Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Influenza (flu) vaccination rates of Care home staff (CHS) in England are consistently lower (≈ 15% in 2023) than World Health Organisation recommendations (≥ 75%). The FluCare trial examined the effectiveness of a multi-component intervention (including on-site flu vaccination clinics, information materials including video, £850 incentive and monthly monitoring with feedback) designed to address known barriers to flu vaccine uptake amongst CHS. This paper reports an embedded process evaluation designed to understand implementation of the FluCare intervention and provide explanations for observed effects in the trial. Methods The FluCare cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted between November 2022 and March 2023. A mixed methods process evaluation was conducted employing questionnaires, semi-structured interviews, video analytics (no. clicks and duration of view) and clinic logs (no. clinics delivered, days/time clinics were delivered, and no. staff vaccinated). CHS (including managers) and vaccination providers (pharmacists, nurses and general practitioners) were purposively and conveniently selected, respectively, for the interviews. Descriptive statistics were obtained for quantitative data, and qualitative data were analysed thematically. Results FluCare intervention implementation varied across Care homes (CHs), with clinics and videos not being implemented in 35% and 43% of the intervention CHs respectively. In addition, clinic days and times varied depending on provider (pharmacy or general practice) and CH. Partial intervention implementation was partly influenced by managers’ engagement and sub-organisational cultures marked by negative narratives around vaccines. Contextual barriers included delivery of clinics late in the flu season. A greater indication of implementation fidelity was positively associated with change in staff attitudes and behaviours, with some getting vaccinated for the first time. Conclusions Variation in implementation of the FluCare intervention provides an explanation for detecting a difference where the intervention was fully implemented in the main trial. Manager and leader engagement is vital for both successful implementation and staff engagement. Avoidable contextual barriers, such as late timing of clinics, must be addressed to enhance flu vaccination uptake by CHS. More work is needed to understand the role of CH leaders in influencing intervention implementation, sub-organisational cultures and vaccination attitudes. Trial registration ISRCTN22729870. Registered on 24 August 2022.

Background Influenza (flu) vaccination rates in UK care home staff are extremely low. Less than 40% of staff in care homes are vaccinated for influenza (flu), presenting risks to the health of frail residents and potential staff absence from cross-infection. Staff often do not perceive a need for vaccination and are unaware they are entitled to free flu vaccination. The FluCare study, a cluster randomised control trial (RCT), uses behavioural interventions to address barriers. Videos, posters, and leaflets are intended to raise awareness of flu vaccination benefits and debunk myths. On-site staff vaccination clinics increase accessibility. Financial incentives to care homes for improved vaccination rates and regular monitoring influence the environment. This paper outlines the planned process evaluation which will describe the intervention’s mechanisms of action, explain any changes in outcomes, identify local adaptations, and inform design of the implementation phase. Methods/design A mixed method process evaluation to inform the interpretation of trial findings. Objectives • Describe the intervention as delivered in terms of dose and fidelity, including adaptations and variations across care homes. • Explore the effects of individual intervention components on primary outcomes. • Investigate the mechanisms of impact. • Describe the perceived effectiveness of relevant intervention components (including videos, leaflets, posters, and flu clinics) from participant perspectives (care home manager, care home staff, flu clinic providers). • Describe the characteristics of care homes and participants to assess reach. A purposive sample of twenty care homes (ten in the intervention arm, ten in the control arm) for inclusion in the process evaluation. Data will include (1) study records including care home site profiles, (2) responses to a mechanism of action questionnaire, and (3) semi-structured interviews with care home staff and clinic providers. Quantitative data will be descriptively reported. Interview data will be thematically analysed and then categories mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Discussion Adopting this systematic and comprehensive process evaluation approach will help ensure data is captured on all aspects of the trial, enabling a full understanding of the intervention implementation and RCT findings. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN22729870. Registered on 24 August 2022.

Background/Objectives: Vaccinating care home staff is essential to protect vulnerable residents by reducing infection risks and creating a safer care environment. However, vaccine hesitancy amongst staff remains a challenge, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic raised concerns about side effects and vaccination mandates. This study examines how the pandemic influenced flu vaccine hesitancy amongst UK care home staff. Methods: Data were collected from the FluCare trials conducted over the 2021–22 and 2022–23 winter seasons to explore the impact of concurrent mandatory and non-mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies on flu vaccine uptake. A total of 52 interviews (21 from the feasibility study and 31 from the randomised control trial) were conducted with care home managers and staff. Thematic analysis identified key themes shaping staff attitudes toward flu vaccination. Results: Four central themes emerged regarding the impact of the pandemic on staff attitudes and the contextual influences shaping vaccine hesitance: (i) tension between autonomy and morals in vaccination decisions; (ii) the COVID ‘craze’ and the displacement of the flu vaccine; (iii) the role of the COVID ‘craze’ in staff vaccine fatigue; and (iv) conspiracies, (mis)information, and the significance of trust. Psychosocial theories on decision making and health behaviour were used to further interpret the findings. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that post-COVID-19 interventions in care home setting should address the issues of autonomy, vaccine fatigue, and trust to enhance vaccine uptake. Understanding these factors could support more effective strategies to address hesitancy amongst care home staff in future vaccination campaigns.

Background The rising prevalence of adolescent mild depression in the UK and the paucity of evidence-based interventions in non-specialist sectors where most cases present, creates an urgent need for early psychological interventions. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for obtaining unbiased estimates of intervention effectiveness. However, the complexity of mental health settings poses great challenges for effectiveness evaluations. This paper reports learning from an embedded process evaluation of the ICALM RCT which tested the feasibility of delivering Interpersonal Counselling for Adolescents (IPC-A) plus Treatment as Usual (TAU) versus TAU only for adolescent (age 12–18) mild depression by non-qualified mental health professionals in non-specialist sectors. Methods A qualitative mixed methods process evaluation, drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s socioecological model to investigate key influences on trial delivery across macro-(e.g. policy), meso-(e.g. service characteristics) and micro-(e.g. on-site trial processes) contextual levels. Data collection methods included 9 site questionnaires, 4 observations of team meetings, policy documents, and 18 interviews with stakeholders including therapists, heads of service and managers. Thematic analysis focused on understanding how contextual features shaped trial implementation. Results The ICALM trial concluded in 2022 having only randomised 14 out of the target 60 young people. At a macro-level, trial delivery was impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with services reporting a sharp increase in cases of (social) anxiety over low mood, and backlogs at central referral points which prolonged waiting times for mild cases (e.g. low mood). An interaction between high demand and lack of capacity at a meso-service level led to low prioritisation of trial activities at a micro-level. Unfamiliarity with research processes (e.g. randomisation) and variation in TAU support also accentuated the complexities of conducting an RCT in this setting. Conclusions Conducting a RCT of IPC-A in non-specialist services is not feasible in the current context. Failure to conduct effectiveness trials in this setting has clinical implications, potentially resulting in escalation of mild mental health problems. Research done in this setting should adopt pragmatic and innovative recruitment and engagement approaches (e.g. creating new referral pathways) and consider alternative trial designs, e.g. cluster, stepped-wedge or non-controlled studies using complex systems approaches to embrace contextual complexity. Trial registration ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN82180413. Registered on 31 December 2019.

Four studies are reported that investigated when and how children acquire an understanding of aspects of death, especially its five 'subcomponents' of irreversibility, inevitability, universality, cessation, and causality. Building on previous research and providing a unique and novel perspective, child, parent, parent-child factors, and their associations with children's developing understanding of death were explored. These factors include experiences with bereavement, pet ownership, parental afterlife and religious beliefs, and parent-child conversations. Through interviews with nine mothers, Study 1 took a grounded theory approach to explore how parents' beliefs about death influence what they discuss with children. In Study 2, 96 children were interviewed, and their parents completed questionnaires, to further investigate how these parental beliefs and other factors predicted children's concepts. In Study 3, a new storybook task was used to observe naturalistic conversations about death between 19 of the parent-child dyads who participated in Study 2. By comparing data from Studies 2 and 3, Study 4 addressed issues highlighted in the previous three studies, including conceptual change during the period between studies, and how actual conversations compare with those self-reported by parents. Key findings were that such self-reports are often unreliable measures of parent-child conversations because parents tend to underestimate children's active roles within them; parent and child factors likely influence children's conceptions, primarily through their impact on parent-child discussions; and children are able to reason spiritually about death from as young as 5 years, as their biological knowledge develops. This latter finding contrasts with that of previous research (e.g., Harris & Giménez, 2005), according to which spiritual reasoning first occurs only after biological knowledge has been acquired. The findings of this thesis have numerous methodological and theoretical implications for research and for adults (e.g., parents, teachers, and clinicians) facing discussions of death with children.