Search

Background: Liver disease is a growing health concern and a major cause of death. It causes multiple symptoms, including financial, psychological and social issues. To address these challenges, palliative care can support people alongside active treatment, and towards the end of life, but little is known about the care experiences of individuals with liver disease in the United Kingdom. This review aimed to explore the palliative and end‐of‐life care experiences of people with liver disease in the United Kingdom. Method: A systematic review was conducted using a five‐stage process and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines. Searches were across Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and grey literature until 10 May 2023. The review was registered through International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). NVivo 12.5 was used to facilitate data analysis (systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42022382649). Results: Of 6035 papers (excluding duplicates) found from searches, five met the inclusion criteria of primary research related to adults with liver disease receiving palliative and/or end‐of‐life care in the United Kingdom, published in English. Reflexive thematic analysis of the data was conducted. The themes identified were the experiences of people with liver disease of relating to healthcare professionals, using services, receiving support, and experiences of information and communication. These were connected by an overarching concept of disempowerment versus empowerment, with the notion of person‐centred care as an important feature. Conclusion: This review has found variations in the care experiences of people with advanced liver disease towards the end of life and an overall lack of access to specialist palliative care services. Where services are designed to be person‐centred, experiences are more empowering. Further research is needed but with recognition that it is often unclear when care for people with liver disease is palliative or end‐of‐life. Patient and Public Contribution: An online public involvement workshop was held on 18 April 2023 through Voice (2023). This included four people with liver disease and four carers to discuss the review findings and to design a qualitative research study to further explore the topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Co‐production is gaining increasing recognition as a good way of facilitating collaboration among different stakeholders, including members of the public. However, it remains an ambiguous concept as there is no definitive or universal model of co‐production or clarity on what constitutes a good co‐production approach. This paper draws on the reflections of the academic researchers, practitioners and public advisors involved in co‐producing a priority‐setting exercise. The exercise was conducted by the Primary and Community Health Services (PCHS) Theme of the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration for Kent, Surrey and Sussex (NIHR ARC KSS). Methods: We collected data through written and verbal reflections from seven collaborators involved in the PCHS priority‐setting exercise. We used Gibbs' model of reflection to guide the data collection. We then analysed the data through an inductive, reflexive thematic analysis. Results: A common thread through our reflections was the concept of 'sharing'. Although co‐production is inherently shared, we used the virtuous cycle to illustrate a sequence of sharing concepts during the research cycle, which provides the underpinnings of positive co‐production outcomes. We identified six themes to denote the iterative process of a shared approach within the virtuous cycle: shared values, shared understanding, shared power, shared responsibilities, shared ownership and positive outcomes. Conclusion: Our results present a virtuous cycle of co‐production, which furthers the conceptual underpinnings of co‐production. Through our reflections, we propose that positive co‐production outcomes require foundations of shared values and a shared understanding of co‐production as a concept. These foundations facilitate a process of shared power, shared responsibilities and shared ownership. We argue that when these elements are present in a co‐production exercise, there is a greater potential for implementable outcomes in the communities in which the research serves and the empowerment of collaborators involved in the co‐production process. Public Members' Contributions: Three members of the public who are public advisors in the NIHR ARC KSS were involved in the priority‐setting exercise that informed this paper. The public advisors were involved in the design of the priority‐setting exercise and supported participants' recruitment. They also co‐facilitated the focus groups during data collection and were involved in the data analysis, interpretation and preparation of the priority‐setting report. For this current manuscript, two of them are co‐authors. They provided reflections and contributed to the writing and reviewing of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Those with severe and enduring mental ill health are at greater risk of long‐term physical health conditions and have a reduced life expectancy as a result. Multiple factors compound this health inequality, and the need for setting research priorities in this area is highlighted with physical and mental healthcare services being separate, and limited multimorbidity research. Methods: The aim of this exercise was to work in partnership with healthcare professionals and carers, family, friends and individuals with lived experience of both mental and physical health conditions, to set research priorities to help people with mental health conditions to look after their physical health. The exercise was guided by the James Lind Alliance approach. For this, a steering group was set up, two surveys were completed and a final priority workshop was conducted. Results: This priority setting exercise guided by people's needs and lived experience has produced a set of well‐defined research topics. Initially, 555 research questions were suggested in the first survey, which were refined to 54 questions for the second survey. A priority setting workshop was then conducted to get the final 10 priorities. Conclusions: Taking these topics forward to improve services and treatment for both mental and physical ill health may in turn improve physical health and lessen the reduced life expectancy of those living with mental ill health. Patient or Public Contribution: This work was completed in collaboration with people who have lived experience of mental ill health and physical health conditions, as well as carers, family and friends. Their contribution has been significant for this work from piloting surveys, amending language used and educating the researchers and contributing to this paper. The initial work was completed with a steering group and continued with surveys and workshops. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: People who call emergency ambulances frequently are often vulnerable because of health and social circumstances, have unresolved problems or cannot access appropriate care. They have higher mortality rates. Case management by interdisciplinary teams can help reduce demand for emergency services and is available in some UK regions. We report results of interviews with people who use emergency ambulance services frequently to understand their experiences of calling and receiving treatment. Methods: We used a two‐stage recruitment process. A UK ambulance service identified six people who were known to them as frequently calling emergency services. Through third‐sector organisations, we also recruited nine individuals with healthcare experiences reflecting the characteristics of people who call frequently. We gained informed consent to record and transcribe all telephone interviews. We used thematic analysis to explore the results. Results: People said they make frequent calls to emergency ambulance services as a last resort when they perceive their care needs are urgent and other routes to help have failed. Those with the most complex health needs generally felt their immediate requirements were not resolved and underlying mental and physical problems led them to call again. A third of respondents were also attended to by police and were arrested for behaviour associated with their health needs. Those callers receiving case management did not know they were selected for this. Some respondents were concerned that case management could label frequent callers as troublemakers. Conclusion: People who make frequent calls to emergency ambulance services feel their health and care needs are urgent and ongoing. They cannot see alternative ways to receive help and resolve problems. Communication between health professionals and service users appears inadequate. More research is needed to understand service users' motivations and requirements to inform design and delivery of accessible and effective services. Patient or Public Contribution: People with relevant experience were involved in developing, undertaking and disseminating this research. Two public contributors helped design and deliver the study, including developing and analysing service user interviews and drafting this paper. Eight public members of a Lived Experience Advisory Panel contributed at key stages of study design, interpretation and dissemination. Two more public contributors were members of an independent Study Steering Committee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Co‐production with communities is increasingly seen as best practice that can improve the quality, relevance and effectiveness of research and service delivery. Despite this promising position, there remains uncertainty around definitions of co‐production and how to operationalize it. The current paper describes the development of a co‐production strategy to guide the work of the ActEarly multistakeholder preventative research programme to improve children's health in Bradford and Tower Hamlets, UK. Methods: The strategy used Appreciative Inquiry (AI), an approach following a five‐step iterative process: to define (Step 1) scope and guide progress; to discover (Step 2) key issues through seven focus groups (N = 36) and eight in‐depth interviews with key stakeholders representing community groups, and the voluntary and statutory sectors; to dream (Step 3) best practice through two workshops with AI participants to review findings; to design (Step 4) a co‐production strategy building on AI findings and to deliver (Step 5) the practical guidance in the strategy. Results: Nine principles for how to do co‐production well were identified: power should be shared; embrace a wide range of perspectives and skills; respect and value the lived experience; benefits should be for all involved parties; go to communities and do not expect them to come to you; work flexibly; avoid jargon and ensure availability of the right information; relationships should be built for the long‐term; co‐production activities should be adequately resourced. These principles were based on three underlying values of equality, reciprocity and agency. Conclusion: The empirical insights of the paper highlight the crucial importance of adequate resources and infrastructure to deliver effective co‐production. This documentation of one approach to operationalizing co‐production serves to avert any misappropriations of the term 'co‐production' by listening to service users, stakeholders and other relevant groups, to develop trust and long‐term relationships, and build on the learning that already exists amongst such groups. Patient or Public Contribution: The work was overseen by a steering group (N = 17) of individuals, both professional and members of the public with experience in undertaking co‐production, and/or with some knowledge of the context of the two ActEarly field sites, who provided regular oversight and feedback on the AI process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Migrant and ethnic inequalities in maternal and perinatal mortality persist across high‐income countries. Addressing social adversity and inequities across the childbirth trajectory cannot be left to chance and the good intentions of practitioners. Robust, evidence‐based tools designed to address inequity by enhancing both the quality of provision and the experience of care are needed. Methods: An inductive modelling approach was used to develop a new evidence‐based conceptual model of woman–midwife relationships, drawing on data from an ethnographic study of relationships between migrant Pakistani women and midwives, conducted between 2013 and 2016 in South Wales, UK. Key analytic themes from early data were translated into social–ecological concepts, and a model was developed to represent how these key themes interacted to influence the woman–midwife relationship. Results: Three key concepts influencing the woman–midwife relationship were developed from the three major themes of the underpinning research: (1) Healthcare System; (2) Culture and Religion; and (3) Family Relationships. Two additional weaving concepts appeared to act as a link between these three key concepts: (1) Authoritative Knowledge and (2) Communication of Information. Social and political factors were also considered as contextual factors within the model. A visual representation of this model was developed and presented. Conclusions: The model presented in this paper, along with future work to further test and refine it in other contexts, has the potential to impact on inequalities by facilitating future discussion on cultural issues, encouraging collaborative learning and knowledge production and providing a framework for future global midwifery practice, education and research. Patient or Public Contribution: At the outset of the underpinning research, a project involvement group was created to contribute to study design and conduct. This group consisted of the three authors, an Advocacy Officer at Race Equality First and an NHS Consultant Midwife. This group met regularly throughout the research process, and members were involved in discussions regarding ethical/cultural/social issues, recruitment methods, the creation of participant information materials, interpretation of data and the dissemination strategy. Ideas for the underpinning research were also discussed with members of the Pakistani community during community events and at meetings with staff from minority ethnic and migrant support charities (BAWSO, Race Equality First, The Mentor Ring). Local midwives contributed to study design through conversations during informal observations of antenatal appointments for asylum seekers and refugees. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A range of nonpharmaceutical public health interventions has been introduced in many countries following the rapid spread of Covid‐19 since 2020, including recommendations or mandates for the use of face masks or coverings in the community. While the effectiveness of face masks in reducing Covid‐19 transmission has been extensively discussed, scant attention has been paid to the lived experience of those wearing face masks. Method: Drawing on 40 narrative interviews with a purposive sample of people in the United Kingdom, with a particular focus on marginalised and minoritized groups, our paper explores experiences of face mask use during the pandemic. Results: We find that face masks have a range of societal, health and safety impacts, and prompted positive and negative emotional responses for users. We map our findings onto Lorenc and Oliver's framework for intervention risks. We suggest that qualitative data offer particular insights into the experiences of public health interventions, allowing the potential downsides and risks of interventions to be more fully considered and informing public health policies that might avoid inadvertent harm, particularly towards marginalised groups. Patient or Public Contribution: The study primarily involved members of the public in the conduct of the research, namely through participation in interviews (email and telephone). The conception for the study involved extensive discussions on social media with a range of people, and we received input and ideas from presentations we delivered on the preliminary analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: A person‐centred model of care, developed in the early days of the HIV epidemic when there were no effective treatments for HIV, led to relatively close relationships between carers and people living with HIV (PLWH). Our study examines the experiences of carers using a relational framework, exploring the traumas and challenges involved, coping practices instigated by carers and the emergence of 'relational traumatic growth' opportunities. Methods: Twenty‐two UK healthcare workers and charity volunteers working with PLWH from the early years of the epidemic were recruited. Semistructured interviews were used to elicit participants' own stories of working with PLWH, from their initial involvement to the present time, and their reflections on the personal impact of working in the field of HIV. Data were analysed using a thematic approach employing relational categories. Results: The impact of care was related to the formation of close relationships, identification with PLWH, high numbers of deaths and the difficulties and challenges encountered relationally. Participants described attempts to cope through informal and formal support, as well as endeavours to manage professional boundaries. Various ways of making sense of experiences were described, ranging from denial to abandoning the HIV field, to intense commitment. For some, traumatic experiences lead to validation, a search for personal meaning and managing the sense of loss with an exploration of further ventures, contributing to the achievement of relational traumatic growth. Conclusion: The intensity of relationships in HIV work, developed through the emotional and practical work of caring for PLWH, led healthcare workers and volunteers to experience a range of psychological consequences, both negative (including distress and emotional exhaustion) and also positive (such as acquiring a sense of purpose). Patient or Public Contribution: People living with HIV and those working with them were involved in the initial study conceptualization and design. The second and fourth authors of this paper were professionals working in HIV throughout the pandemic and have led on all aspects of the study. People living with HIV and those working with them additionally guided participant selection by suggesting participants and supporting recruitment. Narrative transcripts were checked and amended (if necessary) by participants. Initial findings were presented at the AIDS impact conference, where PLWH and those working with them attended and feedback on important ideas that helped to prioritize and shape the study findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: British South Asians have a higher prevalence of overweight and obesity than the wider population. Bradford (UK), with its high Pakistani presence and levels of economic deprivation, has exceptionally high instances, especially in deprived areas where many Pakistanis reside. British Pakistani women in Bradford are more likely to be overweight and obese. There is uncertainty on how these women can be aided to manage their weight. Therefore, the objective of this study was to explore the obesity concerns of Pakistani women living in deprived inner‐city areas of Bradford. Methods: Three focus groups interviews were carried out with 23 Pakistani women living in deprived areas of Bradford. Data were analysed thematically. Results: This exploratory study identified a wide range of concerns that women had around managing their weight. Participants disclosed distrust in information given around medication, conflicting dietary information and reported low levels of trust in women‐only organized physical activities. Cultural barriers were identified, which included the gender role of the woman, the lack of culturally appropriate dietary advice, cultural misunderstandings of what constitutes a healthy diet and healthy weight, the lack of culturally suitable exercise facilities and conforming to family and community expectations. Other concerns were language barriers around a lack of understanding, the inability to read Urdu and reliance on others to translate information. Conclusion: These findings have implications for researchers, local authorities, policy makers and others with an interest in reducing the rates of obesity in this population. Recommendations include training health practitioners to be culturally aware of the diet and eating practices of this community, exploring different ways to support socially isolated women to be more physically active at home, addressing physical activity and diet misconceptions and designing obesity management information materials appropriate for a range of literacy levels. Patient or Public Contribution: Public contributors were involved in the development of the interview guide and design of the research. A pilot focus group with participants not included in the present paper was used to help test and refine the focus group questions. Interview transcripts were member checked by participants, and participants assisted with data analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Many older people live with both multiple long‐term conditions and frailty; thus, they manage complex medicines regimens and are at heightened risk of the consequences of medicines errors. Research to enhance how people manage medicines has focused on adherence to regimens rather than on the wider skills necessary to safely manage medicines, and the older population living with frailty and managing multiple medicines at home has been under‐explored. This study, therefore, examines in depth how older people with mild to moderate frailty manage their polypharmacy regimens at home. Methods: Between June 2021 and February 2022, 32 patients aged 65 years or older with mild or moderate frailty and taking five or more medicines were recruited from 10 medical practices in the North of England, United Kingdom, and the CARE 75+ research cohort. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted face to face, by telephone or online. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Findings: Five themes were developed: (1) Managing many medicines is a skilled job I didn't apply for; (2) Medicines keep me going, but what happened to my life?; (3) Managing medicines in an unclear system; (4) Support with medicines that makes my work easier; and (5) My medicines are familiar to me—there is nothing else I need (or want) to know. While navigating fragmented care, patients were expected to fit new medicines routines into their lives and keep on top of their medicines supply. Sometimes, they felt let down by a system that created new obstacles instead of supporting their complex daily work. Conclusion: Frail older patients, who are at heightened risk of the impact of medicines errors, are expected to perform complex work to safely self‐manage multiple medicines at home. Such a workload needs to be acknowledged, and more needs to be done to prepare people in order to avoid harm from medicines. Patient and Public Involvement: An older person managing multiple medicines at home was a core member of the research team. An advisory group of older patients and family members advised the study and was involved in the first stages of data analysis. This influenced how data were coded and themes shaped. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) is a critical priority in research, policy, academia and advocacy organizations. PPI in dementia research is gaining momentum. However, these efforts are missing in international projects aimed at those living with advanced dementia in long‐term care (LTC) homes. Additional complexities can arise in enacting PPI within the context of integration of a palliative approach to care and experiences around end‐of‐life in (EOL) dementia. The mySupport study involved implementing the Family Carer Decision Support (FCDS) intervention for care partners of those living with advanced dementia in LTC in six countries. Research Design and Objective: An interpretive description study was conducted to explore the perspectives of international researchers from six countries on engaging people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL care in research processes. The findings from this study informed the development of a PPI strategy and a subsequent toolkit for the FCDS intervention. Findings: Thirty‐eight interviews were completed with project researchers: 12 from the United Kingdom, 8 from Canada, 7 from Ireland, 4 each from Italy and The Netherlands and 3 from the Czech Republic. Four broad themes describe international researchers' perspectives on advancing methods of engagement for people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL in international PPI activities: (1) Groundwork to engage in research; (2) planning for research activities is key; (3) focus on meaningful engagement and (4) having foresight for practical issues shaping PPI. Discussion and Implications: International projects that involve PPI can present many sources of challenges. The findings in this study highlight important considerations for foundational work for incorporating PPI in international projects. Learning from world leaders and those with lived experiences in various regions can be insightful and help share tools and resources. Patient or Public Contribution: PPI was envisioned as a critical part of conducting the mySupport study. The findings from this study informed the development of a PPI strategy and an international Strategic Guiding Council that included family carers of those living with advanced dementia in LTC homes in six countries. This manuscript focused on the perspectives of researchers on their engagement with people with lived experiences of dementia and EOL. The perspectives of persons with lived experiences on engaging in the mySupport research study will be reported in a forthcoming manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: While screening uptake is variable, many individuals feel they 'ought' to participate in screening programmes to aid the detection of conditions amenable to early treatment. Those not taking part in screening are often presented as either hindered by practical or social barriers or personally at fault. Why some people choose not to participate receives less consideration. Methods: We explored screening nonparticipation by examining the accounts of participants who chose not to participate in screening offered by a national research trial of atrial fibrillation (AF) screening in England (SAFER: Screening for Atrial Fibrillation with ECG to Reduce stroke). AF is a heart arrhythmia that increases in prevalence with age and increases the risk of stroke. Systematic screening for AF is not a nationally adopted programme within the United Kingdom; it provides a unique opportunity to explore screening nonparticipation outside of the norms and values attached to existing population‐based screening programmes. We interviewed people aged over 65 (n = 50) who declined an invitation from SAFER and analysed their accounts thematically. Results: Beyond practical reasons for nonparticipation, interviewees challenged the utility of identifying and managing AF earlier. Many questioned the benefits of screening at their age. The trial's presentation of the screening as research made it feel voluntary—something they could legitimately decline. Conclusion: Nonparticipants were not resistant to engaging in health‐promoting behaviours, uninformed about screening or unsupportive of its potential benefits. Instead, their consideration of the perceived necessity, legitimacy and utility of this screening shaped their decision not to take part. Patient or Public Contribution: The SAFER programme is guided by four patient and carer representatives. The representatives are embedded within the team (e.g., one is a co‐applicant, another sits on the programme steering committee) and by participating in regular meetings advise on all aspects of the design, management and delivery of the programme, including engaging with interpreting and disseminating the findings. For the qualitative workstream, we established a supplementary patient and public involvement group with whom we regularly consult about research design questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic brought rapid and major changes to research, and those wishing to carry out Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) activities faced challenges, such as restrictions on movement and contact, illness, bereavement and risks to potential participants. Some researchers moved PPI to online settings during this time but remote consultations raise, as well as address, a number of challenges. It is important to learn from PPI undertaken in this period as face‐to‐face consultation may no longer be the dominant method for PPI. Methods: UK stay‐at‐home measures announced in March 2020 necessitated immediate revisions to the intended face‐to‐face methods of PPI consultation for the ESORT Study, which evaluated emergency surgery for patients with common acute conditions. PPI plans and methods were modified to all components being online. We describe and reflect on: initial plans and adaptation; recruitment; training and preparation; implementation, contextualisation and interpretation. Through first‐hand accounts we show how the PPI processes were developed, experienced and viewed by different partners in the process. Discussion and Conclusions: While concerns have been expressed about the possible limiting effects of forgoing face‐to‐face contact with PPI partners, we found important benefits from the altered dynamic of the online PPI environment. There were increased opportunities for participation which might encourage the involvement of a broader demographic, and unexpected benefits in that the online platform seemed to have a 'democratising' effect on the meetings, to the benefit of the PPI processes and outcomes. Other studies may however find that their particular research context raises particular challenges for the use of online methods, especially in relation to representation and inclusion, as new barriers to participation may be raised. It is important that methodological challenges are addressed, and researchers provide detailed examples of novel methods for discussion and empirical study. Patient and Public Contribution: We report a process which involved people with lived experience of emergency conditions and members of the public. A patient member was involved in the design and implementation, and two patients with lived experience contributed to the manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: It is increasingly accepted that young people need to be centrally involved in research on issues that affect them. The aim of this study was to explore young people's perceptions of the benefits for them of being involved in mental health research and the processes that enabled these benefits. Methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted by co‐researchers (young people with lived experience and/or interest in mental health) with 13 young people (aged 13–24 years) who had experience of being involved in mental health research when they were between 11 and 16 years of age. Reflective thematic analysis was used to identify important aspects of young people's experiences. Results: Four main themes were identified: (1) opportunity to have a meaningful impact, (2) opportunity to be part of a supportive community, (3) opportunity to learn and grow and (4) increasing opportunities for young people. Conclusion: This study highlights young people's experiences of being involved in mental health research and identifies ways in which researchers can ensure that involvement opportunities bring benefits to both the young people and the research. Patient or Public Contribution: This research was a response to issues raised by young people involved in research. The project was supported by co‐researchers throughout, including design, data collection, analysis and write‐up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: There is a need for better integration of services across communities and sectors for people living with traumatic brain injury (TBI) to meet their complex needs. Building on insights gained from earlier pilot work, here we report the outcomes of a participatory workshop that sought to better understand the challenges, barriers and opportunities that currently exist within the care pathway for survivors of TBI. Methods: A diverse range of stakeholders from the acute and rehabilitation care pathway and the health and social care system were invited to participate in a 3‐h workshop. The participants worked in four mixed subgroups using practice development methodology, which promotes person‐centred, inclusive and participatory action. Results: Thematic analysis identified shared purposes and values that were used to produce a detailed implementation and impact framework for application at both the level of the care interface and the overarching integrated care system. A variety of enablers were identified that related to collective values and behaviours, case management, team leadership and integrated team working, workforce capability, evidence‐based practice and resourcing. The clinical, economic, cultural and social outcomes associated with these enablers were also identified, and included patient safety, independence and well‐being, reduced waiting times, re‐admission rates, staff retention and professional development. Conclusion: The co‐produced recommendations made within the implementation and impact framework described here provide a means by which the culture and delivery of health and social care services can be better tailored to meet the needs of people living with TBI. We believe that the recommendations will help shape the formation of new services as well as the development of existing ones. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and public involvement have been established over a 10‐year history of relationship building through a joint forum and events involving three charities representing people with TBI, carers, family members, clinicians, service users, researchers and commissioners, culminating in a politically supported event that identified concerns about the needs of people following TBI. These relationships formed the foundation for the interactive workshop, the focus of this publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health and social care systems face difficulties in managing multimorbidity, disease burden and complex needs in long‐term conditions such as Parkinson's disease. Objective: This study aimed to develop a European understanding of how health and social care professionals can collaborate with stakeholders from different organizations and sectors to enhance the management of Parkinson's disease in a community setting by identifying the existing gaps in this process and how people with Parkinson's disease and their family carers could benefit from these partnerships. Methods: A mixed‐methods sequential study was conducted in Denmark, Norway, Spain and the United Kingdom. The findings from the qualitative phase are presented. Individual semistructured interviews were analysed using Braun's and Clarke's thematic analysis. A meta‐ethnography approach was used to analyse and synthesize cross‐national findings. Results: A total of 41 healthcare professionals and 39 stakeholders from different disciplines and sectors were interviewed in the four countries. The participants acknowledged a lack of awareness of available resources and poor communication between the different support systems in the management of Parkinson's disease. To promote multiagency collaborations, the participants highlighted the need to organize services along the Parkinson's disease journey, patient involvement and strategic involvement of carers in organizing resources and Parkinson's disease care pathways. According to the participants, the benefits from multiagency partnerships could lead to an enhanced continuity of care and specialized knowledge, mobilization of resources in the community, personalized support and improved access to services. Conclusions: Policymakers are called upon to create formal structures that facilitate multisectoral collaborations to promote an integrated system of care for the management of Parkinson's disease in the community. To address this challenge, we propose five strategies showing how organizations can work together to optimize the use of resources and enhance the management of Parkinson's disease throughout the illness trajectory. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and Public Involvement groups made up of stakeholders, healthcare professionals, patients with Parkinson's disease and family carers participated in the design of the study, the development of the interview guides and the validation of the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In October 2022, it was estimated 2.3 million people in the United Kingdom have self‐reported Long Covid (LC). Many people have reported not receiving adequate healthcare support. There is a lack of research which provides an in‐depth exploration of the barriers faced by people with LC in accessing healthcare support. It is important to understand these barriers to provide better support, care and advice for those experiencing LC. Objective: To understand the barriers faced in accessing primary, secondary and specialist healthcare support for people with LC. Design and Participation: 40 interviews were conducted with people living with LC in Bradford alongside 12 interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) providing LC support in Bradford healthcare settings. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: People living with LC had a large degree of difficulty in accessing healthcare services for LC support. We categorized the healthcare access experiences of participants into five main types: (1) being unable to access primary care, (2) accessing primary care but receiving (perceived) inadequate support, (3) extreme persistence, (4) alternatives to mainstream health care and (5) positive experiences. There was a severe lack of access to specialist LC services. Ethnic minority participants faced a further barrier of mistrust and fear of services deterring them from accessing support. HCPs discussed systemic barriers to delivering services. Experiences were embedded in macrostructural issues further exacerbated by the pandemic. Conclusion: To better support people with LC, the barriers faced in accessing healthcare support must be addressed. Of significance, improvements to general practitioner access are required; especially as GPs are the first line of support for people living with LC. Patient and Public Involvement: A patient and public involvement group is engaged at regular intervals in the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID‐19 vaccines have been the central pillar of the public health response to the pandemic, intended to enable us to 'live with Covid'. It is important to understand change and complexity of COVID‐19 vaccines attitudes and decisions to maximize uptake through an empathetic lens. Objective: To explore the factors that influenced people's COVID‐19 vaccines decisions and how their complex attitudes towards the vaccines had changed in an eventful year. Design and Participants: This is a follow‐up study that took place in Bradford, UK between October 2021 and January 2022, 1 year after the original study. In‐depth phone interviews were conducted with 12 (of the 20 originally interviewed) people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Eleven of the 12 participants interviewed had received both doses of the COVID‐19 vaccine and most intended to have a booster dose. Participants described a variety of reasons why they had decided to have the vaccines, including the following: feeling at increased risk at work; protecting family and others in their communities; unrestricted travel and being influenced by the vaccine decisions of family, friends and colleagues. All participants discussed ongoing interaction with COVID‐19 misinformation and for some, this meant they were uneasy about their decision to have the vaccine. They described feeling overloaded by and disengaged from COVID‐19 information, which they often found contradictory and some felt mistrustful of the UK Government's motives and decisions during the pandemic. Conclusions: The majority of participants had managed to navigate an overwhelming amount of circulating COVID‐19 misinformation and chosen to have two or more COVID‐19 vaccines, even if they had been previously said they were unsure. However, these decisions were complicated, demonstrating the continuum of vaccine hesitancy and acceptance. This follow‐up study underlines that vaccine attitudes are changeable and contextual. Patient or Public Contribution: The original study was developed through a rapid community and stakeholder engagement process in 2020. Discussion with the Bradford Council Public Health team and the public through the Bradford COVID‐19 Community Insights Group was undertaken in 2021 to identify important priorities for this follow‐up study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Making a diagnosis of asthma can be challenging for clinicians and patients. A clinical decision support system (CDSS) for use in primary care including a patient‐facing mode, could change how information is shared between patients and healthcare professionals and improve the diagnostic process. Methods: Participants diagnosed with asthma within the last 5 years were recruited from general practices across four UK regions. In‐depth interviews were used to explore patient experiences relating to their asthma diagnosis and to understand how a CDSS could be used to improve the diagnostic process for patients. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach. Results: Seventeen participants (12 female) undertook interviews, including 14 individuals and 3 parents of children with asthma. Being diagnosed with asthma was generally considered an uncertain process. Participants felt a lack of consultation time and poor communication affected their understanding of asthma and what to expect. Had the nature of asthma and the steps required to make a diagnosis been explained more clearly, patients felt their understanding and engagement in asthma self‐management could have been improved. Participants considered that a CDSS could provide resources to support the diagnostic process, prompt dialogue, aid understanding and support shared decision‐making. Conclusion: Undergoing an asthma diagnosis was uncertain for patients if their ideas and concerns were not addressed by clinicians and were influenced by a lack of consultation time and limitations in communication. An asthma diagnosis CDSS could provide structure and an interface to prompt dialogue, provide visuals about asthma to aid understanding and encourage patient involvement. Patient and Public Contribution: Prespecified semistructured interview topic guides (young person and adult versions) were developed by the research team and piloted with members of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group. Findings were regularly discussed within the research group and with PPI colleagues to aid the interpretation of data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Self‐management strategies improve asthma outcomes, although interventions for South Asian populations have been less effective than in White populations. Both self‐management and culture are dynamic, and factors such as acculturation and generation have not always been adequately reflected in existing cultural interventions. We aimed to explore the perspectives of Bangladeshi and Pakistani people in the United Kingdom, across multiple generations (first, second and third/fourth), on how they self‐manage their asthma, with a view to suggesting recommendations for cultural interventions. Methods: We purposively recruited Bangladeshi and Pakistani participants, with an active diagnosis of asthma from healthcare settings. Semi‐structured interviews in the participants' choice of language (English, Sylheti, Standard Bengali or Urdu) were conducted, and data were analysed thematically. Results: Twenty‐seven participants (13 Bangladeshi and 14 Pakistani) were interviewed. There were generational differences in self‐management, influenced by complex cultural processes experienced by South Asians as part of being an ethnic minority group. Individuals from the first generation used self‐management strategies congruent to traditional beliefs such as 'sweating' and often chose to travel to South Asian countries. Generations born and raised in the United Kingdom learnt and experimented with self‐management based on their fused identities and modified their approach depending on whether they were in familial or peer settings. Acculturative stress, which was typically higher in first generations who had migration‐related stressors, influenced the priority given to asthma self‐management throughout generations. The amount and type of available asthma information as well as social discussions within the community and with healthcare professionals also shaped asthma self‐management. Conclusions: Recognizing cultural diversity and its influence of asthma self‐management can help develop effective interventions tailored to the lives of South Asian people. Patient or Public Contribution: Patient and Public Involvement colleagues were consulted throughout to ensure that the study and its materials were fit for purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Patient and public involvement in research is anchored in moral and epistemological rationales. Moral rationales relate to the public having a right to influence how knowledge about them is generated. Epistemological rationales relate to how research design and implementation can improve when informed by experiential, as well as technical, knowledge. In other words, public involvement can increase the epistemological resources of researchers, and contribute to research that is fit for purpose and has high external validity. Methods: This article presents an analysis of 3 meetings and 11 interviews with public collaborators and researchers in three UK‐based health research studies. Data comprised transcripts of audio‐recorded research meetings and interviews with public collaborators and researchers. Data were first analysed to develop a data‐informed definition of experiential knowledge, then thematically to investigate how this experiential knowledge was considered and received within the research space. Results: At meetings, public collaborators shared their experiential knowledge as stories, comments, questions, answers and when referring to their own roles. They were aware of crossing a boundary from everyday life, and some adapted their contributions to fit within the research space. Although researchers and public collaborators made efforts to create an inclusive climate, obstacles to impact were identified. Conclusions: Considering experiential knowledge as a boundary object highlights that this knowledge has a different form to other kinds of knowledge that contribute to research. To enable impact from experiential knowledge, researchers need to create a space where public collaborators experience epistemic justice. Patient and Public Contribution: The Peninsula Public Engagement Group (PenPEG) was involved in the planning and conceptualization of the study, including the development of the ethics application and the interview schedules. One member of this group (Richard Fitzgerald) and one from outside the group (Leon Farmer), were full members of the author team and were involved in the data analysis. Leon Farmer has since become a member of PenPEG. Richard Fitzgerald and Leon Farmer were not involved in the three research studies sampled for this study. Sadly Richard Fitzgerald died during the course of this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is limited research exploring how smoking cessation treatment should be implemented into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to understand attitudes and preferences regarding the integration of smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening from the perspective of those eligible. Methods: Thirty‐one lung cancer screening eligible individuals aged 55–80 years with current or former smoking histories were recruited using community outreach and social media. Two focus groups (three participants each) and 25 individual telephone interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis. Results: Three themes were generated: (1) bringing lung cancer closer to home, where screening was viewed as providing an opportunity to motivate smoking cessation, depending on perceived personal risk and screening result; (2) a sensitive approach to cessation with the uptake of cessation support considered to be largely dependent on screening practitioners' communication style and expectations of stigma and (3) creating an equitable service that focuses on ease of access as a key determinant of uptake, where integrating cessation within the screening appointment may sustain increased quit motivation and prevent loss to follow‐up. Conclusions: The integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening was viewed positively by those eligible to attend. Screening appointments providing personalized lung health information may increase cessation motivation. Services should proactively support participants with possible fatalistic views regarding risk and decreased cessation motivation upon receiving a good screening result. To increase engagement in cessation, services need to be person‐centred. Patient or Public Contribution: This study has included patient and public involvement throughout, including input regarding study design, research materials, recruitment strategies and research summaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research and clinical outcomes that matter to people with lived experience can significantly differ from those outcomes studied by researchers. To inform a future Cochrane review of suicide and self‐harm prevention interventions, we aimed to work with young people with relevant lived experience to agree on priority outcomes. Design: Four participatory codesign workshops were completed across two sites (New Zealand, United Kingdom) with 28 young people in total. We iteratively adapted the methods over the course of the study. Results: 'Improved coping' and 'safer/more accepting environment to disclose' were the final top‐rated outcomes. 'Reduction of self‐harm' was considered a low priority as it could be misleading, stigmatizing and was considered a secondary consequence of other improvements. In contrast to typical research outcomes, young people emphasized the diversity of experience, the dynamic nature of improvement and holistic and asset‐based framing. Methodologically, dialogue using design materials (personas) to thematically explore outcomes was effective in overcoming the initial challenge of disparate quantitative ratings. Discussion: The results will directly inform the development of a Cochrane review, enabling identification of whether and how outcomes of most importance to young people are measured in trials. Rather than producing discrete measurable outcomes that could be easily added to the systematic review, the young people challenged the academic conceptualization of outcomes, with implications for future evidence synthesis and intervention research, and for future codesign. Patient or Public Contribution: Young people with lived experience were codesigners of the outcomes, and their feedback informed iterative changes to the study methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient involvement in psychiatry education is required by policy and has many benefits for students. Little research has focused on the impact on expert patients (EPs). Objective: This study aimed to explore the impact of involvement in psychiatry education on mental health patients. Design: A qualitative descriptive study using semistructured interviews was conducted in a psychiatry teaching unit in the East Midlands, UK. A purposive sample of 20 EPs involved in teaching was interviewed about the social and psychological impacts of involvement. Transcripts were analysed thematically and a coding scheme was developed. Results: Five themes were identified: shaping the doctors of the future—something worthwhile, challenging assumptions about mental health, recovery and transformation, vulnerability and support and expertise and power. Conclusion: These EPs benefitted from their experience of teaching. Involvement in psychiatry teaching may require putting oneself in a vulnerable position, but a supportive and open faculty team may mitigate this challenge. The Expert Patient Programme was seen as a way of helping to reduce the power difference between patients and doctors in the future. There is a need to examine the language that we use to talk about patient involvement as this may have implications for this power dynamic. The context and mechanisms that lead to the benefits described by participants should be studied so that these benefits may be generalized to other contexts. Patient Contribution: An EP was involved in the planning and ethical approval application process of the project and the drafting and approval of this manuscript. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Public health initiatives seek to modify lifestyle behaviours associated with risk (e.g., diet, exercise, and smoking), but underpinning psychological and affective processes must also be considered to maximize success. Objective: This study aimed to qualitatively assess how participants engaged with and utilized the best possible self (BPS)‐intervention specifically as a type 2 diabetes (T2D) prevention tool. Design and Methods: Fourteen participants engaged with a tailored BPS intervention. Reflexive thematic analysis analysed accounts of participant's experiences and feasibility of use. Results: All participants submitted evidence of engagement with the intervention. The analysis considered two main themes: Holistic Health and Control. The analysis highlighted several nuanced ways in which individuals conceptualized their health, set goals, and received affective benefits, offering insights into how people personalized a simple intervention to meet their health needs. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to tailor the BPS intervention as a public health application for the prevention of T2D. The intervention enabled users to identify their best possible selves in a way that encouraged T2D preventive behaviours. We propose that our tailored BPS intervention could be a flexible and brief tool to assist public health efforts in encouraging change to aid T2D prevention. Public Contribution: The format, language and application of the BPS intervention were adapted in response to a public consultation group that developed a version specifically for application in this study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: COVID‐19 vaccines can offer a route out of the pandemic, yet initial research suggests that many are unwilling to be vaccinated. A rise in the spread of misinformation is thought to have played a significant role in vaccine hesitancy. To maximize uptake, it is important to understand why misinformation has been able to take hold at this time and why it may pose a more significant problem within certain contexts. Objective: To understand people's COVID‐19 beliefs, their interactions with (mis)information during COVID‐19 and attitudes towards a COVID‐19 vaccine. Design and Participants: Bradford, UK, was chosen as the study site to provide evidence to local decision makers. In‐depth phone interviews were carried out with 20 people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford during Autumn 2020. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Participants discussed a wide range of COVID‐19 misinformation they had encountered, resulting in confusion, distress and mistrust. Vaccine hesitancy could be attributed to three prominent factors: safety concerns, negative stories and personal knowledge. The more confused, distressed and mistrusting participants felt about their social worlds during the pandemic, the less positive they were about a vaccine. Conclusions: COVID‐19 vaccine hesitancy needs to be understood in the context of the relationship between the spread of misinformation and associated emotional reactions. Vaccine programmes should provide a focused, localized and empathetic response to counter misinformation. Patient or Public Contribution: A rapid community and stakeholder engagement process was undertaken to identify COVID‐19 priority topics important to Bradford citizens and decision makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]