Search

Background: Liver disease is an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality in the United Kingdom and can be challenging to live with in the advanced stages. There has been little research exploring the healthcare experiences of UK individuals with decompensated disease when the liver cannot carry out its functions properly. A PhD research project was developed with people who have liver disease to explore care experiences in decompensated advanced liver disease. Public involvement (PI) is an essential aspect of meaningful health research, and this paper reports on the progression of our PI approach in this ongoing study. Objective: To embed PI throughout the research project to ensure that the study is meaningful to individuals with liver disease and the people who support them. Methods: The research adopts a Constructivist Grounded Theory methodology to develop a theory of care experience. Various PI approaches were considered in developing the PI strategy for this qualitative study. Initially, Embedded consultation was the preferred model, which has evolved to include aspects of collaboration and coproduction. A PI group was set up to oversee the project through the national public engagement website VOICE, and reflections on PI from three members of the group are included in this paper to illuminate the PI process. Results: Six individuals with liver disease and three carers from across the United Kingdom are part of an ongoing PI group. Their role includes commenting on the findings of the systematic literature review for this project and contributing to decisions about recruitment, data collection and data analysis. Additionally, they had a direct impact on changing the focus of the research. The PI group will continue involvement until the completion of the project. Conclusion: Successfully embedding PI into doctoral research, as demonstrated in this project, requires commitment, planning and dedication to reciprocal working for the benefit of PI contributors as well as the research. This approach could be adopted by other postgraduate researchers. Patient or Public Contribution: This project is overseen by the PI group, whose contribution is described throughout, including reflections from three PI group members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United Kingdom (UK) have faced many challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, some of these arising out of their social positions. Existing literature explicating these challenges (e.g., lack of appropriate PPE, redeployment, understaffing) have highlighted inequities in how these have been experienced by HCWs based on ethnicity, gender or, job role. In this paper, we move a step ahead and examine how the intersection of these social positions have impacted HCWs' experiences of challenges during the pandemic. Methods: We collected qualitative data, using interviews and focus groups, from 164 HCWs from different ethnicities, gender, job roles, migration statuses, and regions in the United Kingdom (UK) between December 2020 and July 2021. Interviews and focus groups were conducted online or by telephone, and recorded with participants' permission. Recordings were transcribed and a hybrid thematic analytical approach integrating inductive data-driven codes with deductive ones informed by an intersectional framework was adopted to analyse the transcripts. Results: Thematic analysis of transcripts identified disempowerment, disadvantage and, discrimination as the three main themes around which HCWs' experiences of challenges were centred, based on their intersecting identities (e.g., ethnicity gender, and/or migration status). Our analysis also acknowledges that disadvantages faced by HCWs were linked to systemic and structural factors at the micro, meso and macro ecosystemic levels. This merging of analysis which is grounded in intersectionality and considers the ecosystemic levels has been termed as 'intrasectionalism'. Discussion: Our research demonstrates how an intrasectional lens can help better understand how different forms of mutually reinforcing inequities exist at all levels within the healthcare workforce and how these impact HCWs from certain backgrounds who face greater disadvantage, discrimination and disempowerment, particularly during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Alcohol increases cancer risk, but less is known about public awareness of this link. This scoping review summarizes recent findings on the public awareness of alcohol as a cancer risk factor in European Union and UK. Methods Four databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL) were searched for papers containing data on awareness of alcohol as cancer risk factor in EU or UK published between January 2017 and December 2022, and complemented with grey literature searches. Results In total, 45 studies were included covering 18 EU countries (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden) and UK, presenting data collected between 2009 and 2022. Studies covered general population (17 studied a nationally representative sample), women, health professionals, patients and young people. Awareness of alcohol causing cancer in general was higher and studied more often than awareness of alcohol's impact on specific cancers. Among the EU general population, awareness of the link between alcohol and breast cancer ranged between 10% and 20%, head and neck cancer 15–25%, colorectal and oesophagus cancer 15–45% and liver cancer 40%. Awareness was higher among young people and specialized health professions and lower among women (the latter specifically for the breast cancer). Conclusions While awareness rates varied depending on the exact question wording, many studies showed low awareness of the alcohol-cancer link, especially for specific types such as breast and colon cancer. Public should be better informed about alcohol consumption-related cancer risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In many Westernised countries, children do not consume a sufficient amount of vegetables for optimal health and development. Child-feeding guidelines have been produced to address this, but often only promote offering vegetables at midday/evening meals and snack times. With guidance having limited success in increasing children's vegetable intake at a population level, novel approaches to address this must be developed. Offering vegetables to children at breakfast time in nursery/kindergarten settings has the potential to increase children's overall daily vegetable consumption as children typically attend nursery/kindergarten and many routinely eat breakfast there. However, the feasibility and acceptability of this intervention (Veggie Brek) to children and nursery staff has not been investigated. Methods: A feasibility and acceptability cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) was undertaken in eight UK nurseries. All nurseries engaged in one-week baseline and follow-up phases before and after an intervention/control period. Staff in intervention nurseries offered three raw carrot batons and three cucumber sticks alongside children's main breakfast food each day for three weeks. Control nurseries offered children their usual breakfast. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment data and nursery staff's ability to follow the trial protocol. Acceptability was assessed by children's willingness to eat the vegetables at breakfast time. All primary outcomes were assessed against traffic-light progression criteria. Staff preference for collecting data via photographs versus using paper was also assessed. Further views about the intervention were obtained through semi-structured interviews with nursery staff. Results: The recruitment of parents/caregivers willing to provide consent for eligible children was acceptable at 67.8% (within the amber stop–go criterion) with 351 children taking part across eight nurseries. Both the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention to nursery staff and the willingness of children to consume the vegetables met the green stop–go criteria, with children eating some part of the vegetables in 62.4% (745/1194) of instances where vegetables were offered. Additionally, staff preferred reporting data using paper compared to taking photographs. Conclusions: Offering vegetables to children at breakfast time in nursery/kindergarten settings is feasible and acceptable to children and nursery staff. A full intervention evaluation should be explored via a definitive RCT. Trial registration: NCT05217550. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Access to affordable, appropriate housing is one of the key social determinants of health, affecting well-being across the lifecourse. However, beyond a recognition that housing quality is linked to place of death, little is known about the ways in which housing status impacts social, emotional, and practical aspects of dying and bereavement. Method: The Checking Out project is a qualitative study aiming to explore the ways in which socio-economic status impacts people's experiences of, and attitudes towards, death, dying, and bereavement in the United Kingdom. Qualitative interviews were carried out with 14 bereaved individuals with experience of poverty at end of life or in bereavement, and 15 professionals supporting individuals in low-income communities. Interviews were conducted via phone/video call, and data include experiences of end of life and bereavement both before and during the pandemic. Transcripts were examined using thematic analysis. Results: Housing emerged as an important factor affecting people's experiences, with 7 of the 14 bereaved individuals and all except 1 of the professionals discussing housing-related issues. Participants described ways in which unsuitable housing and housing insecurity impacted practical aspects of dying but also emotional and social well-being at end of life. Housing-related issues affected both patients and their families, though families found it difficult to air these concerns when their relative was dying. Conclusion: The paper demonstrates how trusted professionals are able to advocate or address the issues faced by bereaved individuals and suggests implications for policy and practice. A greater awareness of the potential impact of housing status across public services, including healthcare practitioners, welfare support, and housing providers, could better support patients and practitioners to address these issues proactively. Housing providers and policy-makers should be included as key partners in collaborative public health approaches to palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The importance of support to breastfeeding success is well established, as are the difficulties many mothers face in accessing the support they need. With the majority of UK mothers now accessing social media for support, Breastfeeding Support Facebook (BSF) groups have increased exponentially. BSF groups vary in type (local or national/international) and in moderation—overseen by breastfeeding mothers and by midwives or trained lactation specialists. Some groups aimed at supporting mothers in a specific geographical area also have associated face‐to‐face groups, facilitated as either professional or peer support. Little is currently known about these specific local groups, their prevalence, impact or value to mothers. This paper examines mothers' experiences of using local BSF groups and why they value them as part of a larger study exploring the impact of midwife moderation on these groups. An online survey consisting of open and closed questions was completed by 2028 mothers. Findings identified that local BSF groups are widely used and highly valued for their connection with local face‐to‐face services and other mothers. They offer access to expertise and shared experience in a format mothers find convenient and timely, improving confidence and self‐efficacy. Local BSF groups enable the formation of support networks and development of breastfeeding knowledge that mothers credit with increased well‐being, motivation and breastfeeding duration. As such, they have the potential to add value to local face‐to‐face services and improve breastfeeding experiences and knowledge in communities. The findings have important implications to support the development of integrated online interventions to improve public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]