Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background To ascertain whether person centred coordinated care (P3C) is being delivered in healthcare services, components relating to the construct need to be measured. Patient reported measures (PRMs) can be used to provide a measurement of patients’ experiences of P3C. Traditionally, they have been used to assess whether interventions are delivering P3C. Recently there has been an increased interest in using them to directly enhance P3C in clinical practice by, for example, improving practitioner-patient communication. However, there is limited research available on how P3C can be implemented in practice. This study aimed to extend this literature base by exploring how professionals use PRMs to enhance P3C. Methods Cross sectional thematic analysis of 26 semi-structured interviews with a variety of professionals who have experience of how PRMs can be used to make improvements to P3C. Inductive themes were mapped onto components of P3C care that fell under five established domains of P3C (Information and Communication; My Goals/Outcomes; Decision making; Care Planning and Transitions) to explore whether and how individual components of P3C were being improved through PRMs. Barriers and facilitators that affected the delivery and the results of the PRMs were also identified. Results Three P3C domains (Information and Communication, My Goals/Outcomes and Care Planning) were mapped frequently onto themes generated by the participants’ interviews about PRM use. However, the domain ‘Decision Making’ was only mapped onto one theme and ‘Transitions’ was not mapped at all. Participant reports suggested that PRM use by practitioners enhanced patients’ ability to self-manage, communicate, engage and reflect during consultations. Barriers to PRM use were related to a lack of a whole service approach to implementation. Conclusions Practitioners use both PROMs and PREMs in various ways to improve different aspects of patient care. By sharing experiences professionals can benefit from each other’s learning and work together to extend the potential value that PRMs can offer to P3C delivery.

Background Fragmented care results in poor outcomes for individuals with complexity of need. Person-centred coordinated care (P3C) is perceived to be a potential solution, but an absence of accessible evidence and the lack of a scalable ‘blue print’ mean that services are ‘experimenting’ with new models of care with little guidance and support. This paper presents an approach to the implementation of P3C using collaborative action, providing examples of early developments across this programme of work, the core aim of which is to accelerate the spread and adoption of P3C in United Kingdom primary care settings. Methods Two centrally funded United Kingdom organisations (South West Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care and South West Academic Health Science Network) are leading this initiative to narrow the gap between research and practice in this urgent area of improvement through a programme of service change, evaluation and research. Multi-stakeholder engagement and co-design are core to the approach. A whole system measurement framework combines outcomes of importance to patients, practitioners and health organisations. Iterative and multi-level feedback helps to shape service change while collecting practice-based data to generate implementation knowledge for the delivery of P3C. The role of the research team is proving vital to support informed change and challenge organisational practice. The bidirectional flow of knowledge and evidence relies on the transitional positioning of researchers and research organisations. Results Extensive engagement and embedded researchers have led to strong collaborations across the region. Practice is beginning to show signs of change and data flow and exchange is taking place. However, working in this way is not without its challenges; progress has been slow in the development of a linked data set to allow us to assess impact innovations from a cost perspective. Trust is vital, takes time to establish and is dependent on the exchange of services and interactions. If collaborative action can foster P3C it will require sustained commitment from both research and practice. This approach is a radical departure from how policy, research and practice traditionally work, but one that we argue is now necessary to deal with the most complex health and social problems.

Background: Children and young people (CYP) in care experience poorer physical health and overall wellbeing in comparison to their peers. Despite this, relatively little is known about what their oral health needs and behaviours are. The aim of this scoping review was to provide a global perspective on the oral health status and behaviours of CYP in care and care leavers. It also aimed to synthesise interventions that have been trialled in this population to improve oral health. Methods: Five databases were searched, Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), SocINDEX (EBSCOhost) and Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source (EBSCOhost), alongside grey literature sources up to January 2023. Eligibility criteria were studies that (i) reported on children and adolescents aged 25 years or younger who are currently in formal/informal foster or residential care and care leavers, (ii) pertained to oral health profile, behaviours or oral health promotion interventions (iii) and were published in the English language. Thematic analysis was used to develop the domains for oral health behaviours and interventions. Results: Seventy-one papers were included. Most papers were published from very high or medium Human Development Index countries. CYP in care were found to experience high levels of decay, dental trauma, periodontal disease and poorer oral health-related quality of life. Oral health behaviours included limited oral health self-care behaviours and a lack of oral health-based knowledge. The trialled interventions involved oral health education, supervised brushing and treatment or preventative dental care. Conclusions: This scoping review reveals that CYP in care experience poorer oral health in comparison to their peers. They are also less likely to carry out oral health self-care behaviours. This review highlights a scarcity of interventions to improve the oral health of this population and a paucity of evidence surrounding the oral health needs of care leavers.

Aims: This scoping review aimed to explore three research questions: 1. What is the dental care access for children and young people (CYP) in care and care leavers? 2. What factors influence CYP in care and care leavers’ access to dental care? 3. What pathways have been developed to improve access to oral health care for CYP in care and care leavers? Methods: Five databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL, SocINDEX and Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source) and grey literature sources were systematically searched. Articles relating to CYP in care or care leavers aged 0–25 years old, published up to January 2023 were included. Abstracts, posters and publications not in the English language were excluded. The data relating to dental care access were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: The search identified 942 articles, of which 247 were excluded as duplicates. A review of the titles and abstracts yielded 149 studies. Thirty-eight were eligible for inclusion in the review: thirty-three peer-reviewed articles, one PhD thesis and four grey literature sources. All papers were published from very high or medium Human Development Index countries. The studies indicate that despite having higher treatment needs, CYP in care and care leavers experience greater difficulty in accessing dental services than those not care-experienced. Organisational, psycho-social and logistical factors influence their access to dental care. Their experience of dental care may be impacted by adverse childhood events. Pathways to dental care have been developed, but little is known of their impact on access. There are very few studies that include care leavers. The voices of care-experienced CYP are missing from dental access research. Conclusions: care-experienced CYP are disadvantaged in their access to dental care, and there are significant barriers to their treatment needs being met.

Background Patient and public involvement and engagement can improve the relevance and impact of research yet ‘impact’ is often framed narrowly around study findings rather than the experiences of those involved. Understanding how involvement affects individuals is important, particularly in areas such as mental health where there is significant potential for power differentials within the research process. The DeStress-II project co-developed a training resource to help primary care practitioners support people experiencing poverty-related mental distress. Community Partners with lived experience were integral to the project, contributing to training delivery, online resource co-production, and implementation analysis. This paper explores what supported their sustained engagement and the personal and collective impacts of involvement. Methods A reflective evaluation drawing on two focus groups and individual semi-structured interviews with ten Community Partners from three UK regions. Results Findings highlight the importance of extending the notion of impact beyond traditional boundaries of academic research to also consider individual and collective patient and public benefits of involvement. Meaningful involvement extends research impact beyond outputs to encompass personal growth, confidence, and a lasting sense of community. Key enablers included: (i) a dedicated Community Connector role; (ii) feeling part of and valued within the research team; and (iii) the development and quality of relationships. Conclusions Understanding how patient and public involvement in research is experienced broadens how impact is conceptualised. Dedicated facilitation, time, and resources are essential to create inclusive environments that support mutual learning and positive personal outcomes for people with lived experience. Plain English summary Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in research can improve the relevance and impact of research outcomes. However, research ‘impact’ is often only considered in terms of the study findings. Less attention has been placed on understanding the experiences of those individuals who take part in research in a PPIE role, or any impact they feel this has within their lives. Understanding this is important, particularly in areas such as mental health where there is significant potential for power inequalities in the research experience. The DeStress-II project developed a training resource to support primary care practitioners to deliver supportive consultations with people living with poverty-related mental distress. The resource was developed collaboratively with a team of Community Partners with lived experience of poverty-related mental distress. This paper presents the experiences of the Community Partners who were involved in all aspects of the research: developing and delivering the training, co-producing an online training resource and supporting the analysis of its implementation. We focus on what they feel helped them to sustain their engagement throughout the research, and the impacts of this at both an individual and group level. Factors that supported engagement were: (i) a dedicated Community Connector role; (ii) feeling part of and valued within the research team; and (iii) the development and quality of relationships. Community Partners identified impact at a personal level, including growth in confidence and a desire to create a legacy of work that continued beyond the life of the research project.

ObjectivesTo evaluate a county-wide deincentivisation of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) payment scheme for UK General Practice (GP).SettingIn 2014, National Health Service England signalled a move towards devolution of QOF to Clinical Commissioning Groups. Fifty-five GPs in Somerset established the Somerset Practice Quality Scheme (SPQS)—a deincentivisation of QOF—with the goal of redirecting resources towards Person Centred Coordinated Care (P3C), especially for those with long-term conditions (LTCs). We evaluated the impact on processes and outcomes of care from April 2016 to March 2017.Participants and designThe evaluation used data from 55 SPQS practices and 17 regional control practices for three survey instruments. We collected patient experiences (‘P3C-EQ’; 2363 returns from patients with 1+LTC; 36% response rate), staff experiences (‘P3C-practitioner’; 127 professionals) and organisational data (‘P3C-OCT’; 36 of 55 practices at two time points, 65% response rate; 17 control practices). Hospital Episode Statistics emergency admission data were analysed for 2014–2017 for ambulatory-sensitive conditions across Somerset using interrupted time series.ResultsPatient and practitioner experiences were similar in SPQS versus control practices. However, discretion from QOF incentives resulted in time savings in the majority of practices, and SPQS practice data showed a significant increase in P3C oriented organisational processes, with a moderate effect size (Wilcoxon signed rank test; p=0.01; r=0.42). Analysis of transformation plans and organisational data suggested stronger federation-level agreements and informal networks, increased multidisciplinary working, reallocation of resources for other healthcare professionals and changes to the structure and timings of GP appointments. No disbenefits were detected in admission data.ConclusionThe SPQS scheme leveraged time savings and reduced administrative burden via discretionary removal of QOF incentives, enabling practices to engage actively in a number of schemes aimed at improving care for people with LTCs. We found no differences in the experiences of patients or healthcare professionals between SPQS and control practices.

IntroductionSmoking reduction can lead to increased success in quitting. This study aims to determine if a client-focused motivational support package for smoking reduction (and quitting) and increasing (or otherwise using) physical activity (PA) can help smokers who do not wish to quit immediately to reduce the amount they smoke, and ultimately quit. This paper reports the study design and methods.Methods and analysisA pragmatic, multicentred, parallel, two group, randomised controlled superiority clinical trial, with embedded process evaluation and economics evaluation. Participants who wished to reduce smoking with no immediate plans to quit were randomised 1:1 to receive either (1) tailored individual health trainer face-to-face and/or telephone support to reduce smoking and increase PA as an aid to smoking reduction (intervention) or (2) brief written/electronic advice to reduce or quit smoking (control). Participants in both arms of the trial were also signposted to usual local support for smoking reduction and quitting. The primary outcome measure is 6-month carbon monoxide-confirmed floating prolonged abstinence following participant self-reported quitting on a mailed questionnaire at 3 and 9 months post-baseline. Participants confirmed as abstinent at 9 months will be followed up at 15 months.Ethics and disseminationApproved by SW Bristol National Health Service Research Committee (17/SW/0223). Dissemination will include publication of findings for the stated outcomes, parallel process evaluation and economic evaluation in peer-reviewed journals. Results will be disseminated to trial participants and healthcare providers.Trial registration numberISRCTN47776579; Pre-results.

Background: Better understanding factors leading to suicide and prevention opportunities is a global public health priority. This qualitative pilot study tested whether reviewing inquest recordings could generate insights during COVID-19 and inform public health prevention programmes across a predominantly rural and coastal area where there are significant health inequalities. Methods: Fifty-five inquest recordings reached a suicide conclusion between March 2020 and January 2021. Stratified sampling was used to obtain two samples from each month. Template analysis was employed to thematically analyse data from 30 inquests. Results: Risk factors during this period were social isolation, anxiety, difficulty in routine creation and maintenance, low mood and economic impact. Remote working in a more rural/coastal area impacted both healthcare service users and staff. Lockdown and other multiple risk factors impacted those at increased risk of poor mental health and suicide. Conclusions: There is a need to identify those at risk and with deteriorating mental health. All age trauma-informed approaches are needed to prevent individuals from reaching crisis along with more equitable services and community support due to the complex nature of suicide. This requires consideration of digital access/exclusion, training, continuity of care and enhanced care of those with additional needs and multiple vulnerabilities.

Background: Person-centred coordinated care (P3C) is a priority for stakeholders (ie, patients, carers, professionals, policy makers). As a part of the development of an evaluation framework for P3C, we set out to identify patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) suitable for routine measurement and feedback during the development of services. Methods: A rapid review of the literature was undertaken to identity existing PREMs suitable for the probing person-centred and/or coordinated care. Of 74 measures identified, 7 met our inclusion criteria. We critically examined these against core domains and subdomains of P3C. Measures were then presented to stakeholders in codesign workshops to explore acceptability, utility, and their strengths/weaknesses. Results: The Long-Term Condition 6 questionnaire was preferred for its short length, utility, and tone. However, it lacked key questions in each core domain, and in response to requests from our codesign group, new questions were added to cover consideration as a whole person, coordination, care plans, carer involvement, and a single coordinator. Cognitive interviews, on-going codesign, and mapping to core P3C domains resulted in the refinement of the questionnaire to 11 items with 1 trigger question. The 11-item modified version was renamed the P3C Experiences Questionnaire. Conclusions: Due to a dearth of brief measures available to capture people’s experience of P3C for routine practice, an existing measure was modified using an iterative process of adaption and validation through codesign workshops. Next steps include psychometric validation and modification for people with dementia and learning difficulties.

Patient-reported measure (PRM) questionnaires were originally used in research to measure outcomes of intervention studies. They have now evolved into a diverse family of tools measuring a range of constructs including quality of life and experiences of care. Current health and social care policy increasingly advocates their use for embedding the patient voice into service redesign through new models of care such as person-centered coordinated care (P3C). If chosen carefully and used efficiently, these tools can help improve care delivery through a variety of novel ways, including system-level feedback for health care management and commissioning. Support and guidance on how to use these tools would be critical to achieve these goals. The objective of this study was to develop evidence-based guidance and support for the use of P3C-PRMs in health and social care policy through identification of PRMs that can be used to enhance the development of P3C, mapping P3C-PRMs against an existing model of domains of P3C, and integration and organization of the information in a user-friendly Web-based database. A pragmatic approach was used for the systematic identification of candidate P3C-PRMs, which aimed at balancing comprehensiveness and feasibility. This utilized a number of resources, including existing compendiums, peer-reviewed and gray literature (using a flexible search strategy), and stakeholder engagement (which included guidance for relevant clinical areas). A subset of those candidate measures (meeting prespecified eligibility criteria) was then mapped against a theoretical model of P3C, facilitating classification of the construct being measured and the subsequent generation of shortlists for generic P3C measures, specific aspects of P3C (eg, communication or decision making), and condition-specific measures (eg, diabetes, cancer) in priority areas, as highlighted by stakeholders. In total, 328 P3C-PRMs were identified, which were used to populate a freely available Web-based database. Of these, 63 P3C-PRMs met the eligibility criteria for shortlisting and were classified according to their measurement constructs and mapped against the theoretical P3C model. We identified tools with the best coverage of P3C, thereby providing evidence of their content validity as outcome measures for new models of care. Transitions and medications were 2 areas currently poorly covered by existing measures. All the information is currently available at a user-friendly web-based portal (p3c.org.uk), which includes all relevant information on each measure, such as the constructs targeted and links to relevant literature, in addition to shortlists according to relevant constructs. A detailed compendium of P3C-PRMs has been developed using a pragmatic systematic approach supported by stakeholder engagement. Our user-friendly suite of tools is designed to act as a portal to the world of PRMs for P3C, and have utility for a broad audience, including (but not limited to) health care commissioners, managers, and researchers.