Search

Background Self-harm is common in adolescents and a major public health concern. Evidence for effective interventions is lacking. An individual patient data meta-analysis has the potential to provide more reliable estimates of the effects of therapeutic interventions for self-harm than conventional meta-analyses, to explore which treatments are best suited to certain groups. Method A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of therapeutic interventions to reduce repeat self-harm in adolescents who had a history of self-harm and presented to clinical services. Primary outcome was repetition of self-harm. The methods employed for searches, study screening and selection, and risk of bias assessment are described, with an overview of the outputs of the searching, selection and quality assessment processes. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance is followed. Results We identified a total 39 eligible studies, from 10 countries, where we sought Individual Patient Data (IPD), of which the full sample of participants were eligible in 18 studies and a partial sample of participants were eligible in 21 studies. We obtained IPD from 26 studies of 3448 eligible participants. For our primary outcome, repetition of self-harm, only 6 studies were rated as low risk of bias with 10 rated as high risk (although 2 of these were for secondary outcomes only). Conclusions Obtaining individual patient data for meta-analyses is possible but very time-consuming, despite clear guidance from funding bodies that researchers should share their data appropriately. More attention needs to be paid to seeking appropriate consent from study participants for (pseudo) anonymised data-sharing and institutions need to collaborate on agreeing template data-sharing agreements. Researchers and funders need to consider issues of research design more carefully. Our next step is to analyse all the data we have collected to see if it will tell us more about how we might prevent repetition of self-harm in young people. Funding This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 17/117/11. A plain language summary of this research article is available on the NIHR Journals Library Website https://doi.org/10.3310/GTNT6331. Plain language summary Self-harm is very common in young people and leads to an increased risk of death by suicide. Research so far has not provided clear evidence about which interventions can help to prevent self-harm repetition when young people present to services having harmed themselves. One way to understand what might help is to pool the results from lots of different clinical trials – this is known as a meta-analysis. This has already been done using the data published in research articles but has not led to clearer conclusions. In part this is because the information available in published articles is patchy and inconsistent which makes pooling the information and analysing it, difficult. A more useful approach is to ask researchers who led the clinical trials for their original ‘raw’ data and then pool and analyse all that data – this is known as an individual patient data meta-analysis. This has the added benefit that it is possible to include studies where only some of the participants are young people. We did this, and were able to identify many more study participants along with their data, compared to earlier meta-analyses. In this article, we describe how we searched for relevant research studies and the methods we used to obtain individual patient data from other researchers. We also describe our rating of the research quality of the studies we identified. We identified more studies, with many more participants in total, than in previous pooled study research. Gathering the data from other researchers was very time-consuming and not everyone was willing or able to share their data. When we rated the quality of the studies that we found, many were not of high quality. Our next step is to analyse all the data we have collected to see if it will tell us more about how we might prevent repetition of self-harm in young people.

Background Falls are the most common safety incident reported by acute hospitals. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence recommends multifactorial falls risk assessment and tailored interventions, but implementation is variable. Aim To determine how and in what contexts multifactorial falls risk assessment and tailored interventions are used in acute National Health Service hospitals in England. Design Realist review and multisite case study. (1) Systematic searches to identify stakeholders’ theories, tested using empirical data from primary studies. Review of falls prevention policies of acute Trusts. (2) Theory testing and refinement through observation, staff interviews (n = 50), patient and carer interviews (n = 31) and record review (n = 60). Setting Three Trusts, one orthopaedic and one older person ward in each. Results Seventy-eight studies were used for theory construction and 50 for theory testing. Four theories were explored. (1) Leadership: wards had falls link practitioners but authority to allocate resources for falls prevention resided with senior nurses. (2) Shared responsibility: a key falls prevention strategy was patient supervision. This fell to nursing staff, constraining the extent to which responsibility for falls prevention could be shared. (3) Facilitation: assessments were consistently documented but workload pressures could reduce this to a tick-box exercise. Assessment items varied. While individual patient risk factors were identified, patients were categorised as high or low risk to determine who should receive supervision. (4) Patient participation: nursing staff lacked time to explain to patients their falls risks or how to prevent themselves from falling, although other staff could do so. Sensitive communication could prevent patients taking actions that increase their risk of falling. Limitations Within the realist review, we completed synthesis for only two theories. We could not access patient records before observations, preventing assessment of whether care plans were enacted. Conclusions (1) Leadership: There should be a clear distinction between senior nurses’ roles and falls link practitioners in relation to falls prevention; (2) shared responsibility: Trusts should consider how processes and systems, including the electronic health record, can be revised to better support a multidisciplinary approach, and alternatives to patient supervision should be considered; (3) facilitation: Trusts should consider how to reduce documentation burden and avoid tick-box responses, and ensure items included in the falls risk assessment tools align with guidance. Falls risk assessment tools and falls care plans should be presented as tools to support practice, rather than something to be audited; (4) patient participation: Trusts should consider how they can ensure patients receive individualised information about risks and preventing falls and provide staff with guidance on brief but sensitive ways to talk with patients to reduce the likelihood of actions that increase their risk of falling. Future work (1) Development and evaluation of interventions to support multidisciplinary teams to undertake, and involve patients in, multifactorial falls risk assessment and selection and delivery of tailored interventions; (2) mixed method and economic evaluations of patient supervision; (3) evaluation of engagement support workers, volunteers and/or carers to support falls prevention. Research should include those with cognitive impairment and patients who do not speak English. Study registration This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020184458. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129488) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 5. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information. Plain language summary Many accidental falls by older people in hospitals could be avoided. There are guidelines to prevent falls, but some hospitals are better at following them than others. This study aimed to find out why. First, we looked at research and hospitals’ falls policies for ideas about what stops falls. With advice from service users, we tested these ideas in four hospitals in England, watching how falls were prevented on wards for older people and people who need bone care, and talking to 50 staff, 28 patients and 3 carers. We found the following: Falls leadership: wards had staff called falls link practitioners who supported falls prevention, but senior nurses, not link practitioners, made the most important decisions. Sharing responsibility: patients with falls risks were monitored to try to stop falls. Because only nursing teams were always present to monitor patients, they had most responsibility for preventing falls. This limited sharing responsibility with other staff. Computer tools: nurses used computers to record prevention work, but high workloads could make this a ‘tick-box’ exercise. Computer tools reminded them to do this, although tools varied. Patients had individual falls plans, but they were also ranked more generally as high or low risk of falling, with ‘high-risk’ patients being monitored. Patient involvement: nursing staff did not have time to explain to patients how to prevent falls, but other staff could have such conversations. Many patients had problems like dementia and found it difficult to follow safety advice, although some could take steps to keep safe, with sensitive staff support. We need to involve patients, carers and different staff in falls prevention. Hospitals could develop computer systems to support this, think how to involve more ward staff, and provide guidance on helpful ways to talk with patients about falls. Scientific summary Background Inpatient falls are the most common safety incident reported by acute hospitals and can cause both physical and non-physical harm. The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline on falls in older people recommends a multifactorial falls risk assessment (MFRA) and interventions tailored to address the patient’s identified risk factors for all inpatients aged 65 years and older, or 50–64 years and judged to be at higher risk of falling due to an underlying condition. This approach is estimated to reduce the incidence of inpatient falls by 25–30%. However, there is substantial unexplained variation between hospitals in adherence to this guideline. Objectives Use secondary data to develop a theory that explains what supports and constrains routine use of MFRA and falls prevention interventions. Refine the theory through mixed method data collection across three acute hospital Trusts. Translate the theory into guidance to support MFRA and prevention and, in turn, adherence to the NICE guideline. Methods Throughout the study, we were supported by DW, the lay member of the project management group, and the Lay Research Group (a group of service users and carers who had either fallen themselves or cared for someone who fell in hospital). We first undertook a realist review. In Phase 1, systematic searches were undertaken for commentary-type articles, studies mentioning theories/conceptual models for falls risk assessment, and systematic reviews. Additionally, a search of professional/trade journals and an advanced Google search were undertaken. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened for relevance. Data about contexts, mechanisms and outcomes were extracted from included papers, and referenced substantive theories were noted. Data were summarised in matrices, used to construct context mechanism outcome configurations (CMOcs). To determine which CMOcs should be taken forward for testing in Phase 2, the Lay Research Group and Study Steering Committee (SSC) (comprised of clinicians, academics, and a lay member, with expertise including falls prevention, risk assessment, patient safety and implementation science) ranked them, giving top rankings to statements they believed most likely to work in practice. The Lay Research Group was also asked to highly rank statements likely to have greatest impact for patients and carers. In Phase 2 of the realist review, systematic searches for the four concepts ranked highly by both the Lay Research Group and SSC were conducted across a range of databases. Titles, abstracts and full texts were screened for relevance. In Phase 3 of the realist review, data extraction was conducted using NVivo, coding sections of manuscripts to facilitate theory testing. Researchers analysed two CMOcs: one focused on implementation – facilitation – and one focused on falls risk reduction – patient participation. Narrative summaries were written and used to refine the initial CMOcs. Included texts were appraised using the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT). To assess strength of the body of evidence for the refined CMOcs, we used Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual). As an additional source of evidence, we undertook an advanced Google search for the policies of 25 acute Trusts regarding falls risk assessment and prevention. We assessed adherence of these policies to the NICE guideline on falls in older people by checking whether a falls risk prediction tool was recommended; whether the approach recommended involved tailoring interventions to patients’ individual risk factors; and by looking for specific elements of the assessments undertaken (such as whether continence and cognitive impairment are assessed), as specified by NICE and captured in the National Audit of Inpatient Falls (NAIF). We then conducted a multisite case study to further refine the theories across three NHS acute Trusts in England. Trusts were selected to ensure variation in key indicators in the NAIF and in health IT, and to include both teaching and district general hospitals. In each Trust, we collected data in one older person ward and one orthopaedic ward. Data were collected through 251.25 hours of ethnographic observations of falls prevention practices, interviews with staff (n = 50), patients (n = 28) and carers (n = 3), and a review of patient clinical records (n = 60). We also received routinely collected data on the number of falls and falls-related harms. The Lay Research Group contributed to the development of the observation protocol and interview topic guides for patients and carers. Observations took place at different times of day, including night shifts, and different days of the week, including weekends. The record review extracted data on (1) whether a falls risk assessment was completed for the patient on admission and within 6 hours; (2) whether a care plan was documented for the patient and if this was completed on a day or night shift; and (3) whether the care plan was updated and if updates were completed on a day or night shift. Qualitative data analysis followed the steps of framework analysis. The Lay Research Group contributed, providing a patient perspective. Descriptive statistics were produced for the record review data, broken down by ward. Narratives were written and used to refine the CMOcs. Online presentations at each case site acted as a form of respondent validation and an opportunity to gather participants’ perspectives on the implications of the research for practice. Findings In the realist review, 78 studies were used for theory construction and 50 for theory testing. Four theory areas were explored: (1) leadership; (2) shared responsibility; (3) facilitation via MFRA tools and (4) patient participation. The leadership theory developed in the theory construction phase of the realist review suggested that where falls prevention is prioritised by organisations, for example, in organisational policy and provision of resources, falls leaders/champions (staff trained and dedicated to supporting delivery of multifactorial falls prevention strategies on their wards, e.g. by offering training and education to new staff) inspire and support delivery of the strategy in a consistent and co-ordinated way, so all eligible patients receive a MFRA and tailored intervention strategies. This theory was tested through the review of Trust policies and multisite case study. The review of Trust policies found organisational-level policies, in the main, reflect NICE guidance. The role of falls link practitioners was identified in all three sites. Link practitioners were expected to act as role models for falls reduction in their clinical areas, and provide advice and education around assessment, intervention and management of patients who had fallen or were at risk of falling. They were also expected to facilitate regular audits of falls management practice on wards and raise any patient safety concerns. However, pressures of work on wards, aggravated by coronavirus disease 2019, meant it was not always possible to fulfil such duties. Similarly, it could be difficult for them to attend the training they were entitled to. Despite these challenges, documentation of the falls risk assessment and care plan was largely consistent across sites. Ultimate responsibility for falls prevention resided with senior nurses (the ward manager or the nurse-in-charge of the shift), who would monitor, remind and support staff to deliver falls prevention practices while also being sensitive to the pressures staff were under. They had authority to make decisions related to allocation of resources, such as which patients should be moved to cohort bays (bays where patients considered to be at high risk of falling were placed, with a staff member always present), and they would escalate patient safety concerns to hospital managers. Formal training about Trusts’ falls prevention policies was provided by organisational teams for new starters on induction. Messaging was also a key strategy, for example, through visual displays and reminders about expectations and policy on wards. The initial theory of shared responsibility suggested that, where there is a culture of learning from errors, if information about patients’ falls risks is effectively communicated between ward staff (e.g. through posters/safety huddles/handovers), staff will develop a sense of shared responsibility for falls prevention and become more vigilant of patients at risk from falls, supporting implementation of multifactorial strategies to prevent falls. This theory was tested through the case study. Undertaking MFRAs was the responsibility of nurses; this documentation was rarely accessed by other professional groups. Instead, communication between professional groups was primarily verbal, both formal, for example, in multidisciplinary team meetings and safety huddles, and informal. Additionally, visual communication tools were used, such as patient bed boards, on which information about patient transfer and mobilisation needs was recorded. Symbols such as a falling leaf were also displayed to identify patients at risk of falling. However, information on bed boards was often variable or incomplete. A key falls prevention strategy across all wards was patient supervision, for example, provision of one-to-one care and use of cohort bays, responsibility for which fell to nursing staff, constraining the extent to which responsibility for falls prevention could be shared among the multidisciplinary team. The initial facilitation theory concerned MFRA tools (including health IT) that reflect best practice recommendations, are relatively quick and easy to use, and easily integrated into existing workflows. The theory stated that, where staff educated about falls risks and prevention practices had access to such tools, they will complete them with patients because they facilitate implementation of recommended practice, helping to ensure all eligible patients receive a comprehensive MFRA and appropriate interventions. This theory was tested through the realist review and case study. Review findings suggested that, where tools are clearly visible to staff in their work routines, they can prompt documentation of a falls risk assessment. Following an assessment, documentation and delivery of interventions can be constrained by changes in patient condition, movement between wards, intervention availability, and communication between different professional groups. Health IT can facilitate delivery of falls prevention practices by automating processes and reducing work for clinicians but can also introduce additional tasks. There was variation across case sites in the number and type of assessment items included in the falls risk assessment tools within the electronic health record (EHR). Nurses perceived the tools as practice prompts, but competing priorities on nurse time could reduce tool use to a tick-box exercise. While all tools identified individual patient risk factors, stratification of patients as high or low risk was used to determine which patients should receive supervision. The initial patient participation theory suggested that, where patients have capacity to engage in the MFRA process, and a patient-centred approach is taken that involves them and their carers, patients will understand their strategy and have the confidence/reassurance to participate in specific interventions, thereby reducing their risk of falling. This theory was tested through the realist review and multisite case study. Review findings suggested that interventions that encourage cognitively intact patients to participate in falls prevention practices are associated with a reduction in falls. However, patient participation in falls prevention strategies can be constrained by patients not wanting to disturb busy nurses by requesting help, not perceiving or believing they are at risk of falls, and not understanding their falls risks. Patient participation is supported by staff who understand patients’ circumstances through meaningful, directed interactions, enabling staff to personalise falls prevention messages to improve patient knowledge, skills and confidence to participate. There is little research examining patient participation interventions with cognitively impaired patients. In the case study, workload pressures meant nursing staff had little time to explain to patients why they were at risk of falling or what they could do to prevent themselves from falling, although other staff could have such conversations and pass information to nurses. Many patients had cognitive impairments, which constrained the extent to which they could participate in interventions. Wards were often not staffed sufficiently for staff to respond to patient needs, leading to patients mobilising alone, although the quality of the interaction between staff and patients (including some cognitively impaired patients) could reduce the likelihood of patients taking actions that increased their risk of falling. Participants in the case site presentations agreed with the analysis. Key themes regarding implications were (1) the need for the lessons learnt to be disseminated to all professional groups, through leaflets and training materials; and (2) the need for leaflets for patients and carers, individualised to patients, providing them with information about their falls risks and how to prevent falls. Limitations A limitation of the review is that we were only able to complete data synthesis for two CMOcs. Limitations of the case study are that our observations focused on nursing staff, as they were most present on the wards, and we were unable to access patient records prior to observations, preventing assessment of whether care plans were enacted. Additionally, we did not manage to recruit patient participants who did not speak English; while we had information sheets translated into the three most spoken non-English languages across the case sites, all patients we met could speak English. Conclusions Implications for practice (1) Leadership: There should be a clear distinction between senior nurses’ roles and falls link practitioners in relation to fall prevention; (2) shared responsibility: Trusts should consider how processes and systems, including EHRs, can be revised to better support a multidisciplinary approach, and alternatives to patient supervision should be considered; (3) facilitation: Trusts should consider how to reduce documentation burden and avoid tick-box responses and ensure that items included in the falls risk assessment tools align with guidance. Falls risk assessment tools and falls care plans should be presented as tools to support practice, rather than something to be audited; (4) patient participation: Trusts should consider how they can ensure patients receive individualised information about risks and preventing falls and provide staff with guidance on brief but sensitive ways to talk with patients to reduce the likelihood of actions that increase their risk of falling. Recommendations for research Future research on falls risk assessment and prevention should include those with cognitive impairment and patients who do not speak the main language of the country in which the research is taking place: development and mixed method and economic evaluation of interventions to support multidisciplinary teams to undertake, and involve patients in, MFRA and selection and delivery of tailored interventions mixed method and economic evaluations of cohort bays and one-to-one care, comparing this to tailored alternatives mixed method and economic evaluations of engagement support workers, volunteers, and/or carers to support falls prevention. Study registration This study is registered on PROSPERO CRD42020184458. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR129488) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 5. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Abstract Background Falls are the most common safety incident reported by acute hospitals. In England national guidance recommends delivery of a multifactorial falls risk assessment (MFRA) and interventions tailored to address individual falls risk factors. However, there is variation in how these practices are implemented. This study aimed to explore the variation by examining what supports or constrains delivery of MFRAs and tailored interventions in acute hospitals. Methods A realist review of literature was conducted with searches completed in three stages: (1) to construct hypotheses in the form of Context, Mechanism, Outcome configurations (CMOc) about how MFRAs and interventions are delivered, (2) to scope the breadth and depth of evidence available in Embase to test the CMOcs, and (3) following prioritisation of CMOcs, to refine search strategies for use in multiple databases. Citations were managed in EndNote; titles, abstracts, and full texts were screened, with 10% independently screened by two reviewers. Results Two CMOcs were prioritised for testing labelled: Facilitation via MFRA tools, and Patient Participation in interventions. Analysis indicated that MFRA tools can prompt action, but the number and type of falls risk factors included in tools differ across organisations leading to variation in practice. Furthermore, the extent to which tools work as prompts is influenced by complex ward conditions such as changes in patient condition, bed swaps, and availability of falls prevention interventions. Patient participation in falls prevention interventions is more likely where patient directed messaging takes individual circumstances into account, e.g., not wanting to disturb nurses by using the call bell. However, interactions that elicit individual circumstances can be resource intensive and patients with cognitive impairment may not be able to participate despite appropriately directed messaging. Conclusions Organisations should consider how tools can be developed in ways that better support consistent and comprehensive identification of patients’ individual falls risk factors and the complex ward conditions that can disrupt how tools work as facilitators. Ward staff should be supported to deliver patient directed messaging that is informed by their individual circumstances to encourage participation in falls prevention interventions, where appropriate. Trial registration PROSPERO: CRD42020184458.

BackgroundThere is increasing interest in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in pathology to increase accuracy and efficiency. To date, studies of clinicians’ perceptions of AI have found only moderate acceptability, suggesting the need for further research regarding how to integrate it into clinical practice. ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to determine contextual factors that may support or constrain the uptake of AI in pathology. MethodsTo go beyond a simple listing of barriers and facilitators, we drew on the approach of realist evaluation and undertook a review of the literature to elicit stakeholders’ theories of how, for whom, and in what circumstances AI can provide benefit in pathology. Searches were designed by an information specialist and peer-reviewed by a second information specialist. Searches were run on the arXiv.org repository, MEDLINE, and the Health Management Information Consortium, with additional searches undertaken on a range of websites to identify gray literature. In line with a realist approach, we also made use of relevant theory. Included documents were indexed in NVivo 12, using codes to capture different contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes that could affect the introduction of AI in pathology. Coded data were used to produce narrative summaries of each of the identified contexts, mechanisms, and outcomes, which were then translated into theories in the form of context-mechanism-outcome configurations. ResultsA total of 101 relevant documents were identified. Our analysis indicates that the benefits that can be achieved will vary according to the size and nature of the pathology department’s workload and the extent to which pathologists work collaboratively; the major perceived benefit for specialist centers is in reducing workload. For uptake of AI, pathologists’ trust is essential. Existing theories suggest that if pathologists are able to “make sense” of AI, engage in the adoption process, receive support in adapting their work processes, and can identify potential benefits to its introduction, it is more likely to be accepted. ConclusionsFor uptake of AI in pathology, for all but the most simple quantitative tasks, measures will be required that either increase confidence in the system or provide users with an understanding of the performance of the system. For specialist centers, efforts should focus on reducing workload rather than increasing accuracy. Designers also need to give careful thought to usability and how AI is integrated into pathologists’ workflow.

Mental disorders are increasing in South Asia (SA), but their epidemiological burden is under-researched. We carried out a systematic umbrella review to estimate the prevalence of mental disorders and intentional self-harm in the region. Multiple databases were searched and systematic reviews reporting the prevalence of at least one mental disorder from countries in SA were included. Review data were narratively synthesised; primary studies of common mental disorders (CMDs) among adults were identified from a selected subset of reviews and pooled. We included 124 reviews. The majority (n = 65) reported on mood disorders, followed by anxiety disorders (n = 45). High prevalence of mental disorders and intentional self-harm was found in general adult and vulnerable populations. Two reviews met our pre-defined criteria for identifying primary studies of CMDs. Meta-analysis of 25 primary studies showed a pooled prevalence of 16.0% (95% CI = 11.0–22.0%, I 2 = 99.9%) for depression, 12.0% (5.0–21.0%, I 2 = 99.9%) for anxiety, and 14.0% (10.0–19.0, I 2 = 99.9%) for both among the general adult population; pooled estimates varied by country and assessment tool used. Overall, reviews suggest high prevalence for mental disorders in SA, but evidence is limited on conditions other than CMDs.

Background: Incidents in which children or young people experience severe distress or harm or cause distress or harm to others occur frequently in children and young people’s institutional settings. These incidents are often managed using restrictive practices, such as restraint, seclusion, sedation or constant observation; however, these also present significant risks of physical and psychological harm to children and young people as well as staff. Numerous interventions aim to reduce the use of restrictive techniques, but research is hampered by limited attention to specific intervention components. The behavior change technique taxonomy may improve reporting by providing a common language for specifying the content and mechanisms of behaviour change. This study aimed to identify, standardise and report the effectiveness of components of interventions to reduce restrictive practices in children and young people’s institutional settings. Objectives: To map interventions aimed at reducing restrictive practices in children and young people’s institutional settings internationally, to conduct behaviour change technique analysis of intervention components, to identify process elements, and to explore effectiveness evidence to identify promising behaviour change techniques and compare the results with those found in adult psychiatric inpatient settings in a companion review. Design: Systematic mapping review with programme content coding using the behavior change technique taxonomy. Review methods: Eleven relevant English-language health and social care research databases 1989–2019 [including Applied Social Sciences Index (ASSIA), Criminal Justice Abstracts, Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), MEDLINE and PsycInfo®], grey literature and social media were searched during 2019 (updated January 2020). Data extraction, guided by Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research (WIDER), Cochrane Library and theory coding scheme recommendations, included intervention characteristics and study design and reporting. Screening and quality appraisal used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The behavior change technique taxonomy was applied systematically, and interventions were coded for behaviour change technique components. Outcomes data were then related back to these components. Results: There were 121 records, including 76 evaluations. Eighty-two interventions, mostly multicomponent, were identified. Evaluation approaches commonly used a non-randomised design. There were no randomised controlled trials. Behaviour change techniques from 14 out of a possible 16 clusters were detected. Four clusters (i.e. goals and planning, antecedents, shaping knowledge, and feedback and monitoring) contained the majority of identified behaviour change techniques and were detected in over half of all interventions. Two clusters (i.e. self-belief and covert learning) contained no identified behaviour change techniques. The most common setting in which behaviour change techniques were found was ‘mental health’. The most common procedure focused on staff training. The two most common behaviour change techniques were instruction on how to perform the behaviour and restructuring the social environment. Promising behaviour change techniques included instruction on how to perform the behaviour, restructuring the social environment, feedback on outcomes of behaviour and problem-solving. Compared with the companion review, service user perspectives were more sparse and there was more interest in trauma-informed approaches. Effectiveness evidence, range of interventions and reporting were broadly similar. Limitations: Poor reporting may have prevented detection of some behaviour change techniques. The finding that the evidence was weak restricted the feasibility of examining behaviour change technique effectiveness. Literature searches were restricted to English-language sources. Conclusions: This study generated, to our knowledge, the first review of evidence on the content and effectiveness of interventions to reduce restrictive practices in children and young people’s institutional settings. Interventions tend to be complex, reporting is inconsistent and robust evaluation data are limited, but some behaviour change techniques seem promising. Future work: Promising behaviour change techniques could be further explored. Better evidence could help address the urgent need for effective strategies. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019124730. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 10, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Abstract Background There is a widespread belief that information technologies will improve diagnosis, treatment and care. Evidence about their effectiveness in health care is, however, mixed. It is not clear why this is the case, given the remarkable advances in hardware and software over the last 20 years. This review focuses on interoperable information technologies, which governments are currently advocating and funding. These link organisations across a health economy, with a view to enabling health and care professionals to coordinate their work with one another and to access patient data wherever it is stored. Given the mixed evidence about information technologies in general, and current policies and funding, there is a need to establish the value of investments in this class of system. The aim of this review is to establish how, why and in what circumstances interoperable systems affect patient safety. Methods A realist synthesis will be undertaken, to understand how and why inter-organisational systems reduce patients’ clinical risks, or fail to do so. The review will follow the steps in most published realist syntheses, including (1) clarifying the scope of the review and identifying candidate programme and mid-range theories to evaluate, (2) searching for evidence, (3) appraising primary studies in terms of their rigour and relevance and extracting evidence, (4) synthesising evidence, (5) identifying recommendations, based on assessment of the extent to which findings can be generalised to other settings. Discussion The findings of this realist synthesis will shed light on how and why an important class of systems, that span organisations in a health economy, will contribute to changes in patients’ clinical risks. We anticipate that the findings will be generalizable, in two ways. First, a refined mid-range theory will contribute to our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that, for a range of information technologies, lead to changes in clinical practices and hence patients’ risks (or not). Second, many governments are funding and implementing cross-organisational IT networks. The findings can inform policies on their design and implementation. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42017073004

Behavioural interventions can support the adoption of healthier lifestyles and improve physical health outcomes, but it is unclear what factors might drive success of such interventions in people with serious mental illness (SMI). We systematically identified and reviewed evidence of the association between determinants of physical health self-management behaviours in adults with SMI. Data about American Association of Diabetes Educator's Self-Care Behaviours (AADE-7) were mapped against the novel Mechanisms of Action (MoA) framework. Twenty-eight studies were included in the review, reporting evidence on 104 determinant-behaviour links. Beliefs about capabilities and beliefs about consequences were the most important determinants of behaviour, especially for being physically active and healthy eating. There was some evidence that emotion and environmental context and resources played a role in determining reducing risks, being active, and taking medications. We found very limited evidence associated with problem solving, and no study assessed links between MoAs and healthy coping. Although the review predominantly identified evidence about associations from cross-sectional studies that lacked validated and objective measures of self-management behaviours, these findings can facilitate the identification of behaviour change techniques with hypothesised links to determinants to support self-management in people with SMI.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, registration CRD42018099553.

Objectives: The study aimed to provide a mapping review of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce restrictive practices in adult mental health inpatient settings; classify intervention components using the behaviour change technique taxonomy; explore evidence of behaviour change techniques and interventions; and identify the behaviour change techniques that show most effectiveness and those that require further testing. Background: Incidents involving violence and aggression occur frequently in adult mental health inpatient settings. They often result in restrictive practices such as restraint and seclusion. These practices carry significant risks, including physical and psychological harm to service users and staff, and costs to the NHS. A number of interventions aim to reduce the use of restrictive practices by using behaviour change techniques to modify practice. Some interventions have been evaluated, but effectiveness research is hampered by limited attention to the specific components. The behaviour change technique taxonomy provides a common language with which to specify intervention content. Design: Systematic mapping study and analysis. Data sources: English-language health and social care research databases, and grey literature, including social media. The databases searched included British Nursing Index (BNI), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCRCT), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), EMBASE, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database, HTA Canadian and International, Ovid MEDLINE®, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), PsycInfo® and PubMed. Databases were searched from 1999 to 2019. Review methods: Broad literature search; identification, description and classification of interventions using the behaviour change technique taxonomy; and quality appraisal of reports. Records of interventions to reduce any form of restrictive practice used with adults in mental health services were retrieved and subject to scrutiny of content, to identify interventions; quality appraisal, using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool; and data extraction, regarding whether participants were staff or service users, number of participants, study setting, intervention type, procedures and fidelity. The resulting data set for extraction was guided by the Workgroup for Intervention Development and Evaluation Research, Cochrane and theory coding scheme recommendations. The behaviour change technique taxonomy was applied systematically to each identified intervention. Intervention data were examined for overarching patterns, range and frequency. Overall percentages of behaviour change techniques by behaviour change technique cluster were reported. Procedures used within interventions, for example staff training, were described using the behaviour change technique taxonomy. Results: The final data set comprised 221 records reporting 150 interventions, 109 of which had been evaluated. The most common evaluation approach was a non-randomised design. There were six randomised controlled trials. Behaviour change techniques from 14 out of a possible 16 clusters were detected. Behaviour change techniques found in the interventions were most likely to be those that demonstrated statistically significant effects. The most common intervention target was seclusion and restraint reduction. The most common strategy was staff training. Over two-thirds of the behaviour change techniques mapped onto four clusters, that is ‘goals and planning’, ‘antecedents’, ‘shaping knowledge’ and ‘feedback and monitoring’. The number of behaviour change techniques identified per intervention ranged from 1 to 33 (mean 8 techniques). Limitations: Many interventions were poorly described and might have contained additional behaviour change techniques that were not detected. The finding that the evidence was weak restricted the study’s scope for examining behaviour change technique effectiveness. The literature search was restricted to English-language records. Conclusions: Studies on interventions to reduce restrictive practices appear to be diverse and poor. Interventions tend to contain multiple procedures delivered in multiple ways. Future work: Prior to future commissioning decisions, further research to enhance the evidence base could help address the urgent need for effective strategies. Testing individual procedures, for example, audit and feedback, could ascertain which are the most effective intervention components. Separate testing of individual components could improve understanding of content and delivery. Study registration: The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018086985. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 5. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background People living with severe mental illness (SMI) have a reduced life expectancy by around 15–20 years, in part due to higher rates of long-term conditions (LTCs) such as diabetes and heart disease. Evidence suggests that people with SMI experience difficulties managing their physical health. Little is known, however, about the barriers, facilitators and strategies for self-management of LTCs for people with SMI. Aim To systematically review and synthesise the qualitative evidence exploring facilitators, barriers and strategies for self-management of physical health in adults with SMI, both with and without long-term conditions. Methods CINAHL, Conference Proceedings Citation Index- Science, HMIC, Medline, NICE Evidence and PsycInfo were searched to identify qualitative studies that explored barriers, facilitators and strategies for self-management in adults with SMI (with or without co-morbid LTCs). Articles were screened independently by two independent reviewers. Eligible studies were purposively sampled for synthesis according to the richness and relevance of data, and thematically synthesised. Results Seventy-four articles met the inclusion criteria for the review; 25 articles, reporting findings from 21 studies, were included in the synthesis. Seven studies focused on co-morbid LTC self-management for people with SMI, with the remaining articles exploring self-management in general. Six analytic themes and 28 sub-themes were identified from the synthesis. The themes included: the burden of SMI; living with co-morbidities; beliefs and attitudes about self-management; support from others for self-management; social and environmental factors; and routine, structure and planning. Conclusions The synthesis identified a range of barriers and facilitators to self-management, including the burden of living with SMI, social support, attitudes towards self-management and access to resources. To adequately support people with SMI with co-morbid LTCs, healthcare professionals need to account for how barriers and facilitators to self-management are influenced by SMI, and meet the unique needs of this population.

Background: Interoperable networks connect information technology systems of different organisations, allowing professionals in one organisation to access patient data held in another one. Health policy-makers in many countries believe that they will improve the co-ordination of services and, hence, the quality of services and patient safety. To the best of our knowledge, there have not been any previous systematic reviews of the effects of these networks on patient safety. Objectives: The aim of the study was to establish how, why and in what circumstances interoperable information technology networks improved patient safety, failed to do so or increased safety risks. The objectives of the study were to (1) identify programme theories and prioritise theories to review; (2) search systematically for evidence to test the theories; (3) undertake quality appraisal, and use included texts to support, refine or reject programme theories; (4) synthesise the findings; and (5) disseminate the findings to a range of audiences. Design: Realist synthesis, including consultation with stakeholders in nominal groups and semistructured interviews. Settings and participants: Following a stakeholder prioritisation process, several domains were reviewed: older people living at home requiring co-ordinated care, at-risk children living at home and medicines reconciliation services for any patients living at home. The effects of networks on services in health economies were also investigated. Intervention: An interoperable network that linked at least two organisations, including a maximum of one hospital, in a city or region. Outcomes: Increase, reduction or no change in patients’ risks, such as a change in the risk of taking an inappropriate medication. Results: We did not find any detailed accounts of the ways in which interoperable networks are intended to work and improve patient safety. Theory fragments were identified and used to develop programme and mid-range theories. There is good evidence that there are problems with the co-ordination of services in each of the domains studied. The implicit hypothesis about interoperable networks is that they help to solve co-ordination problems, but evidence across the domains showed that professionals found interoperable networks difficult to use. There is insufficient evidence about the effectiveness of interoperable networks to allow us to establish how and why they affect patient safety. Limitations: The lack of evidence about patient-specific measures of effectiveness meant that we were not able to determine ‘what works’, nor any variations in what works, when interoperable networks are deployed and used by health and social care professionals. Conclusions: There is a dearth of evidence about the effects of interoperable networks on patient safety. It is not clear if the networks are associated with safer treatment and care, have no effects or increase clinical risks. Future work: Possible future research includes primary studies of the effectiveness of interoperable networks, of economies of scope and scale and, more generally, on the value of information infrastructures. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017073004. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Abstract Background In this paper, we report the findings of a realist synthesis that aimed to understand how and in what circumstances patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support patient-clinician communication and subsequent care processes and outcomes in clinical care. We tested two overarching programme theories: (1) PROMs completion prompts a process of self-reflection and supports patients to raise issues with clinicians and (2) PROMs scores raise clinicians’ awareness of patients’ problems and prompts discussion and action. We examined how the structure of the PROM and care context shaped the ways in which PROMs support clinician-patient communication and subsequent care processes. Results PROMs completion prompts patients to reflect on their health and gives them permission to raise issues with clinicians. However, clinicians found standardised PROMs completion during patient assessments sometimes constrained rather than supported communication. In response, clinicians adapted their use of PROMs to render them compatible with the ongoing management of patient relationships. Individualised PROMs supported dialogue by enabling the patient to tell their story. In oncology, PROMs completion outside of the consultation enabled clinicians to identify problematic symptoms when the PROM acted as a substitute rather than addition to the clinical encounter and when the PROM focused on symptoms and side effects, rather than health related quality of life (HRQoL). Patients did not always feel it was appropriate to discuss emotional, functional or HRQoL issues with doctors and doctors did not perceive this was within their remit. Conclusions This paper makes two important contributions to the literature. First, our findings show that PROMs completion is not a neutral act of information retrieval but can change how patients think about their condition. Second, our findings reveal that the ways in which clinicians use PROMs is shaped by their relationships with patients and professional roles and boundaries. Future research should examine how PROMs completion and feedback shapes and is influenced by the process of building relationships with patients, rather than just their impact on information exchange and decision making.

Abstract Care farming (also called social farming) is the therapeutic use of agricultural and farming practices. Service users and communities supported through care farming include people with learning disabilities, mental and physical health problems, substance misuse, adult offenders, disaffected youth, socially isolated older people and the long term unemployed. Care farming is growing in popularity, especially around Europe. This review aimed to understand the impact of care farming on quality of life, depression and anxiety, on a range of service user groups. It also aimed to explore and explain the way in which care farming might work for different groups. By reviewing interview studies we found that people valued, among other things, being in contact with each other, and feeling a sense of achievement, fulfilment and belonging. Some groups seemed to appreciate different things indicating that different groups may benefit in different ways but, it is unclear if this is due to a difference in the types of activities or the way in which people take different things from the same activity. We found no evidence that care farms improved people's quality of life and some evidence that they might improve depression and anxiety. Larger studies involving single service user groups and fully validated outcome measures are needed to prove more conclusive evidence about the benefits of care farming.

Abstract Background Although supported self-management is a well-recognised part of chronic disease management, it has not been routinely used as part of healthcare for adults with a learning disability. We developed an intervention for adults with a mild or moderate learning disability and type 2 diabetes, building on the principles of supported self-management with reasonable adjustments made for the target population. Methods In five steps, we:1.Clarified the principles of supported self-management as reported in the published literature2.Identified the barriers to effective self-management of type 2 diabetes in adults with a learning disability3.Reviewed existing materials that aim to support self-management of diabetes for people with a learning disability4.Synthesised the outputs from the first three phases and identified elements of supported self-management that were (a) most relevant to the needs of our target population and (b) most likely to be acceptable and useful to them5.Implemented and field tested the intervention Results The final intervention had four standardised components: (1) establishing the participant’s daily routines and lifestyle, (2) identifying supporters and their roles, (3) using this information to inform setting realistic goals and providing materials to the patient and supporter to help them be achieved and (4) monitoring progress against goals. Of 41 people randomised in a feasibility RCT, thirty five (85%) completed the intervention sessions, with over three quarters of all participants (78%) attending at least three sessions. Twenty-three out of 40 (58%) participants were deemed to be very engaged with the sessions and 12/40 (30%) with the materials; 30 (73%) participants had another person present with them during at least one of their sessions; 15/41 (37%) were reported to have a very engaged main supporter, and 18/41 (44%) had a different person who was not their main supporter but who was engaged in the intervention implementation. Conclusions The intervention was feasible to deliver and, as judged by participation and engagement, acceptable to participants and those who supported them. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41897033 (registered 21/01/2013)

Abstract Background Reporting adherence to intervention delivery and uptake is a detailed way of describing what was actually delivered and received, in comparison to what was intended. Measuring and reporting adherence is not routinely done well in complex interventions. The OK Diabetes trial (ISRCTN41897033) aimed to develop and subsequently test the feasibility of implementing a supported self-management intervention in adults with a learning disability and type 2 diabetes. A key study objective was to develop a measure of adherence to the intervention. Methods We conducted a systematic review of published literature, extracting data from included papers using a standardised proforma. We undertook a narrative synthesis of papers to determine the form and content of methods for adherence measurement for self-management interventions in this population that had already been developed. We used the framework and data extraction form developed for the review as the basis for an adherence measurement tool that we applied in the OK Diabetes trial. Results The literature review found variability in the quality and content of adherence measurement and reporting, with no standardised approach. We were able to develop an adherence measure based upon the review, and populate it with data collected during the OK Diabetes trial. The adherence tool proved satisfactory for recording and measuring adherence in the trial. Conclusion There remains a need for a standardised approach to adherence measurement in the field of complex interventions. We have shown that it is possible to produce a simple, feasible measure for assessing adherence in the OK Diabetes trial.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is highly prevalent in hospital inpatient populations, leading to significant mortality and morbidity, reduced quality of life and high short- and long-term health-care costs for the NHS. New diagnostic tests may offer an earlier diagnosis or improved care, but evidence of benefit to patients and of value to the NHS is required before national adoption. Objectives: To evaluate the potential for AKI in vitro diagnostic tests to enhance the NHS care of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and identify an efficient supporting research strategy. Data sources: We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, The Cochrane Library databases, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, MEDLINE, metaRegister of Current Controlled Trials, PubMed and Web of Science databases from their inception dates until September 2014 (review 1), November 2015 (review 2) and July 2015 (economic model). Details of databases used for each review and coverage dates are listed in the main report. Review methods: The AKI-Diagnostics project included horizon scanning, systematic reviewing, meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity, appraisal of analytical validity, care pathway analysis, model-based lifetime economic evaluation from a UK NHS perspective and value of information (VOI) analysis. Results: The horizon-scanning search identified 152 potential tests and biomarkers. Three tests, Nephrocheck® (Astute Medical, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA), NGAL and cystatin C, were subjected to detailed review. The meta-analysis was limited by variable reporting standards, study quality and heterogeneity, but sensitivity was between 0.54 and 0.92 and specificity was between 0.49 and 0.95 depending on the test. A bespoke critical appraisal framework demonstrated that analytical validity was also poorly reported in many instances. In the economic model the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £11,476 to £19,324 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), with a probability of cost-effectiveness between 48% and 54% when tests were compared with current standard care. Limitations: The major limitation in the evidence on tests was the heterogeneity between studies in the definitions of AKI and the timing of testing. Conclusions: Diagnostic tests for AKI in the ICU offer the potential to improve patient care and add value to the NHS, but cost-effectiveness remains highly uncertain. Further research should focus on the mechanisms by which a new test might change current care processes in the ICU and the subsequent cost and QALY implications. The VOI analysis suggested that further observational research to better define the prevalence of AKI developing in the ICU would be worthwhile. A formal randomised controlled trial of biomarker use linked to a standardised AKI care pathway is necessary to provide definitive evidence on whether or not adoption of tests by the NHS would be of value. Study registration: The systematic review within this study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013919. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Background: Outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) is widely used in most developed countries, providing considerable opportunities for improved cost savings. However, it is implemented only partially in the UK, using a variety of service models. Objectives: The aims of this research were to (1) establish the extent of OPAT service models in England and identify their development; (2) evaluate patients’ preferences for different OPAT service delivery models; (3) assess the cost-effectiveness of different OPAT service delivery models; and (4) convene a consensus panel to consider our evidence and make recommendations. Methods: This mixed-methods study included seven centres providing OPAT using four main service models: (1) hospital outpatient (HO) attendance; (2) specialist nurse (SN) visiting at home; (3) general nurse (GN) visiting at home; and (4) self-administration (SA) or carer administration. Health-care providers were surveyed and interviewed to explore the implementation of OPAT services in England. OPAT patients were interviewed to determine key service attributes to develop a discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was used to perform a quantitative analysis of their preferences and attitudes. Anonymised OPAT case data were used to model cost-effectiveness with both Markov and simulation modelling methods. An expert panel reviewed the evidence and made recommendations for future service provision and further research. Results: The systematic review revealed limited robust literature but suggested that HO is least effective and SN is most effective. Qualitative study participants felt that different models of care were suited to different types of patient and they also identified key service attributes. The DCE indicated that type of service was the most important factor, with SN being strongly preferred to HO and SA. Preferences were influenced by attitudes to health care. The results from both Markov and simulation models suggest that a SN model is the optimal service for short treatment courses (up to 7 days). Net monetary benefit (NMB) values for HO, GN and SN services were £2493, £2547 and £2655, respectively. For longer treatment, SA appears to be optimal, although SNs provide slightly higher benefits at increased cost. NMB values for HO, GN, SN and SA services were £8240, £9550, £10,388 and £10,644, respectively. The simulation model provided useful information for planning OPAT services. The expert panel requested more guidance for service providers and commissioners. Overall, they agreed that mixed service models were preferable. Limitations: Recruitment to the qualitative study was suboptimal in the very elderly and ethnic minorities, so the preferences of patients from these groups might not be represented. The study recruited from Yorkshire, so the findings may not be applicable nationally. Conclusions: The quantitative preference analysis and economic modelling favoured a SN model, although there are differences between sociodemographic groups. SA provides cost savings for long-term treatment but is not appropriate for all. Future work: Further research is necessary to replicate our results in other regions and populations and to evaluate mixed service models. The simulation modelling and DCE methods used here may be applicable in other health-care settings. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Service and Delivery Research programme.

Background: The feedback of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data is intended to support the care of individual patients and to act as a quality improvement (QI) strategy. Objectives: To (1) identify the ideas and assumptions underlying how individual and aggregated PROMs data are intended to improve patient care, and (2) review the evidence to examine the circumstances in which and processes through which PROMs feedback improves patient care. Design: Two separate but related realist syntheses: (1) feedback of aggregate PROMs and performance data to improve patient care, and (2) feedback of individual PROMs data to improve patient care. Interventions: Aggregate – feedback and public reporting of PROMs, patient experience data and performance data to hospital providers and primary care organisations. Individual – feedback of PROMs in oncology, palliative care and the care of people with mental health problems in primary and secondary care settings. Main outcome measures: Aggregate – providers’ responses, attitudes and experiences of using PROMs and performance data to improve patient care. Individual – providers’ and patients’ experiences of using PROMs data to raise issues with clinicians, change clinicians’ communication practices, change patient management and improve patient well-being. Data sources: Searches of electronic databases and forwards and backwards citation tracking. Review methods: Realist synthesis to identify, test and refine programme theories about when, how and why PROMs feedback leads to improvements in patient care. Results: Providers were more likely to take steps to improve patient care in response to the feedback and public reporting of aggregate PROMs and performance data if they perceived that these data were credible, were aimed at improving patient care, and were timely and provided a clear indication of the source of the problem. However, implementing substantial and sustainable improvement to patient care required system-wide approaches. In the care of individual patients, PROMs function more as a tool to support patients in raising issues with clinicians than they do in substantially changing clinicians’ communication practices with patients. Patients valued both standardised and individualised PROMs as a tool to raise issues, but thought is required as to which patients may benefit and which may not. In settings such as palliative care and psychotherapy, clinicians viewed individualised PROMs as useful to build rapport and support the therapeutic process. PROMs feedback did not substantially shift clinicians’ communication practices or focus discussion on psychosocial issues; this required a shift in clinicians’ perceptions of their remit. Strengths and limitations: There was a paucity of research examining the feedback of aggregate PROMs data to providers, and we drew on evidence from interventions with similar programme theories (other forms of performance data) to test our theories. Conclusions: PROMs data act as ‘tin openers’ rather than ‘dials’. Providers need more support and guidance on how to collect their own internal data, how to rule out alternative explanations for their outlier status and how to explore the possible causes of their outlier status. There is also tension between PROMs as a QI strategy versus their use in the care of individual patients; PROMs that clinicians find useful in assessing patients, such as individualised measures, are not useful as indicators of service quality. Future work: Future research should (1) explore how differently performing providers have responded to aggregate PROMs feedback, and how organisations have collected PROMs data both for individual patient care and to improve service quality; and (2) explore whether or not and how incorporating PROMs into patients’ electronic records allows multiple different clinicians to receive PROMs feedback, discuss it with patients and act on the data to improve patient care. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005938. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Background: Offender health is deemed a priority issue by the Department of Health. Peer support is an established feature of prison life in England and Wales; however, more needs to be known about the effectiveness of peer-based interventions to maintain and improve health in prison settings. Objectives: The study aimed to synthesise the evidence on peer-based interventions in prison settings by carrying out a systematic review and holding an expert symposium. Review questions were (1) what are the effects of peer-based interventions on prisoner health and the determinants of prisoner health?, (2) what are the positive and negative impacts on health services within prison settings of delivering peer-based interventions?, (3) how do the effects of peer-based approaches compare with those of professionally led approaches? and (4) what are the costs and cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions in prison settings? Data sources: For the systematic review, 20 electronic databases including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and EMBASE were searched from 1985. Grey literature and relevant websites were also searched. To supplement the review findings 58 delegates, representing a variety of organisations, attended an expert symposium, which provided contextual information. Review methods: Two reviewers independently selected studies using the following inclusion criteria: population – prisoners resident in prisons and young offender institutions; intervention – peer-based interventions; comparators: review questions 3 and 4 compared peer-led and professionally led approaches; outcomes – prisoner health or determinants of health, organisational/process outcomes or views of prison populations; study design: quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods evaluations. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed validity using piloted electronic forms and validity assessment criteria based on published checklists. Results from quantitative studies were combined using narrative summary and meta-analysis when appropriate; results from qualitative studies were combined using thematic synthesis. Results: A total of 15,320 potentially relevant papers were identified of which 57 studies were included in the effectiveness review and one study was included in the cost-effectiveness review; most were of poor methodological quality. A typology of peer-based interventions was developed. Evidence suggested that peer education interventions are effective at reducing risky behaviours and that peer support services provide an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and have a positive effect on recipients; the strongest evidence came from the Listener scheme. Consistent evidence from many predominantly qualitative studies suggested that being a peer deliverer was associated with positive effects across all intervention types. There was limited evidence about recruitment of peer deliverers. Recurring themes were the importance of prison managerial and staff support for schemes to operate successfully, and risk management. There was little evidence on the cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions. An economic model, developed from the results of the effectiveness review, although based on data of variable quality and a number of assumptions, showed the cost-effectiveness of peer-led over professionally led education in prison for the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Limitations: The 58 included studies were, on the whole, of poor methodological quality. Conclusions: There is consistent evidence from a large number of studies that being a peer worker is associated with positive health. Peer support services can also provide an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and can have a positive effect on recipients. This was confirmed by expert evidence. Research into cost-effectiveness is sparse but a limited HIV-specific economic model, although based on a number of assumptions and evidence of variable quality, showed that peer interventions were cost-effective compared with professionally led interventions. Well-designed intervention studies are needed to provide robust evidence including assessing outcomes for the target population, economic analysis of cost-effectiveness and impacts on prison health services. More research is needed to examine issues of reach, utilisation and acceptability from the perspective of recipients and those who choose not to receive peer support. Study registration: This study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002349. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Background: Lack of uniformity in outcome measures used in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions can impede the ability to assess effectiveness and limits comparisons across trials. Objective: To identify and appraise outcome measures to produce a framework of recommended measures for use in evaluations of childhood obesity treatment interventions. Data sources: Eleven electronic databases were searched between August and December 2011, including MEDLINE; MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations; EMBASE; PsycINFO; Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC); Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED); Global Health, Maternity and Infant Care (all Ovid); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost); Science Citation Index (SCI) [Web of Science (WoS)]; and The Cochrane Library (Wiley) – from the date of inception, with no language restrictions. This was supported by review of relevant grey literature and trial databases. Review methods: Two searches were conducted to identify (1) outcome measures and corresponding citations used in published childhood obesity treatment evaluations and (2) manuscripts describing the development and/or evaluation of the outcome measures used in the childhood intervention obesity evaluations. Search 1 search strategy (review of trials) was modelled on elements of a review by Luttikhuis et al. (Oude Luttikhuis H, Baur L, Jansen H, Shrewsbury VA, O’Malley C, Stolk RP, et al. Interventions for treating obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;1:CD001872). Search 2 strategy (methodology papers) was built on Terwee et al.’s search filter (Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, de Vet HCW. Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Qual Life Res 2009;18:1115–23). Eligible papers were appraised for quality initially by the internal project team. This was followed by an external appraisal by expert collaborators in order to agree which outcome measures should be recommended for the Childhood obesity Outcomes Review (CoOR) outcome measures framework. Results: Three hundred and seventy-nine manuscripts describing 180 outcome measures met eligibility criteria. Appraisal of these resulted in the recommendation of 36 measures for the CoOR outcome measures framework. Recommended primary outcome measures were body mass index (BMI) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Experts did not advocate any self-reported measures where objective measurement was possible (e.g. physical activity). Physiological outcomes hold potential to be primary outcomes, as they are indicators of cardiovascular health, but without evidence of what constitutes a minimally importance difference they have remained as secondary outcomes (although the corresponding lack of evidence for BMI and DXA is acknowledged). No preference-based quality-of-life measures were identified that would enable economic evaluation via calculation of quality-adjusted life-years. Few measures reported evaluating responsiveness. Limitations: Proposed recommended measures are fit for use as outcome measures within studies that evaluate childhood obesity treatment evaluations specifically. These may or may not be suitable for other study designs, and some excluded measures may be more suitable in other study designs. Conclusions: The CoOR outcome measures framework provides clear guidance of recommended primary and secondary outcome measures. This will enhance comparability between treatment evaluations and ensure that appropriate measures are being used. Where possible, future work should focus on modification and evaluation of existing measures rather than development of tools de nova. In addition, it is recommended that a similar outcome measures framework is produced to support evaluation of adult obesity programmes. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

To respond to an identified gap in the literature, a qualitative research project was developed to explore if students had stories around continuing to study despite having experienced significant challenges and to locate what supported these students to avoid ‘dropping out’. Meaning attribution was also explored, along with seeing if students had advice for others. This article reports on the project, the relevant literature, research methodology and findings. The results confirmed that students who experience significant challenges do have stories to tell, and that they are keen to give advice for the benefit of others. Thematic analysis of the research data showed that the two main factors of ‘determination’ and ‘support’ were important to students’ continuation in courses, and that student services play a vital role in this. The data also showed that ‘determination’ was the preferred student language for attributing meaning to what they had done, and the clinical application of this is discussed. A major research outcome was the publication of the book - ‘Determined to Succeed’ in print and on-line formats (see www.acu.edu.au\determinedtosucceed). Converting the ‘Determined to Succeed’ book to an e-book positioned the student stories in the public domain, increasing access to the resource and contributing to student retention, all of which makes a valuable contribution to the tertiary education sector.

First year female university students are at high risk of experiencing an escalation or beginning of domestic violence upon commencement of tertiary study. Current female first year students have reported increased rates of coercive controlling patterns of abuse from perpetrators as they undermine their efforts to study and succeed. Research on women’s health outcomes from intimate partner violence shows increased levels of depression and anxiety along with other concerning health effects. This article recommends that tertiary sector counsellors implement routine screening for domestic violence when female students present with symptoms of depression, anxiety, and/ or relationship issue so as to provide a pro-active and supportive response to this issue and contribute to student well-health and safety. This article is based on a poster presentation made by the author to the ANZSSA Conference in Brisbane in December 2009. The findings that went into the development of that poster have continued to be strongly reinforced during the intervening three years.

A qualitative study looked at role stress in 11 nondoctorally prepared undergraduate nursing faculty in a southern university school of nursing with a doctoral program. Faculty reported that role stress and strain affect both their teaching and their decisions to remain in academia. (JOW)