Search

Background: Globally, dementia care is under strain. Rising rates across ageing populations, coupled with overstretched health and care systems, mean that people living with dementia and their carers are missing out on crucial support. Addressing dementia care is a key priority for the UK government. This has led to a period of care transformation, including the implementation of new dementia support services across integrated care systems (ICS). However, little is known about how these new services work. This evaluation identifies how a dementia care coordinator service, implemented in the largest ICS in England, works for people living with dementia, their carers and the workforce. Methods: A realist evaluation using mixed methods was carried out between 2022 and 2024. This involved a repeat survey with dementia care coordinators, carried out a year apart, alongside 57 interviews with coordinators, service managers, healthcare practitioners, people living with dementia and their carers. A realist logic of analysis was applied across all data sets. Results: Three broad concepts were identified including (1) workforce design and organisational culture, (2) meeting the needs of people living with dementia and their carers and (3) connecting to services and integrating care. A total of 23 context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) across these concepts highlighted that whilst tensions exist between the service and wider system, dementia care coordinators ultimately act as bridge builders, connecting people to much-needed support. However, services like this could become a victim of their own success due to increasing caseloads and the risk of staff burnout. Conclusions: The dementia care coordinator service is capable of supporting people who are pre- and post-dementia diagnosis despite the care system being under strain. This is a direct result of the bridge building work of the dementia care coordinators. Our findings support evidence-based recommendations for those wanting to implement and sustain a system-wide service and provide evidence for policy makers to consider increased funding for this service nationwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Little is known regarding the extent to which substance use disorder (SUD) treatment facilities adopt comprehensive services to meet patients' medical and social needs. Objective: To examine trends in the availability of comprehensive services within outpatient SUD treatment facilities from 2018 to 2022. Methods: We used data from the Mental Health and Addiction Treatment Tracking Repository, a national database of SUD treatment facilities (n = 13,793). We examined the availability of four domains of comprehensive services and four types of SUD treatment services from 2018 to 2022. We conducted bivariate and multivariate logistic regression predicting the availability of a comprehensive service model (defined as having at least one service from each service domain), controlling for organizational and community characteristics. Results: Comprehensive services were increasingly offered from 2018 to 2022. In unadjusted and adjusted models, facilities which were externally accredited (OR: 1.50; 95%CI: 1.30–1.74), accepted Medicaid (OR: 1.51; 95%CI: 1.30–1.74), performed community outreach (OR: 2.05; 95%CI: 1.80–2.33), provided naloxone and overdose education (OR: 3.50; 95%CI: 3.06–3.99), had a robust SUD treatment infrastructure (OR: 2.33; 95%CI; 2.08–2.62), and were located in a county with a lower percentage of White residents (OR: 0.99; 95%CI: 0.99–0.99), a higher percentage of residents in poverty (OR: 1.02; 95%CI: 1.00–1.03), and the Northeast compared with the South (OR: 1.21; 95%CI: 1.01–1.45), had significantly higher odds of adopting a comprehensive service model. Conclusion: Findings highlight the importance of factors reflecting experience with organizational change efforts and enhanced external support. Policymakers working to enhance the uptake of comprehensive services should focus on obtaining the financial and technical support necessary to develop these models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cost-of-living crisis is a public health threat; however, the effects of the rising cost of living were not a policy priority for integrated care systems (ICSs) in early 2022. At the request of ICS leaders, the National Health Service (NHS) Confederation created an online cost-of-living hub in October 2022 to raise awareness of the consequences of the rising cost of living among ICS policymakers and support systems in mitigating these effects. This study aims to investigate the impact of this hub. Mixed methods. To quantify hub utilisation, the hub viewing figures collected by the NHS Confederation website were analysed. A thematic analysis was performed to characterise how cost-of-living features in integrated care strategies, and the results compared to information published on the hub. The pages that comprise the hub were well engaged with, having between 2736 and 6161 views. Alongside this, the impacts of the rising cost of living feature extensively in integrated care strategies, being discussed in 32 out of 37 strategies across four contexts: health, communities, economic, and environmental. The significant majority of subthemes reflect points made by the hub. These results suggest the hub may have raised awareness about the impacts of–and possible responses to–the cost-of-living crisis among ICS policymakers. This may act as an impetus and guide for future public health interventions using policy and practice hubs. Furthermore, the discussion of cost-of-living across a range of contexts implies ICSs are engendering a collaborative, system-wide approach to tackling complex local issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Until recently the healthcare system in England was based on a commissioning/provider model. However, this has been replaced with an Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) approach, aimed at improving health and wellbeing and reducing inequalities through local collaborative partnerships with public sector organizations, community groups, social enterprise organizations and other local agencies. Part of this new approach is an emphasis on the role of community assets (i.e., local resources), that are considered integral to promoting positive health and wellbeing outcomes. This paper presents research from a series of three research studies on "community assets" conducted in the East of England within a newly established ICS. Based on analysis of qualitative data highlighting the lived experience of community asset members, this paper shows the positive wellbeing impact on vulnerable community members that assets provide. Further insight on the local impact and the collaborative nature of the research is provided suggesting that new asset-based approaches recognize the social determinants of health. This presents a shift away from positivistic linear approaches to population health and wellbeing to a new non-linear collaborative approach to addressing health inequalities and promoting wellbeing. The authors suggest that exploring this through a complexity theory lens could illuminate this further. Finally, the authors warn that while community assets have an important role to play in empowering citizens and providing much needed support to vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, they are not a substitute for functioning funded public sector services that are currently being undermined by ongoing local governments funding cuts. As such, while community assets can help ameliorate some of the negative effects people experience due to economic, structural and health disadvantages, only a more fair and more equal distribution of resources can address growing health inequalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global public health problem with major human and economic consequences. Despite advances in clinical guidelines, classification systems and evidence-based treatments, CKD remains underdiagnosed and undertreated and is predicted to be the fifth leading cause of death globally by 2040. This review aims to identify barriers and enablers to the effective detection, diagnosis, disclosure and management of CKD since the introduction of the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative (KDOQI) classification in 2002, advocating for a renewed approach in response to updated Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2024 clinical guidelines. The last two decades of improvements in CKD care in the UK are underpinned by international adoption of the KDIGO classification system, mixed adoption of evidence-based treatments and research informed clinical guidelines and policy. Interpretation of evidence within clinical and academic communities has stimulated significant debate of how best to implement such evidence which has frequently fuelled and frustratingly forestalled progress in CKD care. Key enablers of effective CKD care include clinical classification systems (KDIGO), evidence-based treatments, electronic health record tools, financially incentivised care, medical education and policy changes. Barriers to effective CKD care are extensive; key barriers include clinician concerns regarding overdiagnosis, a lack of financially incentivised care in primary care, complex clinical guidelines, managing CKD in the context of multimorbidity, bureaucratic burden in primary care, underutilisation of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) medications, insufficient medical education in CKD, and most recently – a sustained disruption to routine CKD care during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Future CKD care in UK primary care must be informed by lessons of the last two decades. Making step change, over incremental improvements in CKD care at scale requires a renewed approach that addresses key barriers to detection, diagnosis, disclosure and management across traditional boundaries of healthcare, social care, and public health. Improved coding accuracy in primary care, increased use of SGLT2i medications, and risk-based care offer promising, cost-effective avenues to improve patient and population-level kidney health. Financial incentives generally improve achievement of care quality indicators – a review of financial and non-financial incentives in CKD care is urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2022, England embarked on an ambitious and innovative re-organisation to produce an integrated health and care system with a greater focus on improving population health. This study aimed to understand how nascent ICSs are developing and to identify the key challenges and enablers to integration. Methods: Four ICSs participated in the study between November 2021 and May 2022. Semi-structured interviews with system leaders (n = 67) from health, social and voluntary care as well as representatives of local communities were held. A thematic framework approach supported by Leutz's five laws of integration framework was used to analyse the data. Results: The benefits of ICSs include enhancing the delivery of good quality care, improving population health and providing more person-centred care in the community. However, differences between health and social care such as accountability, organisational/professional cultures, risks of duplicating efforts, tensions over funding allocation, issues of data integration and struggles in engaging local communities threaten to hamper integration. Conclusions: Despite ICS's investing in the structural and relational components of integrated care, the unprecedented pressures on systems to reduce demand on primary and emergency care tackling elective backlogs may detract from a key goal of ICSs, improving population health and prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health equity enables everyone to have the best possible opportunity for good health regardless of their social circumstance. In this article we set out why it is so vital that this begins in childhood, particularly at a time when increased costs of living in many countries are exacerbating health inequities further. We examine the impact of addressing the social determinants of health at individual, population and systems levels, and why this is the business of all partners involved in the local health economy. In the UK, integrated care systems (ICS) are early in their development. In this short article, we describe the work of the Children and Young People's Health Equity Collaborative: a collaboration between children's charity Barnardo's, the Institute of Health Equity, Birmingham and Solihull ICS, Cheshire and Merseyside ICS, and South Yorkshire ICS. This details a three-year programme designed to establish enablers for this whole systems approach. This includes a Children and Young People's Health Equity Framework, a dynamic data measurement tool to direct action for longer term outcomes and supporting child health equity interventions. Children and young people's voice is central to our work, combining academic evidence with lived experience of what really matters to them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Until recently the healthcare system in England was based on a commissioning/provider model. However, this has been replaced with an Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) approach, aimed at improving health and wellbeing and reducing inequalities through local collaborative partnerships with public sector organizations, community groups, social enterprise organizations and other local agencies. Part of this new approach is an emphasis on the role of community assets (i.e., local resources), that are considered integral to promoting positive health and wellbeing outcomes. This paper presents research from a series of three research studies on “community assets” conducted in the East of England within a newly established ICS. Based on analysis of qualitative data highlighting the lived experience of community asset members, this paper shows the positive wellbeing impact on vulnerable community members that assets provide. Further insight on the local impact and the collaborative nature of the research is provided suggesting that new asset-based approaches recognize the social determinants of health. This presents a shift away from positivistic linear approaches to population health and wellbeing to a new non-linear collaborative approach to addressing health inequalities and promoting wellbeing. The authors suggest that exploring this through a complexity theory lens could illuminate this further. Finally, the authors warn that while community assets have an important role to play in empowering citizens and providing much needed support to vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, they are not a substitute for functioning funded public sector services that are currently being undermined by ongoing local governments funding cuts. As such, while community assets can help ameliorate some of the negative effects people experience due to economic, structural and health disadvantages, only a more fair and more equal distribution of resources can address growing health inequalities.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed a move from face-to-face to digital delivery of services by hospitals and primary care. However, little is known about the impact of digital transformation on organizations supporting unpaid caregivers. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, the value of care provided by such informal caregivers is estimated to be £111 billion (US$ 152.7 billion) in England. Objective: This study aims to analyze service uptake patterns (including digital service options) over the pandemic period in an English caregivers' support organization covering a population of 0.98 million; measure changes in organizational performance, service efficiency, and quality; and identify the views of caregivers on service provision and future digital delivery. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the use of digital versus nondigital support services (January 2019 to June 2021) by caregivers in city and rural geographic areas. We compared organizational performance and service quality indicators for 2 financial years (2019-2020 and 2020-2021). A survey was conducted to identify barriers and facilitators to digital service uptake, the computer proficiency of caregivers (the Computer Proficiency Questionnaire, 12-item version), and preferences for future digital service provision. Quantitative data were analyzed using Stata 13 (StataCorp LLC). Thematic analysis was used for open-text survey responses. Results: The number of caregivers registered with the organization rose from 14,817 in 2019 to 20,237 in 2021. Monthly contacts rose from 1929 to 6741, with remote contacts increasing from 48.89% (943/1929) to 86.68% (5843/6741); distinctive patterns were observed for city versus rural caregivers. There was an increase in one-to-one contacts (88.8%) and caregiver assessments (20.9%), with no expansion in staffing. Service quality indicators showed an improvement in 5 of 8 variables (all P <.05). The 152 carers completing the survey had similar demographics to all registered caregivers. The Computer Proficiency Questionnaire, 12-item version, mean score of 25.61 (SD 4.40) indicated relatively high computer proficiency. The analysis of open-text responses identified a preference for the organization to continue to offer face-to-face services as well as web-based options. The digital services that were the most highly rated were carers' well-being assessments, support needs checks, and peer support groups. Conclusions: Our findings show that staff in the caregiver support organization were agile in adapting their services to digital delivery while dealing with increased numbers of registered clients and higher monthly contacts, all without obvious detriment to service quality. Caregivers indicated a preference for blended services, even while recording high computer proficiency. Considering the economic importance of unpaid caregivers, more attention should be given to organizations funded to provide support for them and to the potential for technology to enhance caregivers' access to, and engagement with, such services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical academics provide key contributions to positive outcomes in the delivery of high-quality health and social care; however, building capacity and capability for these roles for Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals (NMAHPs) within contemporary healthcare settings is often complex and challenging. Accessing funding and training, such as that provided by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), can remain beyond the reach of NMAHPs at point-of-care delivery because of limited structural empowerment, practical support and a culture inhibiting the growth of clinical academic careers. This article will discuss strategic developments and partnerships from two organisations, both with a positive track record of supporting clinical academic career development for NMAHPs. We aim to provide practical and applicable examples showing how NMAHPs have been supported from foundational to post-doctoral level and outline these under three key headings: strategic commitment; structures to engage, enthuse and empower clinical academic careers; and realising the benefits for staff and patient experience. We contend that a wide-ranging level of support is required to encourage aspiring clinical academics to navigate this complex journey, often where the development of personal confidence, and access to early career models combining clinical and research activity are pivotal. We conclude that when crafted and created effectively with sustainable commitment by organisations, NMAHP clinical academics provide an innovative workforce solution with the knowledge and skills essential for a contemporary NHS healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background As integrated care systems are embedded across England there are regions where the integration process has been evaluated and continues to evolve. Evaluation of these integrated systems contributes to our understanding of the challenges and facilitators to this ongoing process. This can support integrated care systems nationwide as they continue to develop. We describe how two integrated care partnerships in different localities, at differing stages of integration with contrasting approaches experienced challenges specifically when integrating with primary care services. The aim of this analysis was to focus on primary care services and how their existing structures impacted on the development of integrated care systems. Methods We carried out an exploratory approach to re-analysing our previously conducted 51 interviews as part of our prior evaluations of integrated health and care services which included primary care services. The interview data were thematically analysed, focussing on the role and engagement of primary care services with the integrated care systems in these two localities. Results Four key themes from the data are discussed: (i) Workforce engagement (engagement with integration), (ii) Organisational communication (information sharing), (iii) Financial issues, (iv) Managerial information systems (data sharing, IT systems and quality improvement data). We report on the challenges of ensuring the workforce feel engaged and informed. Communication is a factor in workforce relationships and trust which impacts on the success of integrated working. Financial issues highlight the conflict between budget decisions made by the integrated care systems when primary care services are set up as individual businesses. The incompatibility of information technology systems hinders integration of care systems with primary care. Conclusions Integrated care systems are national policy. Their alignment with primary care services, long considered to be the cornerstone of the NHS, is more crucial than ever. The two localities we evaluated as integration developed both described different challenges and facilitators between primary care and integrated care systems. Differences between the two localities allow us to explore where progress has been made and why.

Background: As integrated care systems are embedded across England there are regions where the integration process has been evaluated and continues to evolve. Evaluation of these integrated systems contributes to our understanding of the challenges and facilitators to this ongoing process. This can support integrated care systems nationwide as they continue to develop. We describe how two integrated care partnerships in different localities, at differing stages of integration with contrasting approaches experienced challenges specifically when integrating with primary care services. The aim of this analysis was to focus on primary care services and how their existing structures impacted on the development of integrated care systems. Methods: We carried out an exploratory approach to re-analysing our previously conducted 51 interviews as part of our prior evaluations of integrated health and care services which included primary care services. The interview data were thematically analysed, focussing on the role and engagement of primary care services with the integrated care systems in these two localities. Results: Four key themes from the data are discussed: (i) Workforce engagement (engagement with integration), (ii) Organisational communication (information sharing), (iii) Financial issues, (iv) Managerial information systems (data sharing, IT systems and quality improvement data). We report on the challenges of ensuring the workforce feel engaged and informed. Communication is a factor in workforce relationships and trust which impacts on the success of integrated working. Financial issues highlight the conflict between budget decisions made by the integrated care systems when primary care services are set up as individual businesses. The incompatibility of information technology systems hinders integration of care systems with primary care. Conclusions: Integrated care systems are national policy. Their alignment with primary care services, long considered to be the cornerstone of the NHS, is more crucial than ever. The two localities we evaluated as integration developed both described different challenges and facilitators between primary care and integrated care systems. Differences between the two localities allow us to explore where progress has been made and why. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the UK, people's lives are being cut short because of obesity, and the lives of the most deprived members of our communities are being cut the most. The role of the medical professional in managing overweight and obesity is extensive, but, for many patients, maintaining a healthy weight needs to be supported by creating environments that help people to stay healthy in the first place. The building blocks of health are the environmental, commercial, economic and social factors that largely determine our health and wellbeing and impact our capability, opportunity and motivation to maintain healthy-weight behaviours. Although the role of the healthcare professional generally is to focus on the individual patient, clinicians can still influence these building blocks. Clinicians have the skills to create change, they often hold power in organisations with local to international impact and there are actions, big or small, that every clinician can take to improve obesity prevention. Here, we outline an environmental--behavioural framework for the primary prevention of obesity and consider the role of clinicians in catalysing change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The Covid-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented challenge for health and social care systems globally. There is an urgent need for research on experiences of COVID-19 at different levels of health systems, including lessons from professional, organisational and local system responses, that can be used to inform managerial and policy responses. Methods This paper presents the findings from a thematic analysis of front-line staff experiences working across the Norfolk and Waveney integrated care system (ICS) in the East of England during April and October 2020 to address the question “What are the experiences and perceptions of partner organisations and practitioners at multiple levels of the health system in responding to COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic?” This question was posed to learn from how practitioners, interdependent partner organisations and the system experienced the pandemic and responded. 176 interview transcripts derived from one to one and focus group interviews, meeting notes and feedback from a “We Care Together” Instagram campaign were submitted for qualitative thematic analysis to an external research team at a regional University commissioned to undertake an independent evaluation. Three phases of qualitative analysis were systematically undertaken to derive the findings. Findings Thirty-one themes were distilled highlighting lessons learned from things that went well compared with those that did not; challenges compared with the celebrations and outcomes; learning and insights gained; impact on role; and system headlines. The analysis supported the ICS to inform and capitalise on system wide learning for integration, improvement and innovations in patient and care home resident safety, and staff wellbeing to deal with successive waves of the pandemic as well as prioritising workforce development priorities as part of its People Plan. Conclusions The findings contribute to a growing body of knowledge about what impact the pandemic has had on health and social care systems and front-line practitioners globally. It is important to understand the impact at all three levels of the system (micro, meso and macro) as it is the meso and macro system levels that ultimately impact front line staff experiences and the ability to deliver person centered safe and effective care in any context. The paper presents implications for future workforce and health services policy, practice innovation and research.

System-level decisions around the commissioning and provision of healthcare services in England have contributed to barriers in accessing the National Health Service. In this article, we ask how to better regulate resource allocation to ensure greater equity in access to healthcare services. First, we focus on the Health and Care Act 2022, which, drawing on principles of deliberative regulation to address health inequalities, initiates a shift away from previous regulatory approaches towards a collaborative decision-making model. We then shed light on the systemic factors creating and maintaining access barriers by considering shortcomings in previous regulatory approaches. With these in mind, we consider whether deliberative regulation-providing communities with resources to create normative solutions to intrinsic issues-could help address these systemic challenges. To assess the potential of laws or policies to achieve greater equity in healthcare, we also introduce an evaluative framework based on deliberative principles. We apply this framework to a case study of an Integrated Care System to gauge the extent to which the Health and Care Act 2022 has indeed been effectively adopting a deliberative approach by intentionally engaging marginalized communities in decision-making and devising accountability mechanisms for the allocation of healthcare resources., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: In England, Integrated Care Systems have been established to improve integration of care, as part of the NHS Long Term Plan. For people near the end of life, palliative care can improve integration of care. We aimed to understand whether and how palliative and end of life care was included in Integrated Care System strategies, and to consider priorities for strengthening this. Methods: Documentary analysis of Integrated Care System (ICS) strategies, using summative content analysis, was performed. Google searches were used to identify NHS Trust, Clinical Commissioning Group or ICS websites. We searched these websites to identify strategies. Key terms were used to identify relevant content. Themes were mapped onto an adapted logic model for integrated care. Results: 23 Integrated Care System strategy documents were identified. Of these, two did not mention any of the key terms, and six highlighted palliative and end of life care as either a priority, area of focus, or an ambition. While most (19/23) strategies included elements that could be mapped onto the adapted logic model for integrated care, the thread from enablers and components, to structures, processes, outcomes, and impact was incomplete. Conclusions: Greater prioritisation of palliative and end of life care within recently established Integrated Care Systems could improve outcomes for people near the end of life, as well as reduce reliance on acute hospital care. Integrated Care Systems should consider involving patients, the public and palliative care stakeholders in the ongoing development of strategies. For strategies to be effective, our adapted logic model can be used to outline how different components of care fit together to achieve defined outcomes and impact.

Integrated care systems (ICS) in England are partnerships between different health and social care organisations, to co‐ordinate care and therefore provide more effective health and social care provision. The objective of this article is to explore the role of the 'Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise' (VCSE) sector in integrated care systems. In particular, the paper aims to examine recent experiences of the voluntary sector in responding to the Covid‐19 pandemic, and the lessons that can be learnt for integrated care provision. The article focuses on the case of Oxfordshire (UK), using a mixed methods approach that included a series of semi‐structured interviews with key informants in health and the VCSE sector as well as online surveys of GPs and organisations in the VCSE sector. These were complemented by two contrasting geographical case studies of community responses to Covid‐19 (one urban, one rural). Data were collected between April and June 2021. Interviewees were recruited through professional and community networks and snowball sampling, with a total of 30 semi‐structured interviews being completed. Survey participants were recruited through sector‐specific networks and the research arm of doctors.net.uk, with a total of 57 survey respondents in all. The research demonstrated the critical role of social prescribing link workers and locality officers in forging connections between the health and VCSE sectors at the hyper‐local level, particularly in the urban case study. In the rural case study, the potential role of the Parish Council in bringing the two sectors together was highlighted, to support community health and well‐being through stronger integrated working between the two sectors. The article concludes that enhanced connections between health and the VCSE sector will strengthen the outcomes of ICS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging evidence suggests that connecting people to non‐medical activities in the community (social prescribing) may relieve pressure on services by promoting autonomy and resilience, thereby improving well‐being and self‐management of health. This way of working has a long history in the voluntary and community sector but has only recently been widely funded by the National Health Service (NHS) in England and implemented in Primary Care Networks (PCNs). The COVID‐19 global pandemic coincided with this new service. There is wide variation in how social prescribing is implemented and scant evidence comparing different delivery models. As embedded researchers within an Integrated Care System in the Southwest of England, we examined the impact of COVID on the implementation of social prescribing in different employing organisations during the period March 2020 to April 2021. Data were collected from observations and field notes recorded during virtual interactions with over 80 social prescribing practitioners and an online survey of 52 social prescribing practitioners and middle managers. We conceptualise social prescribing as a pathway comprising access, engagement and activities, facilitated by workforce and community assets and strategic partnerships. We found that these elements were all impacted by the pandemic, but to different degrees according to the way the service was contracted, whether referrals (access) and approach (engagement) were universal ('open') or targeted ('boundaried') and the extent to which practitioners' roles were protected or shifted towards immediate COVID‐specific work. Social prescribers contracted in PCNs were more likely to operate an 'open' model, although boundaries were developing over time. We suggest the presence of an explicit, agreed delivery model (whether 'open' or 'boundaried') might create a more coherent approach less likely to result in practitioner role drift, whilst allowing flexibility to adjust to the pandemic and enhancing practitioner satisfaction and well‐being. The potential consequences of different models are examined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The global increase in the older population, which is expected to reach 1.5 billion by 2050, poses significant challenges for publicly funded health care systems. Life expectancy, although positive, is leading to an increase in chronic diseases requiring complex and costly health and social solutions. This study explores key strategies to address these challenges. Qualitative interviews followed by a survey. The study involved experts, students, artificial intelligence, and participants at a congress. We first interviewed 5 experts from different countries representing health care management and psychology from Belgium, health economics from Canada, sociology from France, and geriatrics from Switzerland. In addition, a focus group session with medical students in physical therapy and queries to ChatGPT increased the range of perspectives. A synthesis of all opinions or insights was used to formulate concrete strategies. These strategies were incorporated into an online survey that was distributed to 215 participants of the Geriatric and Gerontologic Congress in Montreal, Canada, in September 2023. All 20 potential solutions were duly acknowledged, with particular attention paid to the following 5 priorities: the urgent need to integrate geriatric training into the education of future health professionals, the promotion of home-based care models, the establishment of comprehensive and integrated care systems, the strengthening of primary care services, and the emphasis on primary prevention strategies. This study highlights key priorities for addressing the health needs of the older population. By emphasizing education, home-based care, and integrated services and strengthening primary care and prevention, health systems can respond effectively to the challenges of an ageing population. Although these needs may not be entirely unmet, they indicate areas where existing services are insufficient in providing adequate coverage and support to ensure tailored and sustainable health care solutions for older people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented challenge for health and social care systems globally. There is an urgent need for research on experiences of COVID-19 at different levels of health systems, including lessons from professional, organisational and local system responses, that can be used to inform managerial and policy responses. Methods: This paper presents the findings from a thematic analysis of front-line staff experiences working across the Norfolk and Waveney integrated care system (ICS) in the East of England during April and October 2020 to address the question "What are the experiences and perceptions of partner organisations and practitioners at multiple levels of the health system in responding to COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic?" This question was posed to learn from how practitioners, interdependent partner organisations and the system experienced the pandemic and responded. 176 interview transcripts derived from one to one and focus group interviews, meeting notes and feedback from a "We Care Together" Instagram campaign were submitted for qualitative thematic analysis to an external research team at a regional University commissioned to undertake an independent evaluation. Three phases of qualitative analysis were systematically undertaken to derive the findings. Findings: Thirty-one themes were distilled highlighting lessons learned from things that went well compared with those that did not; challenges compared with the celebrations and outcomes; learning and insights gained; impact on role; and system headlines. The analysis supported the ICS to inform and capitalise on system wide learning for integration, improvement and innovations in patient and care home resident safety, and staff wellbeing to deal with successive waves of the pandemic as well as prioritising workforce development priorities as part of its People Plan. Conclusions: The findings contribute to a growing body of knowledge about what impact the pandemic has had on health and social care systems and front-line practitioners globally. It is important to understand the impact at all three levels of the system (micro, meso and macro) as it is the meso and macro system levels that ultimately impact front line staff experiences and the ability to deliver person centered safe and effective care in any context. The paper presents implications for future workforce and health services policy, practice innovation and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic challenged the NHS to make rapid adjustments to practice to ensure that patients could continue to access vital treatments while reducing the risk of infection. A roundtable discussion was convened, including professionals from cancer care delivery and those working in patient involvement, to discuss experiences during the pandemic and to offer recommendations for the safe transition and implementation of cancer care in the community setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Covid-19 pandemic has created an unprecedented challenge for health and social care systems globally. There is an urgent need for research on experiences of COVID-19 at different levels of health systems, including lessons from professional, organisational and local system responses, that can be used to inform managerial and policy responses.Methods: This paper presents the findings from a thematic analysis of front-line staff experiences working across the Norfolk and Waveney integrated care system (ICS) in the East of England during April and October 2020 to address the question "What are the experiences and perceptions of partner organisations and practitioners at multiple levels of the health system in responding to COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic?" This question was posed to learn from how practitioners, interdependent partner organisations and the system experienced the pandemic and responded. 176 interview transcripts derived from one to one and focus group interviews, meeting notes and feedback from a "We Care Together" Instagram campaign were submitted for qualitative thematic analysis to an external research team at a regional University commissioned to undertake an independent evaluation. Three phases of qualitative analysis were systematically undertaken to derive the findings.Findings: Thirty-one themes were distilled highlighting lessons learned from things that went well compared with those that did not; challenges compared with the celebrations and outcomes; learning and insights gained; impact on role; and system headlines. The analysis supported the ICS to inform and capitalise on system wide learning for integration, improvement and innovations in patient and care home resident safety, and staff wellbeing to deal with successive waves of the pandemic as well as prioritising workforce development priorities as part of its People Plan.Conclusions: The findings contribute to a growing body of knowledge about what impact the pandemic has had on health and social care systems and front-line practitioners globally. It is important to understand the impact at all three levels of the system (micro, meso and macro) as it is the meso and macro system levels that ultimately impact front line staff experiences and the ability to deliver person centered safe and effective care in any context. The paper presents implications for future workforce and health services policy, practice innovation and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health‐care commissioning decisions has always been a contentious issue. However, the current moves towards Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in England's NHS are viewed as posing the risk of reducing the impact of current structures for PPI. Objective To understand how different members in clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) understand PPI as currently functioning in their decision‐making practices, and the implications of the STPs for it. Design Thematic analysis of 18 semi‐structured interviews with CCG governing body voting members (e.g. clinicians and lay members), non‐voting governing body members (e.g. Healthwatch representatives) and CCG staff with roles focussed on PPI, recruited from CCGs in South London STPs. Results There are contestations amongst CCG members regarding not only what PPI is, but also the role that it currently plays and could play in commissioning decision making in the context of STPs. Three main themes were identified: PPI is ‘going out’ into the community; PPI as a disruptive power; and PPI as co‐production, a ‘utopian dream’? Conclusions Long‐standing issues distinctive to PPI in NHS prioritization decisions are resurfacing with the moves towards STPs, particularly in relation to contradictions between the rhetoric of ‘partnership’ and reorganizations that foster more top‐down control. The interviews reveal pervasive distrusts across a number of levels that are counterproductive to the collaborations upon which STPs rely. And it is argued that such distrust and contestations will continue until a formalized space for PPI in STP priority‐setting is created.

Background: Traditional education for healthcare leaders supports individuals to learn how to lead organizations, with functional areas such as strategy, organizational behaviour, finance and accounting, and information technology. As healthcare systems globally shift toward more healthcare integration, we need to rethink how we recruit and equip leaders with the skills and experiences needed to lead complex adaptive systems, that go well beyond a focus on individual organizations. A synthesis of the literature evidence identifies which skills and behaviours facilitate effective leadership of integrated care initiatives as well as provides a framework for highlighting the core competencies needed for a new generation of leaders. Aims and objectives: During this workshop, authors of a Canadian article on leadership competencies for integrated care will review their competency framework and will invite panellists who are leading different integrated care systems to share their perspectives on the skills, behaviours and competencies needed to lead and support integrated systems of care in this environment. We will present and discuss real-life leadership scenarios and experiences both to validate the competency framework and to engage the audience in a discussion on what it takes to lead in an integrated care system. Workshop participants and panellists will explore questions such as: what are the leadership challenges we face in shifting towards more integrated care delivery? What are the skills and competencies we want to emerge in the next generation of healthcare leaders? What are the implications for leadership and management recruitment and ongoing education? What kinds of education programs for integrated care and complex adaptive systems exist currently and what can we learn from them about how to reshape traditional health leadership curricula? Format: The workshop is formatted as follows: Chairperson: 1. Introduction 2. Overview of proposed leadership competency framework Panellists: 3. Stories from leaders across different countries about challenges and success factors in leading integrated systems of care 4. Developing leadership: example programmes and reflections from those who have led them 5. Discussion? All participants 6. Discussion by panellists and audience on considerations for how we recruit, educate and mentor leaders in a complex integrated-care world. Target Audience: The target participants are individuals working in policy, practice, education and system leadership who are focused on the challenges of advancing integrated care. Learnings: This workshop is intended to encourage participants to think differently about necessity of evolving leadership development for integrated care by presenting a competency framework and showcasing how these competencies work in practice with leaders across different countries.

Local services can provide better and more joined-up care for patients when different organisations work collaboratively in an integrated system. Population health management (PHM) provides the shared data about local people's current and future health and wellbeing needs. Joint care planning and support addresses both the psychological and physical needs of an individual recognising the huge overlap between mental and physical wellbeing. Joint posts and joint organisational development are likely to become more commonplace and community nurses will have a vital contribution to planning and delivery of integrated care to improve health and care outcomes for their local populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical academics provide key contributions to positive outcomes in the delivery of high-quality health and social care; however, building capacity and capability for these roles for Nurses, Midwives and Allied Health Professionals (NMAHPs) within contemporary healthcare settings is often complex and challenging. Accessing funding and training, such as that provided by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), can remain beyond the reach of NMAHPs at point-of-care delivery because of limited structural empowerment, practical support and a culture inhibiting the growth of clinical academic careers. This article will discuss strategic developments and partnerships from two organisations, both with a positive track record of supporting clinical academic career development for NMAHPs. We aim to provide practical and applicable examples showing how NMAHPs have been supported from foundational to post-doctoral level and outline these under three key headings: strategic commitment; structures to engage, enthuse and empower clinical academic careers; and realising the benefits for staff and patient experience. We contend that a wide-ranging level of support is required to encourage aspiring clinical academics to navigate this complex journey, often where the development of personal confidence, and access to early career models combining clinical and research activity are pivotal. We conclude that when crafted and created effectively with sustainable commitment by organisations, NMAHP clinical academics provide an innovative workforce solution with the knowledge and skills essential for a contemporary NHS healthcare system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health‐care commissioning decisions has always been a contentious issue. However, the current moves towards Sustainability and Transformation Partnerships (STPs) in England's NHS are viewed as posing the risk of reducing the impact of current structures for PPI. Objective: To understand how different members in clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) understand PPI as currently functioning in their decision‐making practices, and the implications of the STPs for it. Design: Thematic analysis of 18 semi‐structured interviews with CCG governing body voting members (e.g. clinicians and lay members), non‐voting governing body members (e.g. Healthwatch representatives) and CCG staff with roles focussed on PPI, recruited from CCGs in South London STPs. Results: There are contestations amongst CCG members regarding not only what PPI is, but also the role that it currently plays and could play in commissioning decision making in the context of STPs. Three main themes were identified: PPI is 'going out' into the community; PPI as a disruptive power; and PPI as co‐production, a 'utopian dream'? Conclusions: Long‐standing issues distinctive to PPI in NHS prioritization decisions are resurfacing with the moves towards STPs, particularly in relation to contradictions between the rhetoric of 'partnership' and reorganizations that foster more top‐down control. The interviews reveal pervasive distrusts across a number of levels that are counterproductive to the collaborations upon which STPs rely. And it is argued that such distrust and contestations will continue until a formalized space for PPI in STP priority‐setting is created. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There will be significant changes to the way in which primary and community health services are provided in the wake of the NHS Long Term Plan published in January 2019. Community nurses are already preparing themselves for these changes by exploring models of care that are patient-centred and link to neighbourhood, place and system levels. This article discusses two examples of such models of care, the Buurtzorg and Embrace model, both from the Netherlands. Styles of leadership and associated development, both within nursing and on a multi-professional basis will be crucial to ensure success. This article outlines Alban-Metcalfe's engaging transformational leadership model as a potential platform to move to flatter, more diverse teams and collective leadership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2016, NHS England set up 10 integrated care systems (ICSs) which aim to devolve some responsibility for delivery of health and social care services to local healthcare providers in partnership with local government, social care, primary care networks, and voluntary and charitable organisations. These are new ways of working and provide an opportunity to better integrate perioperative care across the entire pathway from the moment of contemplation of surgery through to recovery at home. This review describes the ways in which the aims of many ICS plans can be met with good perioperative care, and how clinicians can use this opportunity to make significant progress in improving outcomes for patients. We describe examples of initiatives in cancer pathways which are already proving successful and have caught the imagination of the local community at all levels, as well as examples of integrated perioperative care across the country which can be applied to other systems. We hope to demonstrate ways in which perioperative care can add value to a local health population given the right support and chance to deliver it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Effective communication of information is central to integrated care systems (ICS), particularly between providers and care-consumers. Drawing on communication theory, this paper aims to investigate whether and why source effects increase positive evaluations of health-related messages among care-consumers.Design/methodology/approach A preliminary online survey (N = 525) establishes the discriminant validity of the measures used in the main experimental study. The main study (N = 116) examines whether identical messages disclosed to be created by different sources (i.e. institutional, care-consumer, collaborative) lead to different message evaluations, and whether source credibility and similarity, and message authenticity, explain this process.Findings In comparison to any other source, messages disclosed to be co-created are evaluated more positively by care-consumers. This effect occurs through a parallel serial mediation carried over by perceptions of source credibility and source similarity (parallel, first serial-level mediators) and message authenticity (second serial-level mediator).Practical implications The findings offer guidelines for leveraging source effects in ICS communication strategies, signaling how collaborative message sources increase the favorableness of health message evaluations.Originality/value This research demonstrates the efficacy of drawing on marketing communication theory to build ICS communication capacity by showing how re-configuring the declared source of informational content can increase positive evaluations of health-related messages. In so doing, this research extends existing literature on message authenticity by demonstrating its key underlying role in affecting message evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In November 2021 Claire Fuller led a national piece of work looking at primary care within integrated care systems (ICSs) to identify what was working well and why. The published report from this piece of work became known as the Fuller Stocktake. 1 In this interview, Professor Fuller sets out the process and principles behind the Stocktake., (© Royal College of Physicians 2023. All rights reserved.)

Moving from leadership of general practice to leadership involving all medical disciplines throughout the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic provided a fascinating overview of the health and care landscape. There are many erroneous assumptions in secondary care about general practice, and vice versa, with professional tribalism a cause for concern. However, there are many examples of effective and straightforward integration, and the establishment of integrated care systems in England has provided a unique opportunity to address the commissioning challenges that had previously been barriers., (© Royal College of Physicians 2023. All rights reserved.)