Search

Introduction: International policy is encouraging a re-design of health and social care services, including the use of social prescribing. Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, an Integrated Care Organisation in the UK, commissioned a voluntary sector ‘Wellbeing Coordination’ service as a key element of the wider care model. This case study seeks to understand how primary, acute, social, community and voluntary services are working together in a locality hub and the impact of wellbeing coordinators on service users’ well-being, use and cost of health and social care services Methods: A before-and-after study, supplemented with qualitative case studies, practitioner interviews/surveys, observations of multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings and service user/caregiver interactions. Applying an action-based participatory approach, findings were co-produced with stakeholders and members of the public by embedded researchers-in-residence. Quantitative service user data were collected on health and social well-being outcomes and frailty on referral and 12 weeks. Comprehensive activity and cost data were collected at 12 months pre- and post-referral. Results: Health outcomes and service activity data were collected on 49 participants receiving the wellbeing coordination programme. All person-reported outcomes showed statistically significant increases in mean change scores (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, Well-being Star™, Patient Activation Measure, Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale, Living well goals met). Qualitative case studies and observations highlighted key mechanisms of the intervention and the hub working. The impact on health and social care use and cost was more nuanced, with mean activity and cost increasing overall. Referrals from the Enhanced Intermediate Care MDTs (20/49) showed higher levels of use and cost. At locality hub level, the practitioner survey, observations and interview findings show an increase in vertical and horizontal organisational integration and high levels of staff-reported person-centeredness while embodying a strengths-based approach. Discussion: The study shows a positive impact on outcomes and mixed patterns regarding activity and cost. The findings indicate potential for more ‘down-stream’ and preventative work. The close links with the wider voluntary sector add to the hub offer in holding more complexity, providing access and continuity of care, and delivering holistic and personalised care in the right place and at the right time. Conclusion: Key elements of how the hub works indicate the importance of leadership, co-ordination, communication, colocation, and contracting that allows the nourishing of trusting relationships and crossing of organisational and professional boundaries. Lessons learned: Challenges included pooling resources, record sharing, information governance and engaging all stakeholders in a shared vision for a strengths-based, person-centred culture. Ownership and bottom up dynamics and formal and informal relationships between practitioners at all levels, including the community they work with, were key features for overcoming these. Limitations: Case studies and participatory research approaches may be considered lesser to experimental study designs. However, context is crucial to integrated care and extrapolating generalizable findings. Co-production and triangulating varying data sources helps studying and implementing complex system wide transformation. Suggestions for future research: The Researcher-in-Residence model could be rolled out across systems to facilitate learning, and to increase robustness of insights.

Abstract Background Depression is a common and distressing mental health problem that is responsible for significant individual disability and cost to society. Medication and psychological therapies are effective for treating depression and maintenance anti-depressants (m-ADM) can prevent relapse. However, individuals with depression often express a wish for psychological help that can help them recover from depression in the long-term. We need to develop psychological therapies that prevent depressive relapse/recurrence. A recently developed treatment, Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT, see http://www.mbct.co.uk) shows potential as a brief group programme for people with recurring depression. In two studies it has been shown to halve the rates of depression recurring compared to usual care. This trial asks the policy research question, is MBCT superior to m-ADM in terms of: a primary outcome of preventing depressive relapse/recurrence over 24 months; and, secondary outcomes of (a) depression free days, (b) residual depressive symptoms, (c) antidepressant (ADM) usage, (d) psychiatric and medical co-morbidity, (e) quality of life, and (f) cost effectiveness? An explanatory research question asks is an increase in mindfulness skills the key mechanism of change? Methods/Design The design is a single blind, parallel RCT examining MBCT vs. m-ADM with an embedded process study. To answer the main policy research question the proposed trial compares MBCT plus ADM-tapering with m-ADM for patients with recurrent depression. Four hundred and twenty patients with recurrent major depressive disorder in full or partial remission will be recruited through primary care. Depressive relapse/recurrence over two years is the primary outcome variable. The explanatory question will be addressed in two mutually informative ways: quantitative measurement of potential mediating variables pre/post-treatment and a qualitative study of service users' views and experiences. Discussion If the results of our exploratory trial are extended to this definitive trial, MBCT will be established as an alternative approach to maintenance anti-depressants for people with a history of recurrent depression. The process studies will provide evidence about the effective components which can be used to improve MBCT and inform theory as well as other therapeutic approaches. Trial registration number ISRCTN26666654

Abstract Background Complex interventions have components which can vary in different contexts. Using the Realistic Evaluation framework, this study investigates how a complex health services intervention led to developments in shared care for people with long-term mental illness. Methods A retrospective qualitative interview study was carried out alongside a randomised controlled trial. The multi-faceted intervention supported by facilitators aimed to develop systems for shared care. The study was set in London. Participants included 46 practitioners and managers from 12 participating primary health care teams and their associated community mental health teams. Interviews focussed on how and why out comes were achieved, and were analysed using a framework incorporating context and intervening mechanisms. Results Thirty-one interviews were completed to create 12 case studies. The enquiry highlighted the importance of the catalysing, doing and reviewing functions of the facilitation process. Other facets of the intervention were less dominant. The intervention catalysed the allocation of link workers and liaison arrangements in nearly all practices. Case discussions between link workers and GPs improved individual care as well as helping link workers become part of the primary care team; but sustained integration into the team depended both on flexibility and experience of the link worker, and upon selection of relevant patients for the case discussions. The doing function of facilitators included advice and, at times, manpower, to help introduce successful systems for reviewing care, however time spent developing IT systems was rarely productive. The reviewing function of the intervention was weak and sometimes failed to solve problems in the development of liaison or recall. Conclusion Case discussions and improved liaison at times of crisis, rather than for proactive recall, were the key functions of shared care contributing to the success of Mental Health Link. This multifaceted intervention had most impact through catalysing and doing, whereas the reviewing function of the facilitation was weak, and other components were seen as less important. Realistic Evaluation provided a useful theoretical framework for this process evaluation, by allowing a specific focus on context. Although complex interventions might appear 'out of control', due to their varied manifestation in different situations, context sensitive process evaluations can help identify the intervention's key functions.

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 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/aims/objectives: 'Embedded' approaches to knowledge mobilisation are gaining currency, as health and social care services come under increasing pressure to redesign services now rather than wait for research. One such approach is the 'Researcher-in-Residence' (RiR) model which seeks to co-produce knowledge for action. The aim of this paper is to extend the evidence base regarding mechanisms of impact. Methods: A two-year mixed-method case study of the experience and impact of two part-time RiRs, embedded within an Integrated Care Organisation to support the implementation of new models of care. Data included the results of an anonymous impact survey sent to 80 key stakeholders, field notes of meetings (n=112), and observations of naturally occurring events (n=68). Findings: Impacts were identified in relation to use of co-produced evidence, capacity building, changes in ways of working, and to a lesser degree changes in operations or strategy. Impact involved learning which was mediated by three non-linear, non-predictable, positive and negative feedback cycles (expectations, access, learning/improvement). A mixture of technical skills, personal attributes and behaviours were identified as key to this mediation. Discussion/conclusion: The RiR model promises a timely, applied and transferable research model that contributes to the development, evaluation and adaptation of innovations that seek to integrate services where the evidence base is weak and uncertain. However, the model is not without challenges. These could be addressed by flexibility of research design and funding, and adequately supporting and developing key attributes of RiRs.

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]

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]