Experiences of social prescribing in the UK: a qualitative systematic review.

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL British Journal of General Practice Pub Date : 2025-02-27 Print Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.3399/BJGP.2025.0179
Nur Hidayati Handayani, Marta Wanat, Stephanie Tierney
{"title":"Experiences of social prescribing in the UK: a qualitative systematic review.","authors":"Nur Hidayati Handayani, Marta Wanat, Stephanie Tierney","doi":"10.3399/BJGP.2025.0179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social prescribing connects patients to resources or activities to meet their non-medical needs. In the UK, it is often implemented in primary care. In the social prescribing pathway, patients are directed to link workers to identify suitable solutions for their needs such as art workshops or welfare benefit guidance. Social prescribing marks a notable transition from traditional medical treatments to more comprehensive strategies focusing on holistic health and wellbeing. Insights from patient experiences can improve the development of social prescribing to better meet their needs. This understanding can aid in improving the delivery and outcomes of social prescribing.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To synthesise qualitative research on the experiences of social prescribing among patients in the UK.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>Qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis for peer-reviewed studies that focused on experiences of users of social prescribing in the UK.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>An exhaustive search was performed in six databases: ASSIA, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Social Sciences Citation Index via Web of Science. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for qualitative research was used for quality assessment and the PRISMA 2020 checklist was used to ensure the report transparency.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Titles and abstracts of 1269 studies were screened. In total, 85 studies were full-text screened, and 19 studies were included in the review. Five analytical themes were developed from these studies: a) searching for hope in times of adversity; b) variability in temporal responsiveness; c) sustained change from a positive response; d) feeling supported and empowered by the social prescribing pathway; and e) misalignment producing no response.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients might experience lasting advantages from social prescribing if it aligns with their needs and expectations. Results highlighted the importance of matching social prescribing referral with patients' readiness to engage. Therefore, it is recommended that healthcare professionals evaluate patient suitability before beginning a social prescribing referral.</p>","PeriodicalId":55320,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of General Practice","volume":" ","pages":"e203-e210"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11849696/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of General Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGP.2025.0179","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Social prescribing connects patients to resources or activities to meet their non-medical needs. In the UK, it is often implemented in primary care. In the social prescribing pathway, patients are directed to link workers to identify suitable solutions for their needs such as art workshops or welfare benefit guidance. Social prescribing marks a notable transition from traditional medical treatments to more comprehensive strategies focusing on holistic health and wellbeing. Insights from patient experiences can improve the development of social prescribing to better meet their needs. This understanding can aid in improving the delivery and outcomes of social prescribing.

Aim: To synthesise qualitative research on the experiences of social prescribing among patients in the UK.

Design and setting: Qualitative systematic review using thematic synthesis for peer-reviewed studies that focused on experiences of users of social prescribing in the UK.

Method: An exhaustive search was performed in six databases: ASSIA, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Social Sciences Citation Index via Web of Science. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool for qualitative research was used for quality assessment and the PRISMA 2020 checklist was used to ensure the report transparency.

Results: Titles and abstracts of 1269 studies were screened. In total, 85 studies were full-text screened, and 19 studies were included in the review. Five analytical themes were developed from these studies: a) searching for hope in times of adversity; b) variability in temporal responsiveness; c) sustained change from a positive response; d) feeling supported and empowered by the social prescribing pathway; and e) misalignment producing no response.

Conclusion: Patients might experience lasting advantages from social prescribing if it aligns with their needs and expectations. Results highlighted the importance of matching social prescribing referral with patients' readiness to engage. Therefore, it is recommended that healthcare professionals evaluate patient suitability before beginning a social prescribing referral.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
英国社会处方的经验:定性系统回顾。
背景:社会处方将患者与满足其非医疗需求的资源或活动联系起来。在英国,它通常在初级保健中实施。在社会处方途径中,指导患者与工作人员联系,以确定适合其需求的解决方案,例如艺术工作坊或福利福利指导。社会处方标志着从传统医学治疗向注重整体健康和福祉的更全面战略的显著转变。从患者经验中获得的见解可以改善社会处方的发展,以更好地满足他们的需求。这种理解有助于改善社会处方的提供和结果。目的:对英国患者的社会处方经验进行综合定性研究。设计和设置:使用专题综合对同行评议研究进行定性系统评价,重点关注英国社会处方使用者的经验。方法:对ASSIA、CINAHL、Embase、MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index 6个数据库进行穷尽检索。定性研究的关键评估技能计划工具用于质量评估,PRISMA 2020检查表用于确保报告的透明度。结果:筛选了1269篇研究的标题和摘要。共有85项研究被全文筛选,19项研究被纳入综述。从这些研究中发展出五个分析主题:a)在逆境中寻找希望;B)时间反应的变异性;C)从积极响应持续变化;D)感觉得到社会处方途径的支持和授权;e)错位产生无响应。结论:如果社会处方符合患者的需求和期望,患者可能会从社会处方中获得持久的好处。结果强调了匹配社会处方转诊与患者准备参与的重要性。因此,建议医疗保健专业人员在开始社会处方转诊之前评估患者的适宜性。
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
British Journal of General Practice
British Journal of General Practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.20%
发文量
681
期刊介绍: The British Journal of General Practice is an international journal publishing research, editorials, debate and analysis, and clinical guidance for family practitioners and primary care researchers worldwide. BJGP began in 1953 as the ‘College of General Practitioners’ Research Newsletter’, with the ‘Journal of the College of General Practitioners’ first appearing in 1960. Following the change in status of the College, the ‘Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners’ was launched in 1967. Three editors later, in 1990, the title was changed to the ‘British Journal of General Practice’. The journal is commonly referred to as the ''BJGP'', and is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Understanding measurement of postural hypotension: a nationwide survey of general practice in England. Evidence-based tests to monitor adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus in primary care: rapid reviews and consensus process. Patients' perceptions on reasons for self-referring to the emergency department shortly before a cancer diagnosis: a qualitative study. Anaemia, ethnicity, and cancer incidence: a retrospective cohort study in primary care. Patterns of diagnostic testing for oesophagogastric cancer-related symptoms in Australian primary care: a retrospective cohort study.
×
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:604180095
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