Understanding How, Why and for Whom Link Work Interventions Promote Access in Community Healthcare Settings in the United Kingdom: A Realist Review

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Expectations Pub Date : 2024-11-06 DOI:10.1111/hex.70090
Rebecca Golby, Fiona Lobban, Louise Laverty, Kyriakos Velemis, Vishal R. Aggarwal, Katherine Berry, Abby Morris, Emma Elliott, Rebecca Harris, Al Ross, Carolyn A. Chew-Graham, Miranda Budd, Linda McGowan, David Shiers, Neil Caton, Chris Lodge, Paul French, Robert Griffiths, Jasper Palmier-Claus
{"title":"Understanding How, Why and for Whom Link Work Interventions Promote Access in Community Healthcare Settings in the United Kingdom: A Realist Review","authors":"Rebecca Golby,&nbsp;Fiona Lobban,&nbsp;Louise Laverty,&nbsp;Kyriakos Velemis,&nbsp;Vishal R. Aggarwal,&nbsp;Katherine Berry,&nbsp;Abby Morris,&nbsp;Emma Elliott,&nbsp;Rebecca Harris,&nbsp;Al Ross,&nbsp;Carolyn A. Chew-Graham,&nbsp;Miranda Budd,&nbsp;Linda McGowan,&nbsp;David Shiers,&nbsp;Neil Caton,&nbsp;Chris Lodge,&nbsp;Paul French,&nbsp;Robert Griffiths,&nbsp;Jasper Palmier-Claus","doi":"10.1111/hex.70090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Inequity in access to healthcare in the United Kingdom can have a profound impact on people's ability to manage their health problems. Link work interventions attempt to overcome the socioeconomic and structural barriers that perpetuate health inequalities. Link workers are typically staff members without professional clinical qualifications who support patients to bridge the gap between services. However, little is currently known about how and why link work interventions might be effective. This realist review attempts to understand the contexts and resultant mechanisms by which link work interventions affect access to community healthcare services.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The authors completed a systematic search of empirical literature in Embase, CINAHL, Medline, PsychInfo and SocIndex, as well as grey literature and CLUSTER searches. Context, mechanism and outcome (CMO) configurations were generated iteratively in consultation with an expert panel and grouped into theory areas.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-one eligible manuscripts were identified, resulting in nine CMO configurations within three theory areas. These pertained to adequate time in time-pressured systems; the importance of link workers being embedded across multiple systems; and emotional and practical support for link workers.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Although link work interventions are increasingly utilised across community healthcare settings, the contexts in which they operate vary considerably, triggering a range of mechanisms. The findings suggest that careful matching of resources to patient need and complexity is important. It affords link workers the time to develop relationships with patients, embed themselves in local communities and referring teams, and develop knowledge of local challenges.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>The team included people with lived experience of mental health conditions and a carer who were involved at all stages of the review.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"27 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11540931/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70090","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Inequity in access to healthcare in the United Kingdom can have a profound impact on people's ability to manage their health problems. Link work interventions attempt to overcome the socioeconomic and structural barriers that perpetuate health inequalities. Link workers are typically staff members without professional clinical qualifications who support patients to bridge the gap between services. However, little is currently known about how and why link work interventions might be effective. This realist review attempts to understand the contexts and resultant mechanisms by which link work interventions affect access to community healthcare services.

Methods

The authors completed a systematic search of empirical literature in Embase, CINAHL, Medline, PsychInfo and SocIndex, as well as grey literature and CLUSTER searches. Context, mechanism and outcome (CMO) configurations were generated iteratively in consultation with an expert panel and grouped into theory areas.

Results

Thirty-one eligible manuscripts were identified, resulting in nine CMO configurations within three theory areas. These pertained to adequate time in time-pressured systems; the importance of link workers being embedded across multiple systems; and emotional and practical support for link workers.

Conclusion

Although link work interventions are increasingly utilised across community healthcare settings, the contexts in which they operate vary considerably, triggering a range of mechanisms. The findings suggest that careful matching of resources to patient need and complexity is important. It affords link workers the time to develop relationships with patients, embed themselves in local communities and referring teams, and develop knowledge of local challenges.

Patient or Public Contribution

The team included people with lived experience of mental health conditions and a carer who were involved at all stages of the review.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
了解链接工作干预措施如何、为何以及为谁促进英国社区医疗机构的就医:现实主义评论》。
导言:在英国,获得医疗保健方面的不平等会对人们管理自身健康问题的能力产生深远影响。链接工作干预措施试图克服导致健康不平等现象长期存在的社会经济和结构性障碍。联系工作者通常是没有专业临床资格的工作人员,他们为患者提供支持,弥补服务之间的差距。然而,目前人们对链接工作干预如何以及为何有效知之甚少。这篇现实主义综述试图了解链接工作干预措施影响社区医疗保健服务获取的背景和结果机制:作者对 Embase、CINAHL、Medline、PsychInfo 和 SocIndex 中的实证文献以及灰色文献和 CLUSTER 进行了系统检索。经与专家小组协商,反复生成了背景、机制和结果(CMO)配置,并将其归入理论领域:结果:确定了 31 篇符合条件的稿件,在三个理论领域中产生了 9 个 CMO 配置。这些配置涉及在时间紧迫的系统中提供充足的时间;联系工作者融入多个系统的重要性;以及为联系工作者提供情感和实际支持:尽管在社区医疗机构中越来越多地使用联系工作干预措施,但其运作环境却大不相同,从而引发了一系列机制。研究结果表明,根据患者的需求和复杂程度精心匹配资源非常重要。这使联系工作者有时间与患者建立关系,融入当地社区和转诊团队,并了解当地面临的挑战:患者或公众的贡献:团队中包括有心理健康问题生活经验的人和一名照护者,他们参与了评审的各个阶段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
期刊最新文献
Co-Design of the Structured Personalised Assessment for Reviews After Cancer (SPARC) Intervention Task Shifting, eHealth and Shared Decision-Making—Preference Heterogeneity in the Adult Population for Developments in Outpatient Primary Healthcare Developing a Quality Improvement Framework to Enhance the Health System User Experience for Individuals Living With Type 1 Diabetes: The Reshape T1D Study Feasibility and Applicability of Implementing the Framework for Comprehensive Understanding of Structural Stigma in Mental Healthcare Systems: A Case Example of Nepal Erratum to “What I Wish I Had Known: Examining Parent Accounts of Managing the Health of Their Child With Intellectual Disability”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1