Search

Watchful waiting is a concept that is traditionally not associated with severe and enduring mental illness. This paper, however, boldly argues that the concept could be used as a ground‐breaking and accessible antidote to the perceived inequality experienced by black service users experiencing both mild and severe mental illnesses in England. The novel concepts proposed in this paper are not intended to be consensual, but rather uncompromising to provoke critical thinking in mental health practice. A conceptual framework for watchful waiting in mental health is suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obesity rates are higher among people of lower socioeconomic status. While numerous health behaviour interventions targeting obesity exist, they are more successful at engaging higher socioeconomic status populations, leaving those in less affluent circumstances with poorer outcomes. This highlights a need for more tailored interventions. The aim of this study was to enhance an existing weight loss course for adults living in low socioeconomic communities. Methods: The Behaviour Change Wheel approach was followed to design an add‐on intervention to an existing local authority‐run weight loss group, informed by mixed‐methods research and stakeholder engagement. Results: The COM‐B analysis of qualitative data revealed that changes were required to psychological capability, physical and social opportunity and reflective motivation to enable dietary goal‐setting behaviours. The resulting SMART‐C booklet included 6 weeks of dietary goal setting, with weekly behavioural contract and review. Conclusion: This paper details the development of the theory‐ and evidence‐informed SMART‐C intervention. This is the first report of the Behaviour Change Wheel being used to design an add‐on tool to enhance existing weight loss services. The process benefitted from a further checking stage with stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is one of the few non‐pharmacological interventions for people living with dementia shown to be effective and cost‐effective. What are the current and future cost and health‐related quality of life implications of scaling‐up CST to eligible new cases of dementia in England? Methods/design: Data from trials were combined with microsimulation and macrosimulation modelling to project future prevalence, needs and costs. Health and social costs, unpaid care costs and quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) were compared with and without scaling‐up of CST and follow‐on maintenance CST (MCST). Results: Scaling‐up group CST requires year‐on‐year increases in expenditure (mainly on staff), but these would be partially offset by reductions in health and care costs. Unpaid care costs would increase. Scaling‐up MCST would also require additional expenditure, but without generating savings elsewhere. There would be improvements in general cognitive functioning and health‐related quality of life, summarised in terms of QALY gains. Cost per QALY for CST alone would increase from £12,596 in 2015 to £19,573 by 2040, which is below the threshold for cost‐effectiveness used by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Cost per QALY for CST and MCST combined would grow from £19,883 in 2015 to £30,906 by 2040, making it less likely to be recommended by NICE on cost‐effectiveness grounds. Conclusions: Scaling‐up CST England for people with incident dementia can improve lives in an affordable, cost‐effective manner. Adding MCST also improves health‐related quality of life, but the economic evidence is less compelling. Key points: There are few evidence‐based non‐pharmacological interventions for people living with dementia. Cognitive stimulation therapy (CST) is both effective and cost‐effective, but current availability is constrainedThis paper reports the cost and health‐related quality of life implications of scaling‐up cognitive stimulation therapy to eligible people with dementia in England over a 25 year periodScaling‐up CST would improve general cognitive functioning and health‐related quality of life, but also increase costs for health and social care services, and for family and other unpaid carers. Adding maintenance CST would also improve health‐related quality of life, with even greater cost increasesThe higher costs of scaling‐up CST to the full eligible population over a 25 year period would be considered worth paying by reference to criteria used by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in England. The economic evidence for adding maintenance CST is less compelling [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]