Search

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) poses a significant global health challenge, projected to become one of the leading causes of death by 2040. Current treatments primarily manage complications and slow progression, highlighting the urgent need for personalized therapies targeting the disease-causing genes. Our increased understanding of the underlying genomic changes that lead to kidney diseases coupled with recent successful gene therapies targeting specific kidney cells have turned gene therapy and genome editing into a promising therapeutic approach for treating kidney disease. This review paper reflects on different delivery routes and systems that can be exploited to target specific kidney cells and the ways that gene therapy can be used to improve kidney health.

Background: Patients living with long-term chronic illnesses often need ongoing medical attention, lifestyle adjustments, and psychosocial support beyond the initial diagnosis and treatment phases. Many experience illness deterioration and subsequently require hospitalisation, especially in the transition period after hospital discharge. A promising strategy for managing long-term conditions is promoting self-management. eHealth interventions involving remote patient monitoring have the potential to promote self-management and offer a more seamless bridge between the hospital and the patient´s home environment. However, such interventions can only significantly impact health and health care if they are effective, accepted and adopted by users, normalised into routine practice and everyday life, and able to be widely implemented. Feasibility studies are used to determine whether an intervention is suitable for the target population and effective in achieving its intended goal. They may also provide critical information about an intervention´s acceptability and usability. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the acceptability and usability of a nurse-assisted remote patient monitoring intervention for the post-hospital follow-up of patients with long-term illnesses by use of the core constructs of normalisation process theory. Design: A descriptive and explanatory qualitative approach was used, with patients observed during training and semi-structured interviews conducted with patients and nurses after study completion. Settings: Participants were recruited from two university hospitals in Norway between December 2021 and February 2023. Participants: Ten patients were observed during training, and 27 patients and eight nurses were interviewed after study completion. Methods: Structured and overt observations were made while the patients received training to operate the remote patient monitoring service, guided by an observation guide. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and nurse navigators about their experiences of remote follow-up care, guided by open ended questions. Data analysis followed a stepwise deductive inductive method. Results: `Achieving acceptance and usability through digital social interaction´ emerged as a unifying theme that bridged the experiences of patients with long-term illnesses and the nurse navigators. This overarching theme was illustrated by four sub-themes, which all reflected the usability and acceptability of the nurse-assisted remote patient monitoring service in various ways. Conclusion: Acceptability and usability are critical factors to consider when evaluating remote patient monitoring interventions. In this study, the most important feature for promoting acceptability and usability was the interaction between patients and nurse navigators. Therefore, the intervention´s feasibility and implementation potential rested upon the relationship between its deliverer and receiver.

Abstract Background The war in South Sudan has displaced more than four million people, with Uganda hosting the largest number of South Sudanese refugees. Research in Uganda has shown elevated levels of alcohol misuse and psychological distress among these refugees. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a trans-diagnostic scalable psychological intervention called Problem Management Plus (PM +) to reduce psychological distress among populations exposed to adversities. Our study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the CHANGE intervention, which builds on PM + , to also address alcohol misuse through problem-solving therapy and selected behavioural strategies for dealing with alcohol use disorders. We hypothesise that the CHANGE intervention together with enhanced usual care (EUC) will be superior to EUC alone in increasing the percentage of days abstinent. Methods A parallel-arm individually randomised controlled trial will be conducted in the Rhino Camp and Imvepi settlements in Uganda. Five hundred adult male South Sudanese refugees with (i) elevated levels of alcohol use (between 8 and 20 on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test [AUDIT]); and (ii) psychological distress (> 16 on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale) will be randomly assigned 1:1 to EUC or CHANGE and EUC. CHANGE will be delivered by lay healthcare providers over 6 weeks. Outcomes will be assessed at 3 and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the percentage of days abstinent, measured by the timeline follow-back measure at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include percentage of days abstinent at 12 months and alcohol misuse (measured by the AUDIT), psychological distress (i.e. depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder), functional disability, perpetration of intimate partner violence, and health economic indicators at 3 and 12 months. A mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate competency, dose, fidelity, feasibility, and acceptability. Primary analyses will be intention-to-treat. Discussion CHANGE aims to address alcohol misuse and psychological distress with male refugees in a humanitarian setting. If it is proven to be effective, it can help fill an important under-researched gap in humanitarian service delivery. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN10360385. Registered on 30 January 2023.

Background Guidelines on the management of depression recommend that practitioners use patient-reported outcome measures for the follow-up monitoring of symptoms, but there is a lack of evidence of benefit in terms of patient outcomes. Objective To test using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire as a patient-reported outcome measure for monitoring depression, training practitioners in interpreting scores and giving patients feedback. Design Parallel-group, cluster-randomised superiority trial; 1 : 1 allocation to intervention and control. Setting UK primary care (141 group general practices in England and Wales). Inclusion criteria Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a new episode of depressive disorder or symptoms, recruited mainly through medical record searches, plus opportunistically in consultations. Exclusions Current depression treatment, dementia, psychosis, substance misuse and risk of suicide. Intervention Administration of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire with patient feedback soon after diagnosis, and at follow-up 10–35 days later, compared with usual care. Primary outcome Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, symptom scores at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores at 26 weeks; antidepressant drug treatment and mental health service contacts; social functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (EuroQol 5-Dimension, five-level) at 12 and 26 weeks; service use over 26 weeks to calculate NHS costs; patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale); and adverse events. Sample size The original target sample of 676 patients recruited was reduced to 554 due to finding a significant correlation between baseline and follow-up values for the primary outcome measure. Randomisation Remote computerised randomisation with minimisation by recruiting university, small/large practice and urban/rural location. Blinding Blinding of participants was impossible given the open cluster design, but self-report outcome measures prevented observer bias. Analysis was blind to allocation. Analysis Linear mixed models were used, adjusted for baseline depression, baseline anxiety, sociodemographic factors, and clustering including practice as random effect. Quality of life and costs were analysed over 26 weeks. Qualitative interviews Practitioner and patient interviews were conducted to reflect on trial processes and use of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 using the Normalization Process Theory framework. Results Three hundred and two patients were recruited in intervention arm practices and 227 patients were recruited in control practices. Primary outcome data were collected for 252 (83.4%) and 195 (85.9%), respectively. No significant difference in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score was found at 12 weeks (adjusted mean difference –0.46, 95% confidence interval –2.16 to 1.26). Nor were significant differences found in Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd Edition, score at 26 weeks, social functioning, patient satisfaction or adverse events. EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, quality-of-life scores favoured the intervention arm at 26 weeks (adjusted mean difference 0.053, 95% confidence interval 0.013 to 0.093). However, quality-adjusted life-years over 26 weeks were not significantly greater (difference 0.0013, 95% confidence interval –0.0157 to 0.0182). Costs were lower in the intervention arm but, again, not significantly (–£163, 95% confidence interval –£349 to £28). Cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses, therefore, suggested that the intervention was dominant over usual care, but with considerable uncertainty around the point estimates. Patients valued using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 to compare scores at baseline and follow-up, whereas practitioner views were more mixed, with some considering it too time-consuming. Conclusions We found no evidence of improved depression management or outcome at 12 weeks from using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, but patients’ quality of life was better at 26 weeks, perhaps because feedback of Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores increased their awareness of improvement in their depression and reduced their anxiety. Further research in primary care should evaluate patient-reported outcome measures including anxiety symptoms, administered remotely, with algorithms delivering clear recommendations for changes in treatment. Study registration This study is registered as IRAS250225 and ISRCTN17299295. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/42/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 17. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Plain language summary Depression is common, can be disabling and costs the nation billions. The National Health Service recommends general practitioners who treat people with depression use symptom questionnaires to help assess whether those people are getting better over time. A symptom questionnaire is one type of patient-reported outcome measure. Patient-reported outcome measures appear to benefit people having therapy and mental health care, but this approach has not been tested thoroughly in general practice. Most people with depression are treated in general practice, so it is important to test patient-reported outcome measures there, too. In this study, we tested whether using a patient-reported outcome measure helps people with depression get better more quickly. The study was a ‘randomised controlled trial’ in general practices, split into two groups. In one group, people with depression completed the Patient Health Questionnaire, or ‘PHQ-9’, patient-reported outcome measure, which measures nine symptoms of depression. In the other group, people with depression were treated as usual without the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We fed the results of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 back to the people with depression themselves to show them how severe their depression was and asked them to discuss the results with the practitioners looking after them. We found no differences between the patient-reported outcome measure group and the control group in their level of depression; their work or social life; their satisfaction with care from their practice; or their use of medicines, therapy or specialist care for depression. However, we did find that their quality of life was improved at 6 months, and the costs of the National Health Service services they used were lower. Using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 can improve patients’ quality of life, perhaps by making them more aware of improvement in their depression symptoms, and less anxious as a result. Future research should test using a patient-reported outcome measure that includes anxiety and processing the answers through a computer to give practitioners clearer advice on possible changes to treatment for depression. Scientific summary Some text in this chapter has been adapted from the study protocol published as: Kendrick T, Moore M, Leydon G, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures for monitoring primary care patients with depression (PROMDEP): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2020;21:441. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04344-9. This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article unless otherwise stated. Background Depression is common and costly. It can lead to chronic disability, poor quality of life, suicide, and high service use and costs. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommend different treatments for more severe and less severe depression, but general practitioners, who treat more the majority of people with depression in primary care, are often inaccurate in their global clinical assessments of depression severity, and treatment is not targeted to patients most likely to benefit. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends that practitioners consider using validated patient-reported outcome measures to inform treatment at diagnosis and follow-up of people with depression, but there is insufficient evidence that these measures improve depression management and outcomes for patients in primary care. Aim and objectives The aim of the study was to answer the research question: What is the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of assessing primary care patients with depression or low mood soon after diagnosis and again at follow-up 10–35 days later, using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 combined with patient feedback and practitioner guidance on treatment? The objectives were to (1) carry out a cluster-randomised controlled trial to compare the intervention with usual care; (2) provide intervention arm patients with written feedback on their Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores, indicating evidence-based treatments relevant to the level of severity of depression to discuss with practitioners; (3) train practitioners to interpret Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores and their implications for choice of treatment, taking into account contextual factors; (4) follow up participants for 26 weeks, with research assessments at 12 and 26 weeks; (5) determine the primary outcome of depressive symptoms on the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, at 12-week follow-up; (6) examine secondary outcomes, including depressive symptoms on the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, at 26 weeks, and social functioning and quality of life at both 12- and 26-week follow-ups; (7) measure patient satisfaction, adverse events, antidepressant treatment, secondary care contacts, service use, and costs over 26 weeks’ follow-up, and perform cost-effectiveness and cost–utility analyses; and (8) carry out a qualitative process analysis to explore participants’ reflections on the use of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and the potential for implementing it in practice. Methods The study design was a parallel-group, cluster-randomised superiority trial with 1 : 1 allocation to intervention and control arms. The setting was UK primary care (141 group general practices in England and Wales). Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years with a new episode of depressive disorder or symptoms. Patients were recruited mainly through regular medical records searches but also opportunistically at consultations for new episodes of depression. Exclusion criteria were current treatment for depression; dementia; psychosis; substance misuse; or a significant risk of suicide. The intervention was administration of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 questionnaire as a PROM soon after diagnosis and at follow-up 10–35 days later. Patients were given written feedback on their Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores and potential treatments to discuss with their general practitioners. Practitioners were trained in interpreting Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores and taking them into account in treatment decisions. The primary outcome was depressive symptoms on the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes were Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores at 26 weeks; social functioning (on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (on the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level) at 12 and 26 weeks; service use including antidepressant treatment and primary and secondary care contacts over 26 weeks to calculate NHS costs; and patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (on the Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale). For our sample size calculation, we assumed a baseline mean Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score of 24.0 with a standard deviation of 10.0 (derived from a feasibility study), and mean scores at 12-week follow-up of 14.0 in the intervention arm and 17.0 in the control arm. The anticipated difference of 3.0 points (effect size of 0.3) represented the minimum clinically important difference on the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition. At the 5% level of significance, to have 90% power to detect that difference we calculated we needed 235 patients analysed per arm. We aimed to recruit a mean of six patients per practice and assumed an intracluster correlation coefficient of 0.03 (from the feasibility study), which gave a cluster design effect of 1.15, meaning we needed 270 per arm. We assumed a 20% loss to follow-up at 12 weeks, so the total sample size needed was 270 × 2/0.8 and our original target sample size was a total of 676 patients recruited, from 113 practices, by three recruitment centres (the University of Southampton, the University of Liverpool and University College London). We subsequently revised the target sample size on finding a significant correlation coefficient of > 0.5 between baseline and follow-up values for the primary outcome, which meant that we needed only 222 patients analysed per arm and, therefore, a target sample size of 554 patients recruited (revised 10 June 2021). Cluster randomisation of practices to intervention and control arms was carried out remotely by a Clinical Trials Unit statistician using computerised sequence generation, with minimisation by recruiting centre, size of practice and urban or rural location. Blinding of participating practitioners and patients to allocation was impossible given the nature of the intervention and the cluster-randomised design, but self-report outcome measures were used to prevent researcher rating bias, and statistical analysis was blind to allocation. Differences between intervention and control arms in the outcomes of depressive symptoms, social functioning and quality of life measured at 12- and 26-week follow-up were analysed using linear mixed models, adjusting for baseline depression; duration of depression; history of depression; baseline anxiety; sociodemographic factors (gender, age, socioeconomic position, housing, education, marital status and dependants), and clustering including a random effect for practice. Patient satisfaction, quality of life (quality-adjusted life-years) and costs were compared between the arms over the 26 weeks’ study follow-up period. Differences between the arms in the process of care for depression were also analysed, including patients’ self-reported use of antidepressants at the 12- and 26-week follow-up points, and medication and contacts with mental health services (community mental health nurses, counsellors, psychologists, psychiatrists, other therapists and social workers) recorded in practice medical records over the 26 weeks’ follow-up. A health economic evaluation was undertaken from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective. The outcomes were expressed as incremental cost per point improvement in the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, clinical outcome (cost-effectiveness analysis), and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained (cost–utility analysis). The primary analysis at 26 weeks used a generalised linear mixed model to estimate the differences in costs and quality-adjusted life-years (using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level to calculate patient utilities), adjusted for baseline quality of life; baseline anxiety; sociodemographic factors; and practice as a random effect. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve were generated using non-parametric bootstrapping. Qualitative interviews with participating practitioners and patients in both arms were conducted to reflect on their involvement in the trial and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Intervention arm participants were asked about barriers, facilitators, benefits and problems related to using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, including questions derived from the normalisation process theory framework. Results Practices and patients As the number of patients recruited per practice was smaller than anticipated, we recruited significantly more than our target of 113 practices, eventually reaching a total of 189, but 48 practices subsequently withdrew (24 in each arm), so the final number of active practices was 141: 72 intervention and 69 control (28 above our original target). Practice characteristics were well balanced by arm. Of 11,468 patients approached in consultations or through mailed invitations, 1058 (9.2%) returned reply slips about the study: 574 (10.6% of those approached) in the intervention arm and 484 (8.0% of those approached) in the control arm. After the exclusion of patients declining to participate, ineligible at screening or uncontactable, 529 patients were assessed at baseline: 302 (5.5% of those approached) in the intervention arm and 227 (3.8% of those approached) in the control arm. The ratio of intervention to control arm patients recruited was, therefore, 1.3 to 1, which may have reflected lower motivation to take part among control arm practices. Of 529 patients recruited, 453 (85.6%) were followed up at 12 weeks: 254 intervention arm (84.1%) and 199 control arm (87.7%) patients. At the 26-week point, 414 patients (78.3%) were followed up: 230 intervention arm (76.2%) and 184 control arm (81.1%). Medical records data were collected for 259 intervention arm patients (85.8%) and 201 control arm patients (88.5%). The mean BDI-II score for depressive symptoms at baseline was higher in the intervention arm, at 24.1 (standard deviation 8.89) than in the control arm, at 22.4 (standard deviation 9.52). Baseline anxiety and quality-of-life scores were also worse in the intervention arm. Control arm patients were more likely to have had two or more previous depressive episodes. Demographic characteristics were relatively well balanced. Clinical outcomes At the 12-week follow-up, the mean Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, score was 18.5 (standard deviation 10.2) in the intervention arm and 16.9 (standard deviation 10.3) in the control arm. The adjusted mean score was slightly lower in the intervention arm, but this was not statistically significant (mean adjusted difference –0.46, 95% confidence interval –2.16 to 1.26; p = 0.60). At 26 weeks, the mean Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, scores were 15.1 (standard deviation 10.8) in the intervention arm and 14.7 (standard deviation 10.6) in the control arm (mean adjusted difference –1.63, 95% confidence interval –3.48 to 0.21; p = 0.08). Social functioning on the Work and Social Adjustment Scale and Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale satisfaction with care scores favoured the intervention, but the differences found were not statistically significant. A post hoc analysis at 26 weeks showed similar proportions improving by ≥ 50% on the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition, in the intervention and control arms (45.1% vs. 37.3%), but the proportion remitting to a score of

Abstract Background Hot flushes and night sweats are life-altering symptoms experienced by many women after breast cancer treatment. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to explore the effectiveness of breast care nurse (BCN)-led group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT). This paper reported findings from a qualitative process evaluation to optimise the CBT intervention and explore the determinants of implementation into routine practice. Methods Qualitative process evaluation occurred in parallel with the RCT to explore patient and healthcare staff experiences and perspectives using semi-structured interviews pre-and post-intervention. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) informed data collection, analysis, and reporting of findings. The analysis involved inductive thematic analysis, NPT coding manual and subsequent mapping onto NPT constructs. Results BCNs (n = 10), managers (n = 2), surgeons (n = 3) and trial participants (n = 8) across six recruiting sites took part. All stakeholders believed group CBT met a need for non-medical hot flushes/night sweats treatment, however, had little exposure or understanding of CBT before MENOS4. BCNs believed the work fitted with their identity and felt confident in delivering the sessions. Despite little understanding, patients enrolled onto group CBT because the BCNs were trusted to have the knowledge and understanding to support their needs and despite initial scepticism, reported great benefit from group-based participation. Both managers and surgeons were keen for BCNs to take responsibility for all aspects of CBT delivery, but there were some tensions with existing clinical commitments and organisational priorities. Conclusions Both healthcare staff and patient participants believe BCN-led group CBT is a beneficial service but barriers to long-term implementation into routine care suggest there needs to be multi-level organisational support. Trial registration NCT02623374 – Last updated 07/12/2015 on ClinicalTrials.gov PRS.

Background: People living in settings affected by conflicts face insecurity and live in fragmented social systems. Conducting research in these settings is essential, however integrating results into practices is complex. Implementation science tools are not used often in such environments. In this paper we explore how a convenience sample of interviewees experienced implementation in these settings, through the lens of the adapted Extended Normalization Process Theory (a-ENPT). Methods: We conducted in-depth interviews with 26 participants (donors, academics, and humanitarian actors). We assessed what key issues interviewees met and how they negotiated them. We combined an inductive thematic analysis to identify implementation issues, and we applied the a-ENPT deductively to question power imbalances, engaging a group of humanitarian actors as co-authors along the way. Results: The main challenges met by interviewees related to a) engaging frontline actors to produce knowledge; b) discussing the results critically; c) integrating research results in constrained learning spaces; and d) managing contextual instabilities in settings affected by conflicts. Interviewees negotiated these constraints through an early involvement of frontline actors, an institutional support, a meaningful engagement of communities, and balanced partnerships. Based on these findings we propose a tool to anticipate the power imbalances embedded in the implementation of research results in settings affected by conflicts, rooted in the a-ENPT constructs. Conclusion: We identified mechanisms that allowed for the negotiation of important challenges and power imbalances, through an implementation science tool. Further research should focus on the perspectives of communities affected themselves.

In conflict-affected settings, prevalence of alcohol use disorders (AUDs) can be high. However, limited practical information exists on AUD management in low-income settings. Using a theory of change (ToC) approach, we aimed to identify pathways influencing the implementation and maintenance of a new transdiagnostic psychological intervention (“CHANGE”), targeting both psychological distress and AUDs in humanitarian settings. Three half-day workshops in Uganda engaged 41 stakeholders to develop a ToC map. ToC is a participatory program theory approach aiming to create a visual representation of how and why an intervention leads to specific outcomes. Additionally, five semi-structured interviews were conducted to explore experiences of stakeholders that participated in the ToC workshops. Two necessary pathways influencing the implementation and maintenance of CHANGE were identified: policy impact, and mental health service delivery. Barriers identified included policy gaps, limited recognition of social determinants and the need for integrated follow-up care. Interviewed participants valued ToC’s participatory approach and expressed concerns about its adaptability in continuously changing contexts (e.g., humanitarian settings). Our study underscores ToC’s value in delineating context-specific outcomes and identifies areas requiring further attention. It emphasizes the importance of early planning and stakeholder engagement for sustainable implementation of psychological interventions in humanitarian settings.

Background Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including South Africa, are currently experiencing multiple epidemics: HIV and the rising burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), leading to different patterns of multimorbidity (the occurrence of two or more chronic conditions) than experienced in high income settings. These adversely affect health outcomes, increase patients’ perceived burden of treatment, and impact the workload of self-management. This paper outlines the methods used in a qualitative study exploring burden of treatment among people living with HIV/NCD multimorbidity in South Africa. Methods We undertook a comparative qualitative study to examine the interaction between individuals’ treatment burden (self-management workload) and their capacity to take on this workload, using the dual lenses of Burden of Treatment Theory (BoTT) and Cumulative Complexity Model (CuCoM) to aid conceptualisation of the data. We interviewed 30 people with multimorbidity and 16 carers in rural Eastern Cape and urban Cape Town between February-April 2021. Data was analysed through framework analysis. Findings This paper discusses the methodological procedures considered when conducting qualitative research among people with multimorbidity in low-income settings in South Africa. We highlight the decisions made when developing the research design, recruiting participants, and selecting field-sites. We also explore data analysis processes and reflect on the positionality of the research project and researchers. Conclusion This paper illustrates the decision-making processes conducting this qualitative research and may be helpful in informing future research aiming to qualitatively investigate treatment burden among patients in LMICs.

BackgroundPeople living with multimorbidity in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) experience a high workload trying to meet the demands of self-management. In an unequal society like South Africa, many people face continuous economic uncertainty, which can impact on their capacity to manage their illnesses and lead to poor health outcomes. Using precariousness – the real and perceived impact of uncertainty – as a lens, this paper aims to identify, characterise, and understand the workload and capacity associated with self-management amongst people with multimorbidity living in precarious circumstances in urban and rural South Africa.MethodsWe conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with 30 patients with HIV and co-morbidities between February and April 2021. Patients were attending public clinics in Cape Town (Western Cape) and Bulungula (Eastern Cape). Interviews were transcribed and data analysed using qualitative framework analysis. Burden of Treatment Theory (BoTT) and the Cumulative Complexity Model (CuCoM) were used as theoretical lenses through which to conceptualise the data.ResultsPeople with multimorbidity in rural and urban South Africa experienced multi-faceted precariousness, including financial and housing insecurity, dangerous living circumstances and exposure to violence. Women felt unsafe in their communities and sometimes their homes, whilst men struggled with substance use and a lack of social support. Older patients relied on small income grants often shared with others, whilst younger patients struggled to find stable employment and combine self-management with family responsibilities. Precariousness impacted access to health services and information and peoples’ ability to buy healthy foods and out-of-pocket medication, thus increasing their treatment burden and reducing their capacity.ConclusionThis study highlights that precariousness reduces the capacity and increases treatment burden for patients with multimorbidity in low-income settings in South Africa. Precariousness is both accumulative and cyclic, as financial insecurity impacts every aspect of peoples’ daily lives. Findings emphasise that current models examining treatment burden need to be adapted to accommodate patients’ experiences in low-income settings and address cumulative precariousness. Understanding treatment burden and capacity for patients in LMICs is a crucial first step to redesign health systems which aim to improve self-management and offer comprehensive person-centred care.

BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) services for common mental health disorders have been found to be effective. There is a need for strategies that improve implementation in routine practice. One-size-fits-all strategies are likely to be ineffective. Tailored implementation is considered as a promising approach. The self-guided integrated theory-based Framework for intervention tailoring strategies toolkit (ItFits-toolkit) supports local implementers in developing tailored implementation strategies. Tailoring involves identifying local barriers; matching selected barriers to implementation strategies; developing an actionable work plan; and applying, monitoring, and adapting where necessary. ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit with implementation-as-usual (IAU) in implementing iCBT services in 12 routine mental health care organizations in 9 countries in Europe and Australia. MethodsA stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial design with repeated measures was applied. The trial period lasted 30 months. The primary outcome was the normalization of iCBT delivery by service providers (therapists, referrers, IT developers, and administrators), which was measured with the Normalization Measure Development as a proxy for implementation success. A 3-level linear mixed-effects modeling was applied to estimate the effects. iCBT service uptake (referral and treatment completion rates) and implementation effort (hours) were used as secondary outcomes. The perceived satisfaction (Client Satisfaction Questionnaire), usability (System Usability Scale), and impact of the ItFits-toolkit by implementers were used to assess the acceptability of the ItFits-toolkit. ResultsIn total, 456 mental health service providers were included in this study. Compared with IAU, the ItFits-toolkit had a small positive statistically significant effect on normalization levels in service providers (mean 0.09, SD 0.04; P=.02; Cohen d=0.12). The uptake of iCBT by patients was similar to that of IAU. Implementers did not spend more time on implementation work when using the ItFits-toolkit and generally regarded the ItFits-toolkit as usable and were satisfied with it. ConclusionsThe ItFits-toolkit performed better than the usual implementation activities in implementing iCBT services in routine practice. There is practical utility in the ItFits-toolkit for supporting implementers in developing and applying effective tailored implementation strategies. However, the effect on normalization levels among mental health service providers was small. These findings warrant modesty regarding the effectiveness of self-guided tailored implementation of iCBT services in routine practice. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03652883 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)RR2-10.1186/s13063-020-04686-4

Background: Digital interventions offer a potentially cost-effective means to support patient self-management in primary care, but evidence for the feasibility, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of digital interventions remains mixed. This programme focused on the potential for self-management digital interventions to improve outcomes in two common, contrasting conditions (i.e. hypertension and asthma) for which care is currently suboptimal, leading to excess deaths, illness, disability and costs for the NHS. Objectives: The overall purpose was to address the question of how digital interventions can best provide cost-effective support for patient self-management in primary care. Our aims were to develop and trial digital interventions to support patient self-management of hypertension and asthma. Through the process of planning, developing and evaluating these interventions, we also aimed to generate a better understanding of what features and methods for implementing digital interventions could make digital interventions acceptable, feasible, effective and cost-effective to integrate into primary care. Design: For the hypertension strand, we carried out systematic reviews of quantitative and qualitative evidence, intervention planning, development and optimisation, and an unmasked randomised controlled trial comparing digital intervention with usual care, with a health economic analysis and nested process evaluation. For the asthma strand, we carried out a systematic review of quantitative evidence, intervention planning, development and optimisation, and a feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing digital intervention with usual care, with nested process evaluation. Setting: General practices (hypertension, n = 76; asthma, n = 7) across Wessex and Thames Valley regions in Southern England. Participants: For the hypertension strand, people with uncontrolled hypertension taking one, two or three antihypertensive medications. For the asthma strand, adults with asthma and impaired asthma-related quality of life. Interventions: Our hypertension intervention (i.e. HOME BP) was a digital intervention that included motivational training for patients to self-monitor blood pressure, as well as health-care professionals to support self-management; a digital interface to send monthly readings to the health-care professional and to prompt planned medication changes when patients’ readings exceeded recommended targets for 2 consecutive months; and support for optional patient healthy behaviour change (e.g. healthy diet/weight loss, increased physical activity and reduced alcohol and salt consumption). The control group were provided with a Blood Pressure UK (London, UK) leaflet for hypertension and received routine hypertension care. Our asthma intervention (i.e. My Breathing Matters) was a digital intervention to improve the functional quality of life of primary care patients with asthma by supporting illness self-management. Motivational content intended to facilitate use of pharmacological self-management strategies (e.g. medication adherence and appropriate health-care service use) and non-pharmacological self-management strategies (e.g. breathing retraining, stress reduction and healthy behaviour change). The control group were given an Asthma UK (London, UK) information booklet on asthma self-management and received routine asthma care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome for the hypertension randomised controlled trial was difference between intervention and usual-care groups in mean systolic blood pressure (mmHg) at 12 months, adjusted for baseline blood pressure, blood pressure target (i.e. standard, diabetic or aged > 80 years), age and general practice. The primary outcome for the asthma feasibility study was the feasibility of the trial design, including recruitment, adherence, intervention engagement and retention at follow-up. Health-care utilisation data were collected via notes review. Review methods: The quantitative reviews included a meta-analysis. The qualitative review comprised a meta-ethnography. Results: A total of 622 hypertensive patients were recruited to the randomised controlled trial, and 552 (89%) were followed up at 12 months. Systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the intervention group at 12 months, with a difference of –3.4 mmHg (95% confidence interval –6.1 to –0.8 mmHg), and this gave an incremental cost per unit of systolic blood pressure reduction of £11 (95% confidence interval £5 to £29). Owing to a cost difference of £402 and a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) difference of 0.044, long-term modelling puts the incremental cost per QALY at just over £9000. The probability of being cost-effective was 66% at willingness to pay £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, and this was higher at higher thresholds. A total of 88 patients were recruited to the asthma feasibility trial (target n = 80; n = 44 in each arm). At 3-month follow-up, two patients withdrew and six patients did not complete outcome measures. At 12 months, two patients withdrew and four patients did not complete outcome measures. A total of 36 out of 44 patients in the intervention group engaged with My Breathing Matters [with a median of four (range 0–25) logins]. Limitations: Although the interventions were designed to be as accessible as was feasible, most trial participants were white and participants of lower socioeconomic status were less likely to take part and complete follow-up measures. Challenges remain in terms of integrating digital interventions with clinical records. Conclusions: A digital intervention using self-monitored blood pressure to inform medication titration led to significantly lower blood pressure in participants than usual care. The observed reduction in blood pressure would be expected to lead to a reduction of 10–15% in patients suffering a stroke. The feasibility trial of My Breathing Matters suggests that a fully powered randomised controlled trial of the intervention is warranted. The theory-, evidence- and person-based approaches to intervention development refined through this programme enabled us to identify and address important contextual barriers to and facilitators of engagement with the interventions. Future work: This research justifies consideration of further implementation of the hypertension intervention, a fully powered randomised controlled trial of the asthma intervention and wide dissemination of our methods for intervention development. Our interventions can also be adapted for a range of other health conditions. Trial and study registration: The trials are registered as ISRCTN13790648 (hypertension) and ISRCTN15698435 (asthma). The studies are registered as PROSPERO CRD42013004773 (hypertension review) and PROSPERO CRD42014013455 (asthma review). Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further information.

Objective: To use quantitative and qualitative methods to characterize the work patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) enact and explore the interactions between illness, treatment, and life. Patients and Methods: In this mixed-methods, descriptive study, adult patients with T2DM seen at the outpatient diabetes clinic at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, from February 1, 2016, through March 31, 2017, were invited to participate. The study had 3 phases. In phase 1, the Patient Experience with Treatment and Self-management (PETS) scale was used to quantify treatment burden. In phase 2, a convenience sample of patients used a smartphone application to describe, in real time, time spent completing diabetes self-management tasks and to upload descriptive digital photographs. In phase 3, these data were explored in qualitative interviews that were analyed by 2 investigators using deductive analysis. Results: Of 162 participants recruited, 160 returned the survey (phase 1); of the 50 participants who used the smartphone application (phase 2), we interviewed 17 (phase 3). The areas in which patients reported highest treatment burden were difficulty with negotiating health services (eg, coordinating medical appointments), medical expenses, and mental/physical exhaustion with self-care. Participants reported that medical appointments required about 2.5 hours per day, and completing administrative tasks related to health care required about 45 minutes. Time spent on health behaviors varied widely—from 2 to 60 minutes in a given 3-hour period. Patients’ experience of a task’s burden did not always correlate with the time spent on that task. Conclusion: The most burdensome tasks to patients with T2DM included negotiating health care services, affording medications, and completing administrative tasks even though they were not the most time-consuming activities. To be minimally disruptive, diabetes care should minimize the delegation of administrative tasks to patients.

Abstract Background Many children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) experience delay in diagnosis and access to right care. The reasons for delay are multi-factorial and influenced by patient and family, clinician and organisational factors. Our aim was to explore the experiences of care, from initial symptoms to initial referral to paediatric rheumatology. Methods We analysed one-to-one and joint qualitative interviews with families of children with JIA (n = 36) presenting to a regional paediatric rheumatology service in the UK. We interviewed 51 family members (including mothers, fathers, patients, grandmothers and an aunt) and 10 health professionals (including orthopaedic surgeons, paediatricians, paediatric immunologist, General Practitioner and nurse) and a teacher involved in the care pathway of these JIA patients. Interviews were audio-recorded and analysed according to the standard procedures of rigorous qualitative analysis - coding, constant comparison, memoing and deviant case analysis. Results The median age of the children was 6 years old (range 1–17), with a spread of JIA subtypes. The median reported time to first PRh MDT visit from symptom onset was 22 weeks (range 4-364 weeks). Three key factors emerged in the pathways to appropriate care: (i) the persistence of symptoms (e.g. ‘change’ such as limp or avoidance of previously enjoyed activities); (ii) the persistence of parents help-seeking actions (e.g. repeat visits to primary and hospital care with concern that their child is not ‘normal’; iii) the experience and skills of health professionals resulting in different trajectories (e.g. no-real-concern-at-this-point or further-investigation-is-required). JIA was more likely to be considered amongst health practitioner if they had prior experiences of a child with JIA (moreso with a ‘protracted pathway’) or exposure to paediatric rheumatology in their training. Conversely JIA was more likely to be overlooked if the child had comorbidity such as learning disability or a chronic illness. Conclusions Care pathways are often ‘turbulent’ prior to a diagnosis of JIA with physical and emotional distress for families. There is need for greater awareness about JIA amongst health care professionals and observations of change (from family and non-health care professionals such as teachers) are key to trigger referral for paediatric rheumatology opinion.

Abstract Background Internet-based Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (iCBT) is found effective in treating common mental disorders. However, the use of these interventions in routine care is limited. The international ImpleMentAll study is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 programme. It is concerned with studying and improving methods for implementing evidence-based iCBT services for common mental disorders in routine mental health care. A digitally accessible implementation toolkit (ItFits-toolkit) will be introduced to mental health care organizations with the aim to facilitate the ongoing implementation of iCBT services within local contexts. This study investigates the effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit by comparing it to implementation-as-usual activities. Methods A stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial (SWT) design will be applied. Over a trial period of 30 months, the ItFits-toolkit will be introduced sequentially in twelve routine mental health care organizations in primary and specialist care across nine countries in Europe and Australia. Repeated measures are applied to assess change over time in the outcome variables. The effectiveness of the ItFits-toolkit will be assessed in terms of the degree of normalization of the use of the iCBT services. Several exploratory outcomes including uptake of the iCBT services will be measured to feed the interpretation of the primary outcome. Data will be collected via a centralized data collection system and analysed using generalized linear mixed modelling. A qualitative process evaluation of routine implementation activities and the use of the ItFits-toolkit will be conducted within this study. Discussion The ImpleMentAll study is a large-scale international research project designed to study the effectiveness of tailored implementation. Using a SWT design that allows to examine change over time, this study will investigate the effect of tailored implementation on the normalization of the use of iCBT services and their uptake. It will provide a better understanding of the process and methods of tailoring implementation strategies. If found effective, the ItFits-toolkit will be made accessible for mental health care service providers, to help them overcome their context-specific implementation challenges. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03652883 . Retrospectively registered on 29 August 2018

Abstract Background Benefits to patients from reduced depression have been shown from monitoring progress with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in psychological therapy and mental health settings. This approach has not yet been researched in the United Kingdom for primary care, which is where most people with depression are treated in the United Kingdom. Methods This is a parallel-group cluster randomised trial with 1:1 allocation to intervention and control. Patients who are age 18+ years, with a new episode of depressive disorder/symptoms, meet the inclusion criteria. Patients with current depression treatment, comorbid dementia/psychosis/substance misuse/suicidal ideas are excluded. The intervention includes the Administration of Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) as a PROM within 2 weeks of diagnosis and at follow-up 4 weeks later. General practitioners are trained in interpreting scores and asked to take them into account in their treatment decisions. Patients are given written feedback on scores and suggested treatments. The primary outcome measure is Depression on the Beck Depression Inventory BDI-II at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include BDI-II at 26 weeks, changes in drug treatments and referrals, social functioning (Work & Social Adjustment Scale) and quality of life (EQ-5D) at 12 and 26 weeks, service use over 26 weeks (modified Client Services Receipt Inventory) to calculate NHS costs, and patient satisfaction at 26 weeks (Medical Informant Satisfaction Scale). The sample includes 676 total participants from 113 practices across three centres. Randomisation is achieved by computerised sequence generation. Blinding is impossible given the nature of the intervention (self-report outcome measures prevent rating bias). Differences at 12 and 26 weeks between intervention and controls in depression, social functioning and quality of life are analysed using linear mixed models, adjusted for socio-demographics, baseline depression, anxiety, and clustering, while including practice as a random effect. Patient satisfaction, quality of life (QALYs) and costs over 26 weeks will be compared between arms. Qualitative process analysis includes interviews with 15–20 GP/NPs and 15–20 patients per arm to reflect trial results and implementation issues, using Normalization Process Theory as a theoretical framework. Discussion If PROMs are helpful in improving patient outcomes for depression even to a small extent, then they are likely to be good value for money, given their low cost. The benefits could be considerable, given that depression is common, disabling, and costly. Trial registration ISRCTN no: 17299295 . Registered 1st October 2018.

Abstract Background Around one in ten adults take antidepressants for depression in England, and their long-term use is increasing. Some need them to prevent relapse, but 30–50% could possibly stop them without relapsing and avoid adverse effects and complications of long-term use. However, stopping is not always easy due to withdrawal symptoms and a fear of relapse of depression. When general practitioners review patients on long-term antidepressants and recommend to those who are suitable to stop the medication, only 6–8% are able to stop. The Reviewing long-term antidepressant use by careful monitoring in everyday practice (REDUCE) research programme aims to identify safe and cost-effective ways of helping patients taking long-term antidepressants taper off treatment when appropriate. Methods Design: REDUCE is a two-arm, 1:1 parallel group randomised controlled trial, with randomisation clustered by participating family practices. Setting: England and north Wales. Population: patients taking antidepressants for longer than 1 year for a first episode of depression or longer than 2 years for repeated episodes of depression who are no longer depressed and want to try to taper off their antidepressant use. Intervention: provision of ‘ADvisor’ internet programmes to general practitioners or nurse practitioners and to patients designed to support antidepressant withdrawal, plus three patient telephone calls from a psychological wellbeing practitioner. The control arm receives usual care. Blinding of patients, practitioners and researchers is not possible in an open pragmatic trial, but statistical and health economic data analysts will remain blind to allocation. Outcome measures: the primary outcome is self-reported nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire at 6 months for depressive symptoms. Secondary outcomes: depressive symptoms at other follow-up time points, anxiety, discontinuation of antidepressants, social functioning, wellbeing, enablement, quality of life, satisfaction, and use of health services for costs. Sample size: 402 patients (201 intervention and 201 controls) from 134 general practices recruited over 15–18 months, and followed-up at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A qualitative process evaluation will be conducted through interviews with 15–20 patients and 15–20 practitioners in each arm to explore why the interventions were effective or not, depending on the results. Discussion Helping patients reduce and stop antidepressants is often challenging for practitioners and time-consuming for very busy primary care practices. If REDUCE provides evidence showing that access to internet and telephone support enables more patients to stop treatment without increasing depression we will try to implement the intervention throughout the National Health Service, publishing practical guidance for professionals and advice for patients to follow, publicised through patient support groups. Trial registration ISRCTN:12417565 . Registered on 7 October 2019.

Background: Family support is internationally recognised as integral to palliative care. However, during end of life care discharge planning from hospital, families report a lack of opportunity to discuss their concerns or contribute their knowledge of the ill family member and consequently feel unheard and unsupported. To counter this experience, we co-produced the Family-Focused Support Conversation, a novel research-informed intervention, to guide discussion of family concerns about the meaning, implications and manageability of end of life caregiving following discharge. Objectives: To qualitatively evaluate the usability, accessibility and acceptability of the Family-Focused Support Conversation in hospital and factors which promote and inhibit implementation. Design: Participatory Learning and Action Research design, guided by Normalization Process Theory, a social implementation theory. Settings: Implementation was undertaken by 45 clinical co-researchers, specialist nurses (n=42) and occupational therapists (n=3), working in specialist palliative care teams in twelve hospitals (within seven NHS Trusts) across England, over a six-month period. Methods: During implementation clinical co-researchers collected reflective data about intervention delivery (n=110), participated in regular in-depth conversations of implementation with the research team (n=26 meeting records) and in a final evaluation meeting (n=11 meeting records). Data from family members who had received the intervention, comprised brief questionnaires (n=15) and in-depth semi-structured interviews (n=6). Data were qualitatively analysed, informed by Normalization Process Theory and Family Sense of Coherence Theory. Results: Clinical co-researchers found the intervention eminently usable and accessible. They reported a shift in family support from informing family members about patient healthcare needs, to family concerns such as how they made sense of the meaning of discharge, and how to provide family-orientated care. Family members found the intervention acceptable, they felt supported and able to make informed decisions about their role in providing end of life care. Implementation was positively influenced by coherence between the intervention and value placed on family care by clinical co-researchers. Once incorporated in their practice intervention delivery took no longer than usual practice and could be divided across consultations and collectively delivered with ward and discharge teams. Conclusions: The Family-Focused Support Conversation is usable, accessible and acceptable. It enhances family support by facilitating discussion of family concerns about end of life caregiving and results in family members making informed decisions about their role in end of life care following discharge. Trial registration: n/a.

Introduction: People living with type 2 diabetes undertake a range of tasks to manage their condition, collectively referred to as self-management. Interventions designed to support self-management vary in their content, and efficacy. This systematic review will analyse self-management interventions for type 2 diabetes drawing on theoretical models of patient workload and capacity. Methods and analysis: Five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL and PsycINFO) will be searched from inception to 27th April 2021, supplemented by citation searching and hand-searching of reference lists. Two reviewers will independently review titles, abstracts and full texts. Inclusion criteria include Population: Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus; Intervention: Randomised controlled trials of self-management support interventions; Comparison: Usual care; Outcomes: HbA1c (primary outcome) health-related quality of life (QOL), medication adherence, self-efficacy, treatment burden, healthcare utilization (e.g. number of appointment, hospital admissions), complications of type 2 diabetes (e.g. nephropathy, retinopathy, neuropathy, macrovascular disease) and mortality; Setting: Community. Study quality will be assessed using the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) risk of bias tool. Interventions will be classified according to the EPOC taxonomy and the PRISMS self-management taxonomy and grouped into similar interventions for analysis. Clinical and methodological heterogeneity will be assessed within subgroups, and random effects meta-analyses performed if appropriate. Otherwise, a narrative synthesis will be performed. Interventions will be graded on their likely impact on patient workload and support for patient capacity. The impact of these theoretical constructs on study outcomes will be explored using meta-regression. Conclusion This review will provide a broad overview of self-management interventions, analysed within the cumulative complexity model theoretical framework. Analyses will explore how the workload associated with self-management, and support for patient capacity, impact on outcomes of self-management interventions. Registration number: PROSPERO CRD42021236980.

BackgroundThe number of people receiving antidepressants has increased in the past 3 decades, mainly because of people staying on them longer. However, in many cases long-term treatment is not evidence based and risks increasing side effects. Additionally, prompting general practitioners (GPs) to review medication does not improve the rate of appropriate discontinuation. Therefore, GPs and other health professionals may need help to support patients discontinuing antidepressants in primary care. ObjectiveThis study aims to develop a digital intervention to support practitioners in helping patients discontinue inappropriate long-term antidepressants (as part of a wider intervention package including a patient digital intervention and patient telephone support). MethodsA prototype digital intervention called Advisor for Health Professionals (ADvisor HP) was planned and developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The following elements informed development: a literature review and qualitative synthesis, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles for design elements, and theoretical behavioral analyses. The intervention was then optimized through think-aloud qualitative interviews with health professionals while they were using the prototype intervention. ResultsThink-aloud qualitative interviews with 19 health professionals suggested that the digital intervention contained useful information and was readily accessible to practitioners. The development work highlighted a need for further guidance on drug tapering schedules for practitioners and clarity about who is responsible for broaching the subject of discontinuation. Practitioners highlighted the need to have information in easily and quickly accessible formats because of time constraints in day-to-day practice. Some GPs felt that some information was already known to them but understood why this was included. Practitioners differed in their ideas about how they would use ADvisor HP in practice, with some preferring to read the resource in its entirety and others wanting to dip in and out as needed. Changes were made to the wording and structure of the intervention in response to the feedback provided. ConclusionsADvisor HP is a digital intervention that has been developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The optimization work suggests that practitioners may find this tool to be useful in supporting the reduction of long-term antidepressant use. Further quantitative and qualitative evaluation through a randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

Abstract Background Cancer survivors face a myriad of biopsychosocial consequences due to cancer and treatment that may be potentially mitigated through enabling their self-management skills and behaviors for managing illness. Unfortunately, the cancer system lags in its systematic provision of self-management support (SMS) in routine care, and it is unclear what implementation approaches or strategies work to embed SMS in the cancer context to inform health policy and administrator decision-making. Methods/design A comprehensive scoping review study of the literature will be conducted based on methods and steps identified by Arksey and O’Malley and experts in the field. Electronic searches will be conducted in multiple databases including CINAHL, CENTRAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, AMED, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) (up to Issue 2, 2015), ISI Proceedings (Web of Science), PsychAbstracts, and Sociological Abstracts from January 1997 to November 5, 2018. Following the PRISMA-Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR), two authors will independently screen all titles/abstracts to determine eligibility, data will be abstracted by one author and checked by a second author, and findings will be narratively summarized based on constructs of implementation in the Normalization Process Theory. Discussion This will be the first scoping review study to synthesize knowledge of implementation of SMS in the cancer care context and the implementation approaches and strategies on embedding in care. This information will be critical to inform health policy and knowledge end users about the necessary changes in care to embed SMS in practices and to stimulate future research.

Objective Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is often a multimorbid condition and progression to more severe disease is commonly associated with increased management requirements, including lifestyle change, more medication and greater clinician involvement. This study explored patients’ and kidney care team’s perspectives of the nature and extent of this workload (treatment burden) and factors that support capacity (the ability to manage health) for older individuals with CKD.Design Qualitative semistructured interview and focus group study.Setting and participants Adults (aged 60+) with predialysis CKD stages G3–5 (identified in two general practitioner surgeries and two renal clinics) and a multiprofessional secondary kidney care team in the UK.Results 29 individuals and 10 kidney team members were recruited. Treatment burden themes were: (1) understanding CKD, its treatment and consequences, (2) adhering to treatments and management and (3) interacting with others (eg, clinicians) in the management of CKD. Capacity themes were: (1) personal attributes (eg, optimism, pragmatism), (2) support network (family/friends, service providers), (3) financial capacity, environment (eg, geographical distance to unit) and life responsibilities (eg, caring for others). Patients reported poor provision of CKD information and lack of choice in treatment, whereas kidney care team members discussed health literacy issues. Patients reported having to withdraw from social activities and loss of employment due to CKD, which further impacted their capacity.Conclusion Improved understanding of and measures to reduce the treatment burden (eg, clear information, simplified medication, joined up care, free parking) associated with CKD in individuals as well as assessment of their capacity and interventions to improve capacity (social care, psychological support) will likely improve patient experience and their engagement with kidney care services.

ObjectivesWe aimed to develop a digital intervention to support antidepressant discontinuation in UK primary care that is scalable, accessible, safe and feasible. In this paper, we describe the development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach.DesignIntervention development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach.SettingPrimary Care in the South of England.ParticipantsFifteen participants with a range of antidepressant experience took part in ‘think aloud’ interviews for intervention optimisation.InterventionOur digital intervention prototype (called ‘ADvisor’) was developed on the basis of a planning phase consisting of qualitative and quantitative reviews, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles and a theory-based behavioural analysis. Our optimisation phase consisted of ‘think aloud’ interviews where the intervention was iteratively refined.ResultsThe qualitative systematic review and in-depth qualitative study highlighted the centrality of fear of depression relapse as a key barrier to discontinuation. The quantitative systematic review showed that psychologically informed approaches such as cognitive–behavioural therapy were associated with greater rates of discontinuation than simple advice to reduce. Following a behavioural diagnosis based on the behaviour change wheel, social cognitive theory provided a theoretical basis for the intervention. The intervention was optimised on the basis of think aloud interviews, where participants suggested they like the flexibility of the system and found it reassuring. Changes were made to the tone of the material and the structure was adjusted based on this qualitative feedback.Conclusions‘ADvisor’ is a theory, evidence and person-based digital intervention designed to support antidepressant discontinuation. The intervention was perceived as helpful and reassuring in optimisation interviews. Trials are now needed to determine the feasibility, clinical and cost-effectiveness of this approach.

Abstract Background Evidence on how to implement new interventions into complex healthcare environments is often poorly reported and indexed, reducing its potential to inform initiatives to improve healthcare services. Using the implementation of a digital intervention within routine National Health Service (NHS) practice, we provide an example of how to develop a theoretically based implementation plan and how to report it transparently. In doing so we also highlight some of the challenges to implementation in routine healthcare. Methods The implemented intervention was HeLP-Diabetes, a digital self-management programme for people with Type 2 Diabetes, which was effective in improving diabetes control. The target setting for the implementation was an inner city London Clinical Commissioning Group in the NHS comprised of 34 general practices. HeLP-Diabetes was designed to be offered to patients as part of routine diabetes care across England. Evidence synthesis, engagement of local stakeholders, a theory of implementation (Normalization Process Theory), feedback, qualitative interviews and usage data were used to develop an implementation plan. Results A new implementation plan was developed to implement HeLP-Diabetes within routine practice. Individual component strategies were selected and developed informed by Normalization Process Theory. These strategies included: engagement of local opinion leaders, provision of educational materials, educational visits, educational meetings, audit and feedback and reminders. Additional strategies were introduced iteratively to address barriers that arose during the implementation. Barriers largely related to difficulties in allocating resources to implement the intervention within routine care. Conclusion This paper provides a worked example of implementing a digital health intervention. The learning from this work can inform others undertaking the work of planning and executing implementation activities in routine healthcare. Of particular importance is: the selection of appropriate theory to guide the implementation process and selection of strategies; ensuring that enough attention is paid to planning implementation; and a flexible approach that allows response to emerging barriers.

Abstract Background Women who have been treated for breast cancer may identify vasomotor symptoms, such as hot flushes and night sweats (HFNS), as a serious problem. HFNS are unpleasant to experience and can have a significant impact on daily life, potentially leading to reduced adherence to life saving adjuvant hormonal therapy. It is known that Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) is effective for the alleviation of hot flushes in both well women and women who have had breast cancer. Most women with breast cancer will see a breast care nurse and there is evidence that nurses can be trained to deliver psychological treatments to a satisfactory level, whilst also maintaining treatment fidelity. The research team will assess whether breast care nurses can effectively deliver a CBT intervention to alleviate hot flushes in women with breast cancer. Methods This study is a multi-centre phase III individually randomised controlled trial of group CBT versus usual care to reduce the impact of hot flushes in women with breast cancer. 120–160 women with primary breast cancer experiencing seven or more problematic HFNS a week will be randomised to receive either treatment as usual (TAU) or participation in the group CBT intervention plus TAU (CBT Group). A process evaluation using May’s Normalisation Process Theory will be conducted, as well as practical and organisational issues relating to the implementation of the intervention. Fidelity of implementation of the intervention will be conducted by expert assessment. The cost effectiveness of the intervention will also be assessed. Discussion There is a need for studies that enable effective interventions to be implemented in practice. There is good evidence that CBT is helpful for women with breast cancer who experience HFNS, yet it is not widely available. It is not yet known whether the intervention can be effectively delivered by breast care nurses or implemented in practice. This study will provide information on both whether the intervention can effectively help women with hot flushes and whether and how it can be translated into routine clinical practice. Trial registration ISRCTN 12824632. Registered 25–01-2017.

Abstract Objective Older patients who are at risk of poor healthcare outcomes should be recognised early during hospital admission to allow appropriate interventions. It is unclear whether routinely collected data can identify high-risk patients. The aim of this study was to define current practice with regard to the identification of older patients at high risk of poor healthcare outcomes on admission to hospital. Results Interviews/focus groups were conducted to establish the views of 22 healthcare staff across five acute medicine for older people wards in one hospital including seven nurses, four dieticians, seven doctors, and four therapists. In addition, a random sample of 60 patients’ clinical records were reviewed to characterise the older patients, identify risk assessments performed routinely on admission, and describe usual care. We found that staff relied on their clinical judgment to identify high risk patients which was influenced by a number of factors such as reasons for admission, staff familiarity with patients, patients’ general condition, visible frailty, and patients’ ability to manage at home. “Therapy assessment” and patients’ engagement with therapy were also reported to be important in recognising high-risk patients. However, staff recognised that making clinical judgments was often difficult and that it might occur several days after admission potentially delaying specific interventions. Routine risk assessments carried out on admission to identify single healthcare needs included risk of malnutrition (completed for 85% patients), falls risk (95%), moving and handling assessments (85%), and pressure ulcer risk assessments (88%). These were not used collectively to highlight patients at risk of poor healthcare outcomes. Thus, patients at risk of poor healthcare outcomes were not explicitly identified on admission using routinely collected data. There is a need for an early identification of these patients using a valid measure alongside staff clinical judgment to allow timely interventions to improve healthcare outcomes.

Background: Digital health interventions have potential to contribute to better health outcomes, better healthcare and lower costs. However, evidence for their effectiveness is variable. The development and content of digital health interventions are often not described in enough detail to enable others to replicate the research or improve on previous interventions. This has led to a call for transparent reporting of intervention content and development. Purpose: To describe the development process and content of a digital self-management intervention for people with type 2 diabetes (HeLP-Diabetes) that has been found to achieve its target clinical outcome, the reduction of HbA1c, a measure of glycaemic control. Method: We synthesised theory, data from existing research evidence and international guidelines, and new qualitative data from target users to identify the determinants of self-management and the content to be included in HeLP-Diabetes. Using an ongoing iterative participatory design approach the content of the intervention was written, produced, reviewed and changed. Conclusion: It is possible to develop and transparently report self-management programmes for long-term conditions, which reflect current best evidence, theoretical underpinning and user involvement. We intend that reporting the development process and content will inform future digital intervention development. Keywords: Diabetes mellitus, type 2, Self-management, Patient education as topic, Internet, Digital intervention development, Participatory design

Background: In the UK, 6% of the UK population have diabetes mellitus, 90% of whom have type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Diabetes mellitus accounts for 10% of NHS expenditure (£14B annually). Good self-management may improve health outcomes. NHS policy is to refer all people with T2DM to structured education, on diagnosis, to improve their self-management skills, with annual reinforcement thereafter. However, uptake remains low (5.6% in 2014–15). Almost all structured education is group based, which may not suit people who work, who have family or other caring commitments or who simply do not like group-based formats. Moreover, patient needs vary with time and a single education session at diagnosis is unlikely to meet these evolving needs. A web-based programme may increase uptake. Objectives: Our aim was to develop, evaluate and implement a web-based self-management programme for people with T2DM at any stage of their illness journey, with the goal of improving access to, and uptake of, self-management support, thereby improving health outcomes in a cost-effective manner. Specific objectives were to (1) develop an evidence-based theoretically informed programme that was acceptable to patients and health-care professionals (HCPs) and that could be readily implemented within routine NHS care, (2) determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the programme compared with usual care and (3) determine how best to integrate the programme into routine care. Design: There were five linked work packages (WPs). WP A determined patient requirements and WP B determined HCP requirements for the self-management programme. WP C developed and user-tested the Healthy Living for People with type 2 Diabetes (HeLP-Diabetes) programme. WP D was an individually randomised controlled trial in primary care with a health economic analysis. WP E used a mixed-methods and case-study design to study the potential for implementing the HeLP-Diabetes programme within routine NHS practice. Setting: English primary care. Participants: People with T2DM (WPs A, D and E) or HCPs caring for people with T2DM (WPs B, C and E). Intervention: The HeLP-Diabetes programme; an evidence-based theoretically informed web-based self-management programme for people with T2DM at all stages of their illness journey, developed using participatory design principles. Main outcome measures: WPs A and B provided data on user ‘wants and needs’, including factors that would improve the uptake and accessibility of the HeLP-Diabetes programme. The outcome for WP C was the HeLP-Diabetes programme itself. The trial (WP D) had two outcomes measures: glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level and diabetes mellitus-related distress, as measured with the Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale. The implementation outcomes (WP E) were the adoption and uptake at clinical commissioning group, general practice and patient levels and the identification of key barriers and facilitators. Results: Data from WPs A and B supported our holistic approach and addressed all areas of self-management (medical, emotional and role management). HCPs voiced concerns about linkage with the electronic medical records (EMRs) and supporting patients to use the programme. The HeLP-Diabetes programme was developed and user-tested in WP C. The trial (WP D) recruited to target (n = 374), achieved follow-up rates of over 80% and the intention-to-treat analysis showed that there was an additional improvement in HbA1c levels at 12 months in the intervention group [mean difference –0.24%, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.44% to –0.049%]. There was no difference in overall PAID score levels (mean difference –1.5 points, 95% CI –3.9 to 0.9 points). The within-trial health economic analysis found that incremental costs were lower in the intervention group than in the control group (mean difference –£111, 95% CI –£384 to £136) and the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were higher (mean difference 0.02 QALYs, 95% CI 0.000 to 0.044 QALYs), meaning that the HeLP-Diabetes programme group dominated the control group. In WP E, we found that the HeLP-Diabetes programme could be successfully implemented in primary care. General practices that supported people in registering for the HeLP-Diabetes programme had better uptake and registered patients from a wider demographic than those relying on patient self-registration. Some HCPs were reluctant to do this, as they did not see it as part of their professional role. Limitations: We were unable to link the HeLP-Diabetes programme with the EMRs or to determine the effects of the HeLP-Diabetes programme on users in the implementation study. Conclusions: The HeLP-Diabetes programme is an effective self-management support programme that is implementable in primary care. Future work: The HeLP-Diabetes research team will explore the following in future work: research to determine how to improve patient uptake of self-management support; develop and evaluate a structured digital educational pathway for newly diagnosed people; develop and evaluate a digital T2DM prevention programme; and the national implementation of the HeLP-Diabetes programme. Trial registration: Research Ethics Committee reference number 10/H0722/86 for WPs A–C; Research Ethics Committee reference number 12/LO/1571 and UK Clinical Research Network/National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio 13563 for WP D; and Research Ethics Committee 13/EM/0033 for WP E. In addition, for WP D, the study was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register as reference number ISRCTN02123133. Funding details: This project was funded by the NIHR Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 6, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Understanding the relationship between emergent social phenomena and the stabilizing mechanisms that make collective action possible is a long-standing concern in social science, but remains an inadequately theorized area. This article sets out a middle range theory—translational mobilization theory—to address this challenge. Adopting a practice-based approach, we connect interactionist perspectives on social order, analyses of sociotechnical networks, and theories of strategic action fields, to describe and explain how projects of institutionally sanctioned collective action are progressed by actors interacting with and through socially constructed objects. Investigating these mechanisms is a prerequisite to advancing empirical and theoretical understanding of the complex organizational processes and structures that characterize contemporary society.

Background: Depression and debt are common in the UK. Debt Counselling for Depression in Primary Care: an adaptive randomised controlled pilot trial (DeCoDer) aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the addition of a primary care debt counselling advice service to usual care for patients with depression and debt. However, the study was terminated early during the internal pilot trial phase because of recruitment delays. This report describes the rationale, methods and findings of the pilot study, and implications for future research. Objectives: The overarching aim of the internal pilot was to identify and resolve problems, thereby assessing the feasibility of the main trial. The specific objectives were to confirm methods for practice recruitment and the ability to recruit patients via the proposed approaches; to determine the acceptability of the study interventions and outcome measures; to assess contamination; to confirm the randomisation method for main trial and the level of participant attrition; and to check the robustness of data collection systems. Design: An adaptive, parallel, two-group multicentre randomised controlled pilot trial with a nested mixed-methods process and economic evaluation. Both individual- and cluster (general practice)-level were was used in the pilot phase to assign participants to intervention or control groups. Setting: General practices in England and Wales. Participants: Individuals were included who were aged ≥ 18 years, scored ≥ 14 on the Beck Depression Inventory II and self-identified as having debt worries. The main exclusion criteria were being actively suicidal or psychotic and/or severely depressed and unresponsive to treatment; having a severe addiction to alcohol/illicit drugs; being unable/unwilling to give written informed consent; currently participating in other research including follow-up phases; having received Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) debt advice in the past year; and not wanting debt advice via a general practice. Interventions: The participants in the intervention group were given debt advice provided by the CAB and shared biopsychosocial assessment, in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) and two debt advice leaflets. The participants in the control group were given advice leaflets provided by the general practitioner and TAU only. Main outcome measures: (1) Outcomes of the pilot trial – the proportion of eligible patients who consented, the number of participants recruited compared with target, assessment of contamination, and assessment of patient satisfaction with intervention and outcome measures. (2) Participant outcomes – primary – Beck Depression Inventory II; secondary – psychological well-being, health and social care utilisation, service satisfaction, substance misuse, record of priority/non-priority debts, life events and difficulties, and explanatory measures. Outcomes were assessed at baseline (pre-randomisation) and at 4 months post randomisation. Other data sources – qualitative interviews were conducted with participants, clinicians and CAB advisors. Results: Of the 238 expressions of interest screened, 61 participants (26%) were recruited and randomised (32 in the intervention group and 29 in the control group). All participants provided baseline outcomes and 52 provided the primary outcome at 4 months’ follow-up (14.7% dropout). Seventeen participants allocated to the intervention saw a CAB advisor. Descriptive statistics are reported for participants with complete outcomes at baseline and 4 months’ follow-up. Our qualitative findings suggest that the relationship between debt and depression is complex, and the impact of each on the other is compounded by other psychological, social and contextual influences. Conclusions: As a result of low recruitment, this trial was terminated at the internal pilot phase and was too small for inferential statistical analysis. We recommend ways to reduce this risk when conducting complex trials among vulnerable populations recruited in community settings. These cover trial design, the design and delivery of interventions, recruitment strategies and support for sites. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79705874. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Mark Gabbay and Adele Ring are part-funded by NIHR Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North West Coast and Richard Byng and Rod S Taylor, Vashti Berry and Elizabeth Shaw part-funded by NIHR CLAHRC South West Peninsula.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature on the implementation of e-health to identify: (1) barriers and facilitators to e-health implementation, and (2) outstanding gaps in research on the subject. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PSYCINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched for reviews published between 1 January 1995 and 17 March 2009. Studies had to be systematic reviews, narrative reviews, qualitative metasyntheses or meta-ethnographies of e-health implementation. Abstracts and papers were double screened and data were extracted on country of origin; e-health domain; publication date; aims and methods; databases searched; inclusion and exclusion criteria and number of papers included. Data were analysed qualitatively using normalization process theory as an explanatory coding framework. FINDINGS: Inclusion criteria were met by 37 papers; 20 had been published between 1995 and 2007 and 17 between 2008 and 2009. Methodological quality was poor: 19 papers did not specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria and 13 did not indicate the precise number of articles screened. The use of normalization process theory as a conceptual framework revealed that relatively little attention was paid to: (1) work directed at making sense of e-health systems, specifying their purposes and benefits, establishing their value to users and planning their implementation; (2) factors promoting or inhibiting engagement and participation; (3) effects on roles and responsibilities; (4) risk management, and (5) ways in which implementation processes might be reconfigured by user-produced knowledge. CONCLUSION: The published literature focused on organizational issues, neglecting the wider social framework that must be considered when introducing new technologies.

Background Practice managers play an important role in the organisation and delivery of primary care, including uptake and implementation of technologies. Little is currently known about practice managers' attitudes to the use of information and communication technologies, such as email or text messaging, to communicate or consult with patients. Objectives To investigate practice managers' attitudes to non-face-to-face consultation/communication technologies in the routine delivery of primary care and their role in the introduction and normalisation of these technologies. Methods We carried out a mixed-methods study in Scotland, UK. We invited all practice managers in Scotland to take part in a postal questionnaire survey. A maximum variation sample of 20 survey respondents participated subsequently in in-depth qualitative interviews. Results Practice managers supported the use of new technologies for routine tasks to manage workload and maximise convenience for patients, but a range of contextual factors such as practice list size, practice deprivation area and geographical location affected whether managers would pursue the introduction of these technologies in the immediate future. The most common objections were medico-legal concerns and lack of perceived patient demand. Conclusion Practice managers are likely to play a central role in the introduction of new consultation/ communication technologies within general practice. They hold varying views on the appropriateness of these technologies, influenced by a complex mix of contextual characteristics.Managers from areas in which the ethos of the practice prioritises personalised care in service delivery are less enthusiastic about the adoption of remote consultation/ communication technologies.

ContextAdvance Care Plans (ACPs) enable patients to discuss and negotiate their preferences for the future including treatment options at the end of life. Their implementation poses significant challenges.ObjectiveTo investigate barriers and facilitators to the implementation of ACPs, focusing on their workability and integration in clinical practice.DesignAn explanatory systematic review of qualitative implementation studies.Data sourcesEmpirical studies that reported interventions designed to support ACP in healthcare. Web of Knowledge, Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, British Nursing Index and PubMed databases were searched.MethodsDirect content analysis, using Normalization Process Theory, to identify and characterise relevant components of implementation processes.Results13 papers identified from 166 abstracts were included in the review. Key factors facilitating implementation were: specially prepared staff utilizing a structured approach to interactions around ACPs. Barriers to implementation were competing demands of other work, the emotional and interactional nature of patient-professional interactions around ACPs, problems in sharing decisions and preferences within and between healthcare organizations.ConclusionsThis review demonstrates that doing more of the things that facilitate delivery of ACPs will not reduce the effects of those things that undermine them. Structured tools are only likely to be partially effective and the creation of a specialist cadre of ACP facilitators is unlikely to be a sustainable solution. The findings underscore both the challenge and need to find ways to routinely incorporate ACPs in clinical settings where multiple and competing demands impact on practice. Interventions most likely to meet with success are those that make elements of Advance Care Planning workable within complex and time pressured clinical workflows.

Background: NHS 111 represents a fundamental change in the way that urgent care is delivered. It is underpinned by a computer decision support system (CDSS) and involves significant labour substitution, in particular the greater use of non-clinical staff to deliver services. Objective: To investigate four core features of health-care innovation and change in relation to the new NHS 111 telephone-based service for 24/7 access to urgent care, namely the way in which work and workforce are organised for this new service and how the technology and organisational context shape the way in which services are delivered. Design: Comparative mixed-methods case study of NHS 111 providers. Settings: Five NHS 111 sites, characterised by differences in organisational size, form and ethos and in the type of workforce employed and professional roles and skill mix. Methods: The study combined ethnographic and survey methods. Non-participant observation was conducted at NHS 111 call centres and their linked urgent care centre(s) (UCCs; a total of 356 hours). Six focus groups were conducted with 47 call advisers, clinicians and organisational managers. An online survey was administered to call centre and UCC staff (n = 745) to ask their views about NHS 111; trust in NHS Pathways; and communication and information sharing (response rate: 41% for call centre staff, 35% for UCC staff). Results: Clinical assessment by call advisers is characterised by high levels of communication (including negotiation, communication and translation) and ‘emotion’ work, extending the work beyond simple operation of a CDSS. At most sites clinical advisers supported call advisers in clinical assessment but also played an important role in managing and sanctioning dispositions, notably emergency ambulance dispositions. Clinicians at UCCs have experienced a loss of control over their everyday work, which is now shaped by call centre workers. The Directory of Services, which provides information about locally available services, is key to delivering an integrated urgent care system. Trust in the CDSS is higher amongst call advisers than amongst clinical staff but there is widespread belief that the CDSS is risk averse. Staff often develop workarounds to ‘make the technology work’. There is considerable variation in how NHS 111 is organised and delivered, shaped by the organisational history and the professional culture of the organisations involved. Some sites were driven more by rationing and systemising, pursuing the NHS 111 vision of ‘right care, right place, right time’, whereas others were driven more by an ethos of what they perceived was a more patient-centred service. Conclusions: NHS 111 is primarily founded on a network of different organisations providing different aspects of the service. This network is primarily enabled through technological integration. Successful integration also requires understanding and trusting relationships between different providers, which were lacking in some sites. Underpinning NHS 111 with non-clinical workers offers significant opportunities for workforce reconfiguration, but this is not a simple substitution of labour (i.e. non-clinical staff replacing clinical staff). There is a significant organisational structure that is necessary to support and ‘keep in place’ both the CDSS itself and non-clinical workers using the CDSS. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Owing to increasingly important drivers for change, such as automation, digitisation, and dynamic demand patterns, simulation models of production systems become outdated rapidly. At the same time, building simulation models often requires much time, cost, and expertise, especially when dealing with complex job shop production systems. To address these challenges, an automated simulation model generation (ASMG) framework for material flow simulation of production systems is presented. This framework contains multiple approaches to infer routeing, control and temporal aspects from event-based data. To achieve this, methods from process mining (PM) and machine learning (ML) are applied. Additionally, the suitability of Coloured Petri Nets (CPNs) to serve as conceptual and operational simulation models is examined. The inferred simulation models have high validity when compared to the real system concerning the KPIs machine utilisation, throughput, and work in process. It is shown, that most model elements can be inferred very well, in particular process routes, processing times, and resource selection rules. This proof of concept serves as a foundation for research on detection approaches inferring further model elements such as setup times accurately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]