario-based activities, to support stakeholders to think in a 'realist' way. Using realist and thematic analyses led to hypothesis-building of causal mechanisms. Sharing findings with stakeholders led to further refinement of the intervention design, ready for testing in a subsequent feasibility study. We found that, despite the cognitive challenges associated with dementia, innovative methods of engagement can enable this stakeholder group to understand the realist approach and provide a platform through which to share their experiences. Taking a highly flexible and unhurried approach, led to novel insights into the complexities of person-centred dementia support. We argue for more detailed methodological guidance, based on realist principles, on how to collaborate with underrepresented populations to rigorously gain insights as to what is likely to make a difference and refine initial programme theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: People experiencing homelessness often have complex needs requiring a range of support. These may include health problems (physical illness, mental health and/or substance misuse) as well as social, financial and housing needs. Addressing these issues requires a high degree of coordination amongst services. It is, thus, an example of a wicked policy issue. The purpose of this paper is to examine the challenge of integrating care in this context using evidence from an evaluation of English hospital discharge services for people experiencing homelessness. Design/methodology/approach: The paper undertakes secondary analysis of qualitative data from a mixed methods evaluation of hospital discharge schemes and uses an established framework for understanding integrated care, the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC), to help examine the complexities of integration in this area. Findings: Supporting people experiencing homelessness to have a good discharge from hospital was confirmed as a wicked policy issue. The RMIC provided a strong framework for exploring the concept of integration, demonstrating how intertwined the elements of the framework are and, hence, that solutions need to be holistically organised across the RMIC. Limitations to integration were also highlighted, such as shortages of suitable accommodation and the impacts of policies in aligned areas of the welfare state. Research limitations/implications: The data for this secondary analysis were not specifically focussed on integration which meant the themes in the RMIC could not be explored directly nor in as much depth. However, important issues raised in the data directly related to integration of support, and the RMIC emerged as a helpful organising framework for understanding integration in this wicked policy context. Practical implications: Integration is happening in services directly concerned with the discharge from hospital of people experiencing homelessness. Key challenges to this integration are reported in terms of the RMIC, which would be a helpful framework for planning better integrated care for this area of practice. Social implications: Addressing homelessness not only requires careful planning of integration of services at specific pathway points, such as hospital discharge, but also integration across wider systems. A complex set of challenges are discussed to help with planning the better integration desired, and the RMIC was seen as a helpful framework for thinking about key issues and their interactions. Originality/value: This paper examines an application of integrated care knowledge to a key complex, or wicked policy issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Intermediate care (IC) was redesigned to manage more complex, older patients in the community, avoid admissions and facilitate earlier hospital discharge. The service was 'enhanced' by employing GPs, pharmacists and the voluntary sector to be part of a daily interdisciplinary team meeting, working alongside social workers and community staff (the traditional model). Methods: A controlled before-and-after study, using mixed methods and a nested case study. Enhanced IC in one locality (Coastal) is compared with four other localities where IC was not enhanced until the following year (controls), using system-wide performance data (N = 4,048) together with ad hoc data collected on referral-type, staff inputs and patient experience (N = 72). Results: Coastal showed statistically significant increase in EIC referrals to 11.6% (95%CI: 10.8%--12.4%), with a growing proportion from GPs (2.9%, 95%CI: 2.5%-3.3%); more people being cared for at home (10.5%, 95%CI: 9.8%-11.2%), shorter episode lengths (9.0 days, CI 95%: 7.6-10.4 days) and lower bed-day rates in ≥70 yearolds (0.17, 95%CI: 0.179-0.161). The nested case study showed medical, pharmacist and voluntary sector input into cases, a more holistic, coordinated service focused on patient priorities and reduced acute hospital admissions (5.5%). Discussion and conclusion: Enhancing IC through greater acute, primary care and voluntary sector integration can lead to more complex, older patients being managed in the community, with modest impacts on service efficiency, system activity, and notional costs off-set by perceived benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Judgemental rationality is infrequently referenced within discussions of Realist Evaluations. Judgemental rationality refers to researchers' capacity to assess which, potential, meanings provide the most credible explanations. In evaluation work, rationale for analysis is provided, though rarely do we see how an evaluator made judgements between competing theories, and which theories were discarded and why. We provide a worked example of the application of judgemental rationality. The Engager intervention offered support to prison leavers with common mental health problems. The data for 24, purposively sampled, participants from the intervention arm of the trial were integrated. Bhaskar's DREIC, a five-step analytical procedure, was used to transfactually theorise and interrogate the inferences made within, and across, cases. The findings demonstrated that the intervention was more effective when practitioners developed an in-depth understanding of the participant. We recommend that intervention developers look for ways to enhance therapeutic competencies and judgemental rationality in practitioner teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

UK general practitioner (GP) trainees are taught a consultation model which elicits the patients' main reason for consulting 'today'. This approach will often miss important issues for the increasing number of patients with multimorbidity. We developed the SHERPA model as a person-centred biopsychosocial framework for consulting patients with multimorbidity to address this. We aimed to examine GPs trainees' responses to SHERPA when integrated into their vocational training. The research design was qualitative and participants were GPs trainees in vocational training from one UK training location. GP trainees were introduced to the SHERPA model through interactive workshops. Qualitative data were collected from 16 participants, through four hours of teaching observation, 24 feedback templates, six practical applications of SHERPA and eight one-to-one interviews. Data were transcribed, and, using the Framework approach, systematically analysed, focussing on trainees' learning and application of the model. The results demonstrated that all participants engaged well with the teaching sessions, brought observations from their own experience, and reflected on particularly complex consultations. Half of the participants applied SHERPA successfully with their patients, particularly repeat attenders. Barriers to this approach were: selecting appropriate patients; perceived time pressure; lack of familiarity using the model; viewing SHERPA as 'additional', rather than integral, to shared decision-making in complex situations. The SHERPA model was viewed as helpful by these GP trainees for patients with whom they had established a relationship. Earlier introduction and regular support from trainers, where trainees reflect on experience of SHERPA, could increase confidence in using this method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Involving patients, service users, carers and members of the public in research has been part of health policy and practice in the UK for the last 15 years. However, low‐income communities tend to remain marginalized from the co‐design and delivery of mental health research, perpetuating the potential for health inequalities. Greater understanding is therefore needed on how to meaningfully engage low‐income communities in mental health research. Objectives: To explore and articulate whether and how an engaged research approach facilitated knowledge coproduction relating to poverty and mental distress. Setting: A reflective evaluation of community and researcher engagement in the DeStress study that took place in two low‐income areas of South‐west England. Design: Reflective evaluation by the authors through on‐going feedback, a focus group and first‐person writing and discussion on experiences of working with the DeStress project, and how knowledge coproduction was influenced by an engaged research approach. Results: An engaged research approach influenced the process and delivery of the DeStress project, creating a space where community partners felt empowered to coproduce knowledge relating to poverty‐related mental distress, treatment and the training of health professionals that would otherwise have been missed. We examine motivations for involvement, factors sustaining engagement, how coproduction influenced research analysis, findings and dissemination of outputs, and what involvement meant for different stakeholders. Conclusion: Engaged research supported the coproduction of knowledge in mental health research with low‐income communities which led to multiple impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People in the criminal justice system have complex needs but often do not make use of services outside of prison, in many cases due to poorly joined up working between health and criminal justice services. The 'Engager' programme aimed to develop a complex collaborative care intervention for people leaving prison with common mental health problems that could support their transition into the community and facilitate joined up working between health, justice and social services. To augment our core intervention theory, we wanted to learn from innovative and forward-thinking services providing interagency support and/or treatment for people experiencing common mental health problems within the criminal justice system. We wanted to identify key elements of interagency practice to understand what was and was not effective in engaging people, maintaining their contact and improving mental health and other aspects of their lives. Method: We used a multiple case study design with a focused ethnographic approach in four study sites. Data came from three sources (documents, field notes and semi-structured interviews) underwent a framework analysis. Results: We identified seven main themes, namely: collaboration, client engagement, client motivation, supervision, therapeutic approach, peers and preparations for ending. Engaging and motivating clients was dependent on the relationship built with the professional. This relationship was developed through building trust and rapport, which required time and respectful, open and honest communication. Professionals were often unable to build this relationship effectively if they did not work in effective interagency collaborations, particularly those which included shared practices and were supported by effective supervision. Conclusions: The multiple case study design contributed insights as to how health and justice services work together. The main themes identified are well known factors in health and justice co-working. However, the novel insights were gleaned examining interdependence and interactions in complex, multifactorial phenomena and practice, in particular the importance of shared practice and supervision models. The approach of selecting a small number of cases representing identified knowledge gaps contributed a valuable addition to the program theory and delivery for an innovative complex intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze the use of nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), an instrument that is widely used in diagnosing and determining the severity of depression. Using conversation analysis, we show how the doctor deploys the PHQ-9 in response to the patient's doubts about whether she is depressed. Rather than relaying the PHQ-9 verbatim, the doctor deviates from the wording so that the response options are selectively offered to upgrade the severity of the patient's symptoms. This works in favor of a positive diagnosis and is used to justify a treatment recommendation that the patient previously resisted. This contrasted with the rest of the data set, where diagnosis was either not delivered (as patients are presenting with ongoing problems) or delivered without using the PHQ-9. When clinician-administered, the PHQ-9 can be influenced by how response items are presented. This can lead to either downgrading or upgrading the severity of depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This integrated care study seeks to highlight how voluntary sector "wellbeing co-ordinators" co-located in a horizontally and vertically integrated, multidisciplinary community hub within one locality of an Integrated Care Organisation contribute to complex, person-centred, co-ordinated care. Design/methodology/approach: This is a naturalistic, mixed method and mixed data study. It is complementing a before-and-after study with a sub-group analysis of people receiving input from the wider hub (including Wellbeing Co-ordination and Enhanced Intermediate Care), qualitative case studies, interviews, and observations co-produced with embedded researchers-in-residence. Findings: The cross-case analysis uses trajectories and outcome patterns across six client groups to illustrate the bio-psycho-social complexity of each group across the life course, corresponding with the range of inputs offered by the hub. Research limitations/implications: To consider the effectiveness and mechanisms of complex system-wide interventions operating at horizontal and vertical interfaces and researching this applying co-produced, embedded, naturalistic and mixed methods approaches. Practical implications: How a bio-psycho-social approach by a wellbeing co-ordinator can contribute to improved person reported outcomes from a range of preventive, rehabilitation, palliative care and bereavement services in the community. Social implications: To combine knowledge about individuals held in the community to align the respective inputs, and expectations about outcomes while considering networked pathways based on functional status, above diagnostic pathways, and along a life-continuum. Originality/value: The hub as a whole seems to (1) Enhance engagement through relationship, trust and activation, (2) Exchanging knowledge to co-create a shared bio-psycho-social understanding of each individual's situation and goals, (3) Personalising care planning by utilising the range of available resources to ensure needs are met, and (4) Enhancing co-ordination and ongoing care through multi-disciplinary working between practitioners, across teams and sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the UK, general practitioners (GPs) are the most commonly used providers of care for emotional concerns.Objective: To update and synthesize literature on barriers and facilitators to GP-patient communication about emotional concerns in UK primary care.Design: Systematic review and qualitative synthesis.Method: We conducted a systematic search on MEDLINE (OvidSP), PsycInfo and EMBASE, supplemented by citation chasing. Eligible papers focused on how GPs and adult patients in the UK communicated about emotional concerns. Results were synthesized using thematic analysis.Results: Across 30 studies involving 342 GPs and 720 patients, four themes relating to barriers were: (i) emotional concerns are difficult to disclose; (ii) tension between understanding emotional concerns as a medical condition or arising from social stressors; (iii) unspoken assumptions about agency resulting in too little or too much involvement in decisions and (iv) providing limited care driven by little time. Three facilitative themes were: (v) a human connection improves identification of emotional concerns and is therapeutic; (vi) exploring, explaining and negotiating a shared understanding or guiding patients towards new understandings and (vii) upfront information provision and involvement manages expectations about recovery and improves engagement in treatment.Conclusion: The findings suggest that treatment guidelines should acknowledge: the therapeutic value of a positive GP-patient relationship; that diagnosis is a two-way negotiated process rather than an activity strictly in the doctor's domain of expertise; and the value of exploring and shaping new understandings about patients' emotional concerns and their management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Attempts to transform health systems have in many countries involved starting to pay healthcare providers through a DRG system, but that has involved managerial workarounds. Managerial workarounds have seldom been analysed. This paper does so by extending and modifying existing knowledge of the causes and character of clinical and IT workarounds, to produce a conceptualisation of the managerial workaround. It further develops and revises this conceptualisation by comparing the practical management, at both provider and purchaser levels, of hospital DRG payment systems in England, Germany and Italy.Design/methodology/approach: We make a qualitative test of our initial assumptions about the antecedents, character and consequences of managerial workarounds by comparing them with a systematic comparison of case studies of the DRG hospital payment systems in England, Germany and Italy. The data collection through key informant interviews (N = 154), analysis of policy documents (N = 111) and an action learning set, began in 2010-12, with additional data collection from key informants and administrative documents continuing in 2018-19 to supplement and update our findings.Findings: Managers in all three countries developed very similar workarounds to contain healthcare costs to payers. To weaken DRG incentives to increase hospital activity, managers agreed to lower DRG payments for episodes of care above an agreed case-load 'ceiling' and reduced payments by less than the full DRG amounts when activity fell below an agreed 'floor' volume.Research Limitations/implications: Empirically this study is limited to three OECD health systems, but since our findings come from both Bismarckian (social-insurance) and Beveridge (tax-financed) systems, they are likely to be more widely applicable. In many countries, DRGs coexist with non-DRG or pre-DRG systems, so these findings may also reflect a specific, perhaps transient, stage in DRG-system development. Probably there are also other kinds of managerial workaround, yet to be researched. Doing so would doubtlessly refine and nuance the conceptualisation of the 'managerial workaround' still further.Practical Implications: In the case of DRGs, the managerial workarounds were instances of 'constructive deviance' which enabled payers to reduce the adverse financial consequences, for them, arising from DRG incentives. The understanding of apparent failures or part-failures to transform a health system can be made more nuanced, balanced and diagnostic by using the concept of the 'managerial workaround'.Social Implications: Managerial workarounds also appear outside the health sector, so the present analysis of managerial workarounds may also have application to understanding attempts to transform such sectors as education, social care and environmental protection.Originality/value: So far as we are aware, no other study presents and tests the concept of a 'managerial workaround'. Pervasive, non-trivial managerial workarounds may be symptoms of mismatched policy objectives, or that existing health system structures cannot realise current policy objectives; but the workarounds themselves may also contain solutions to these problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of non‐medical referral, community referral or social prescribing interventions has been proposed as a cost‐effective alternative to help those with long‐term conditions manage their illness and improve health and well‐being. However, the evidence base for social prescribing currently lags considerably behind practice. In this paper, we explore what is known about whether different methods of social prescribing referral and supported uptake do (or do not) work. Supported by an Expert Advisory Group, we conducted a realist review in two phases. The first identified evidence specifically relating to social prescribing in order to develop programme theories in the form of 'if‐then' statements, articulating how social prescribing models are expected to work. In the second phase, we aimed to clarify these processes and include broader evidence to better explain the proposed mechanisms. The first phase resulted in 109 studies contributing to the synthesis, and the second phase 34. We generated 40 statements relating to organising principles of how the referral takes place (Enrolment), is accepted (Engagement), and completing an activity (Adherence). Six of these statements were prioritised using web‐based nominal group technique by our Expert Group. Studies indicate that patients are more likely to enrol if they believe the social prescription will be of benefit, the referral is presented in an acceptable way that matches their needs and expectations, and concerns elicited and addressed appropriately by the referrer. Patients are more likely to engage if the activity is both accessible and transit to the first session supported. Adherence to activity programmes can be impacted through having an activity leader who is skilled and knowledgeable or through changes in the patient's conditions or symptoms. However, the evidence base is not sufficiently developed methodologically for us to make any general inferences about effectiveness of particular models or approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: NICE guidelines for the management of emotional concerns in primary care emphasise the importance of communication and a trusting relationship, which is difficult to operationalise in practice. Current pressures in the NHS mean that it is important to understand care from a patient perspective. This study aimed to explore patients' experiences of primary care consultations for emotional concerns and what patients valued when seeking care from their GP. Methods: Eighteen adults with experience of consulting a GP for emotional concerns participated in 4 focus groups. Data were analysed thematically. Results: (1) Doctor as Drug: Patients' relationship with their GP was considered therapeutic with continuity particularly valued. (2) Doctor as Detective and Validator: Patients were often puzzled by their symptoms, not recognising their emotional concerns. GPs needed to play the role of detective by exploring not just symptoms, but the person and their life circumstances. GPs were crucial in helping patients understand and validate their emotional concerns. (3) Doctor as Collaborator: Patients prefer a collaborative partnership, but often need to relinquish involvement because they are too unwell, or take a more active role because they feel GPs are ill-equipped or under too much pressure to help. Patients valued: GPs booking their follow up appointments; acknowledgement of stressful life circumstances; not relying solely on medication. Conclusions: Seeking help for emotional concerns is challenging due to stigma and unfamiliar symptoms. GPs can support disclosure and understanding of emotional concerns by fully exploring and validating patients' concerns, taking into account patients' life contexts. This process of exploration and validation forms the foundation of a curative, trusting GP-patient relationship. A trusting relationship, with an emphasis on empathy and understanding, can make patients more able to share involvement in their care with GPs. This process is cyclical, as patients feel that their GP is caring, interested, and treating them as a person, further strengthening their relationship. NICE guidance should acknowledge the importance of empathy and validation when building an effective GP-patient partnership, and the role this has in supporting patients' involvement in their care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives This study aimed to describe the recovery journeys of people with a history of recurrent depression who took part in a psychosocial programme designed to teach skills to prevent depressive relapse (mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT)), alongside maintenance antidepressant medication (ADM). Design A qualitative study embedded within a multicentre, single blind, randomised controlled trial (the PREVENT trial). Setting Primary care urban and rural settings in the UK. Participants 42 people who participated in the MBCT arm of the parent trial were purposively sampled to represent a range of recovery journeys. Interventions MBCT involves eight weekly group sessions, with four refresher sessions offered in the year following the end of the programme. It was adapted to offer bespoke support around ADM tapering and discontinuation. Methods Written feedback and structured in-depth interviews were collected in the 2 years after participants undertook MBCT. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and case studies constructed to illustrate the findings. Results People with recurrent depression have unique recovery journeys that shape and are shaped by their pharmacological and psychological treatment choices. Their journeys typically include several over-arching themes: (1) beliefs about the causes of depression, both biological and psychosocial; (2) personal agency, including expectations about their role in recovery and treatment; (3) acceptance, both of depression itself and the recovery journey; (4) quality of life; (5) experiences and perspectives on ADM and ADM tapering-discontinuation; and (6) the role of general practitioners, both positive and negative. Conclusions People with recurrent depression describe unique, complex recovery journeys shaped by their experiences of depression, treatment and interactions with health professionals. Understanding how several themes coalesce for each individual can both support their recovery and treatment choices as well as health professionals in providing more accessible, collaborative, individualised and empowering care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Up to 40% of general practitioners (GP) consultations contain an emotional component. General practitioners (GPs) have to provide care with limited time and resources. This qualitative study aimed to explore how GPs care for patients experiencing emotional concerns within the constraints of busy clinical practice. Seven GPs participated in three focus groups. Groups were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Three themes were identified. (a) Collaboratively negotiated diagnosis: How patients' emotional concerns are understood and managed is the result of a negotiation between patient and GP belief models and the availability of treatments including talking therapy. (b) Doctor as drug: Not only is a continuous relationship between GPs and patients therapeutic in its own right, it is also necessary to effectively diagnose and engage patients in treatment as patients may experience stigma regarding emotional concerns. (c) Personal responsibility and institutional pressure: GPs feel personally responsible for supporting patients through their care journey, however, they face barriers due to lack of time and pressure from guidelines. GPs are forced to prioritise high‐risk patients and experience an emotional toll. In conclusion, guidelines focus on diagnosis and a stepped‐care model, however, this assumes diagnosis is relatively straightforward. GPs and patients have different models of psychological distress. This and the experience of stigma mean that establishing rapport is an important step before the GP and patient negotiate openly and develop a shared understanding of the problem. This takes time and emotional resources to do well. Longer consultations, continuity of care and formal supervision for GPs could enable them to better support patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we present an exemplar of the initial theory-building phase of theory-driven evaluation for the PARTNERS2 project, a collaborative care intervention for people with experience of psychosis in England. Initial theory-building involved analysis of the literature, interviews with key leaders and focus groups with service users. The initial programme theory was developed from these sources in an iterative process between researchers and stakeholders (service users, practitioners, commissioners) involving four activities: articulation of 442 explanatory statements systematically developed using realist methods; debate and consensus; communication; and interrogation. We refute two criticisms of theory-driven evaluation of complex interventions. We demonstrate how the process of initial theory-building made a meaningful contribution to our complex intervention in five ways. Although time-consuming, it allowed us to develop an internally coherent and well-documented intervention. This study and the lessons learnt provide a detailed resource for other researchers wishing to build theory for theory-driven evaluation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: If integrated care approaches are to be properly adapted to local contexts, a better understanding is required of key determinants of implementation and how these might be appropriately supported. Purpose: This study applied the Canadian Context and Capabilities for Integrating Care (CCIC) Framework to investigate factors influencing the implementation and outcomes of a complex integrated care change programme in Torbay and South Devon (TSD) and, more specifically, in one of five sub-localities, Coastal. Methods: A case study method using embedded 'Researchers in Residence' to conduct action-based participatory research and deploying mixed qualitative methods. Results: The relative importance of some domains differ between the English and Canadian studies. In this case study, physical features (structural and geographic) were found to be very pertinent to the relative success of the Coastal Locality, as were empowered clinical leadership, with readiness for change being expressed through processes and cultures that were risk-enabling, strengths-based, person-/outcomefocused. Conclusions: The CCIC Framework provided a useful tool capturing key elements of complex system change with key domains being transferable across settings, while also finding local variation in the UK. This would encourage its wider application so that further comparisons can be made of the ways in which different contextual and implementation properties impact upon delivery and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient take-up and adherence to antidepressants and talking therapy is low. However, little is known about how GPs recommend these treatments and whether patients accept them. Aim: To examine how GPs recommend antidepressants and talking therapy, and how patients respond. Design & setting: A total of 52 recorded primary care consultations for depression, anxiety, and stress were analysed. Method: Using a standardised coding scheme, five ways doctors recommend treatment were coded, conveying varying authority and endorsement. The treatment recommendation types were as follows: more directive pronouncements (I'll start you on X); proposals (How about we start X?); less directive suggestions (Would you like to try X?); offers (Do you want me to give you X?); and assertions (There are medications that might help). It was also coded whether patients accepted, passively resisted (for example, withholding response), or actively resisted (for example, I've tried that before). Results: A total of 33 recommendations occurred in 23 consultations. In two-thirds of cases, GPs treated the patient as primary decision-maker by using suggestions, offers, or assertions. In onethird of cases, they used more directive pronouncements or proposals. GPs endorsed treatment moderately (67%), weakly (18%), or strongly (15%). Only one-quarter of recommendations were accepted immediately. Patients cited fears about medication side effects and/or dependency, group therapy, and doubts about treatment efficacy. Despite three-quarters of patients resisting, 76% got prescriptions or self-referral information for talking therapy. Conclusion: Initially, GPs treat patients as the decision-maker. However, although patients resist, most end up with treatment. This may impact negatively on treatment uptake and success. Social prescribing may fill a treatment gap for some patients. how patients respond in recorded real-life consultations, this article shows that GPs overwhelmingly leave decisions about these treatments to patients. It also suggests that patients frequently resist such recommendations, sometimes explaining their reasons for doing so (concerns about dependence, efficacy, and so on). Patients who resisted typically ended up being given the treatments anyway. Analysis of cases where patients resist suggests discussing and providing information about treatment options before making a recommendation could improve patient acceptance and uptake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evaluation of recovery-focused interventions for people with psychosis may be enhanced by the use of Interpersonal Process Recall (IPR). The aim of this study was to examine whether the inclusion of IPR alongside semi-structured interviews in the formative evaluation of a novel collaborative care intervention increased understanding about both practitioner and service user experiences. It also explored the impact of the IPR process on participants. Four service users and the practitioner delivering the intervention participated in semi-structured interviews and an adapted IPR process. The themes identified from different data sources were systematically compared using framework analysis. Semi-structured interviews indicated that the intervention was operating as intended but IPR data revealed exceptions. Practitioner IPR interviews identified practitioner barriers to delivery and fostered critical self-reflection. Service user IPR interviews facilitated critical feedback but also caused some distress. Interviews gave more information about organisational level contextual factors. IPR increased understanding of how the intervention was being delivered and experienced. IPR should be used alongside other forms of qualitative data collection. The potential of IPR to impact on intervention delivery should be taken into account. Further research is needed to establish for whom IPR is likely to be most effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analysis of data in this article focuses on the self-reported situations of 21 female respondents who were part of a large-scale study of offenders' health needs. The findings show an extensive range of physical and psychological problems, often intertwined with substance misuse and other issues, including offending behaviour. Four components of an existing model of 'continuity of care' are reviewed to explore the difficulties, but also the potential, for collaborative and co-ordinated interventions with regard to working with women offenders. Concern is expressed about the changes and fragmentation in provision for women brought about by the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda in England and Wales. It is advocated here that policy and practice should be developed across health and criminal justice agencies to provide holistic and integrated approaches which could support women offenders in their attempts to stabilize their lives and to find pathways out of crime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Measuring patient experiences of healthcare is increasingly emphasized as a mechanism to measure, benchmark and drive quality improvement, clinical effectiveness and patient safety at both national and local NHS level. Person-centred coordinated care (P3C) is the conjunction of two constructs; person-centred care and care coordination. It is a complex intervention requiring support for changes to organizational structure and the behaviour of professionals and patients. P3C can be defined as: 'care and support that is guided by and organized effectively around the needs and preferences of individuals'. Despite the vast array of PRMS available, remarkably few tools have been designed that efficiently probe the core domains of P3C. This paper presents the psychometric properties of a newly developed PREM to evaluate P3C from a patient perspective.Methods: A customized EMIS search was conducted at 72 GP practices across the South West (Somerset, Devon and Cornwall) to identify 100 patients with 1 or more LTCs, and are frequent users of primary healthcare services. Partial Credit Rasch Modelling was conducted to identify dimensionality and internal consistency. Ecological validity and sensitivity to change were assessed as part of intervention designed to improve P3C in adults with multiple long-term conditions; comparisons were drawn between the P3CEQ and qualitative data.Results: Response rate for the P3CEQ was 32.82%. A two-factor model was identified. Rasch analysis confirmed unidimensionality of each factor (using infit MSQ values between 0.5 and 1.5). High internal consistency was established for both factors; For the Person-centred scale Cronbach's Alpha = 0.829, Person separation = 0.756 and for the coordination scale Cronbach's alpha = 0.783, person separation = 0.672.Conclusions: The P3CEQ is a valid and reliable measure of P3C. The P3C is considered to have strong face, construct and ecological validity, with demonstrable sensitivity to change in a primary healthcare intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To evaluate a county-wide deincentivisation of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) payment scheme for UK General Practice (GP). Setting In 2014, National Health Service England signalled a move towards devolution of QOF to Clinical Commissioning Groups. Fifty-five GPs in Somerset established the Somerset Practice Quality Scheme (SPQS)--a deincentivisation of QOF--with the goal of redirecting resources towards Person Centred Coordinated Care (P3C), especially for those with long-term conditions (LTCs). We evaluated the impact on processes and outcomes of care from April 2016 to March 2017. Participants and design The evaluation used data from 55 SPQS practices and 17 regional control practices for three survey instruments. We collected patient experiences ('P3C-EQ'; 2363 returns from patients with 1+LTC; 36% response rate), staff experiences ('P3C-practitioner'; 127 professionals) and organisational data ('P3C-OCT'; 36 of 55 practices at two time points, 65% response rate; 17 control practices). Hospital Episode Statistics emergency admission data were analysed for 2014-2017 for ambulatory-sensitive conditions across Somerset using interrupted time series. Results Patient and practitioner experiences were similar in SPQS versus control practices. However, discretion from QOF incentives resulted in time savings in the majority of practices, and SPQS practice data showed a significant increase in P3C oriented organisational processes, with a moderate effect size (Wilcoxon signed rank test; p=0.01; r=0.42). Analysis of transformation plans and organisational data suggested stronger federationlevel agreements and informal networks, increased multidisciplinary working, reallocation of resources for other healthcare professionals and changes to the structure and timings of GP appointments. No disbenefits were detected in admission data. Conclusion The SPQS scheme leveraged time savings and reduced administrative burden via discretionary removal of QOF incentives, enabling practices to engage actively in a number of schemes aimed at improving care for people with LTCs. We found no differences in the experiences of patients or healthcare professionals between SPQS and control practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical Research Council guidelines recognise the need to optimise complex interventions prior to full trial through greater understanding of underlying theory and formative process evaluation, yet there are few examples. A realist approach to formative process evaluation makes a unique contribution through a focus on theory formalisation and abstraction. The success of an intervention is dependent on the extent to which it gels or jars with existing provision and can be successfully transferred to new contexts. Interventions with underlying programme theory about how they work, for whom, and under which circumstances will be better able to adapt to work with (rather than against) different services, individuals, and settings. In this methodological article, we describe and illustrate how a realist approach to formative process evaluation develops contextualised intervention theory that can underpin more adaptable and scalable interventions. We discuss challenges and benefits of this approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: People subject to the criminal justice system often have substantially different life‐experiences from the general population. Patient and public involvement (PPI) of "seldom heard" groups provides valuable experiential knowledge, enhancing research. Objective: To share our jointly developed techniques to ensure the meaningful engagement and contribution of people with lived experience of the criminal justice system (PWLECJS) in research, trial science, intervention theory development and dissemination. Methods: Commitment to adequate financial resources, appropriate staff skills and adequate time were combined with previous learning. PWLECJS were approached through local community organizations. A group was established and met fortnightly for ten months in an unthreatening environment and had a rolling membership. Ongoing engagement was promoted by the group taking responsibility for the rules, interactive and accessible activities, feeding back tangible impacts, ongoing contact, building a work ethic, joint celebrations, sessions with individual academic researchers and pro‐actively managed endings. Results: The Peer Researchers contributed to study documents, training academic researchers, research data collection and analysis, intervention delivery and theory development and trial science. The Peer Researchers gained in confidence and an improved sense of self‐worth. The Academic Researchers gained skills, knowledge and an increased openness to being challenged. Discussion and conclusions: PWLECJS can be meaningful included in health research and intervention development. The key elements required are listed. Challenges included differences in priorities for timescales and dissemination, resource limitations and the use of Peer Researchers' names. Further research is required to understand what might be of relevance for other "seldom heard" groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]