NIHR open research最新文献

Background: Our patient and public involvement activities were part of a project aiming to develop a master protocol and National Institute for Health and Care research application for the PROTECT trial aiming to assess the effectiveness, implementation, and efficiency of antimicrobial stewardship interventions, to safely reduce unnecessary antibiotic usage by excluding severe bacterial infection in acutely unwell patients.

Methods: Three public involvement sessions were held with representation from young people and parents, people from diverse backgrounds and people with experience of presenting to the emergency department with undifferentiated illness. The teleconference meetings lasted between 60-90 minutes, were recorded, notes were subsequently taken, and findings summarised. The data was collected on September 13, 2023, October 14, 2023 and February 28, 2024.

Results: Working with public involvement contributors and public involvement groups at the protocol development stage provided an opportunity for the public to shape and influence the trial. We were able to establish the feasibility of the trial in the proposed setting and gain insights into how it would be perceived by potential trial participants. Antibiotic resistance was viewed as an urgent problem and research evaluating new technologies was deemed timely and important. The platform design was considered appropriate, time and cost-effective. Deferred and electronic methods of consent were viewed as acceptable if a clear and inclusive explanation is provided.

Conclusions: Having access to public contributors with relevant lived experience was an important resource for the trial team. Identification and recruitment of public contributors via working with existing public involvement groups across the UK enabled the trial team to involve public members with varied life experiences and from diverse backgrounds. This project was a good practice example of how public involvement groups and practitioners across the UK can work together to deliver public involvement that is inclusive of relevant groups.

Background: Codelists are required to extract meaningful information on characteristics and events from routinely collected health data such as electronic health records. Research using routinely collected health data relies on codelists to define study populations and variables, thus, trustworthy codelists are important. Here, we provide a checklist, in the style of commonly used reporting guidelines, to help researchers adhere to best practice in codelist development and sharing.

Methods: Based on a literature search and a workshop with researchers experienced in the use of routinely collected health data, we created a set of recommendations that are 1. broadly applicable to different datasets, research questions, and methods of codelist creation; 2. easy to follow, implement and document by an individual researcher, and 3. fit within a step-by-step process. We then formatted these recommendations into a checklist.

Results: We have created a 10-step checklist, comprising 28 items, with accompanying guidance on each step. The checklist advises on which metadata to provide, how to define a clinical concept, how to identify and evaluate existing codelists, how to create new codelists, and how to review, check, finalise, and publish a created codelist.

Conclusions: Use of the checklist can reassure researchers that best practice was followed during the development of their codelists, increasing trust in research that relies on these codelists and facilitating wider re-use and adaptation by other researchers.

Background: General practice is facing an unprecedented challenge in managing the consequences of the pandemic. In the midst of a policy drive to balance remote and in-person service provision, substantial workload pressures remain, together with increasing prevalence of long-term conditions, and declining staff numbers and morale. To address these challenges, some practices in the UK have been delivering video and hybrid group consultations (VHGCs) providing clinical care to multiple patients at the same time. Despite positive initial findings and enthusiasm, there are still gaps in our understanding of the influence VHGCs have on patient experience, healthcare utilisation, quality, safety, equity and affordability.

Objectives: To generate an in-depth understanding of VHGCs for chronic conditions in general practice, surface assumptions and sociotechnical dynamics, inform practice and extend theorisation.

Methods: Mixed-methods, multi-site research study using co-design and participatory methods, from qualitative, quantitative and cost-related perspectives. WP1 includes a national, cross-sectional survey on VHGC provision across the UK. In WP2 we will engage patients and general practice staff in co-design workshops to develop VHGC models with emphasis on digital inclusion and equity. In WP3 we will carry out a mixed-methods process evaluation in up to 10 GP practices across England (5 sites already running VHGCs and 5 comparison sites). Qualitative methods will include interviews, focus groups and ethnographic observation to examine the experiences of patients, carers, clinical and non-clinical NHS staff, commissioners and policy-makers. Quantitative methods will examine the impact of VHGCs on healthcare utilisation in primary and secondary care, patient satisfaction, engagement and activation. We will also assess value for money of group and individual care models from a health economics perspective.

Conclusions: We aim to develop transferable learning on sociotechnical change in healthcare delivery, using VHGCs as an exemplar of technology-supported innovation. Findings will also inform the design of a future study.

Introduction: Parkinson's disease (PD) is the most common neurodegenerative movement disorder and is associated with significant disability. The prevalence is rising, and studies have reported potential sex and race disparities in patient outcomes. Data about the demographic trends in PD-related mortality in the United States (US) is limited. This descriptive study aimed to report the national demographic trends in PD-related mortality over a 20-year period.

Methods: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiological Research (CDC-WONDER) Underlying Cause of Death database from January 1999 to December 2020 was used to determine the PD-related age adjusted mortality rate (AAMR) stratified by age, sex, ethnicity and geographic area, with the 1999 deaths as the reference group. Annual percentage change (APC) for AAMR was then calculated using Joinpoint regression.

Results: There were 515,884 PD-related deaths in the study period. The AAMR increased from 5.3 per 100,000 population in 1999 to 9.8 per 100,000 in 2020. Males had consistently higher AAMR than females and white race had consistently higher overall AAMR (7.6 per 100,000), followed by American Indians/Alaska Natives (4.4 per 100,000), Asians/Pacific Islanders (4.1 per 100,000) and Black/African Americans (3.4 per 100,000). The Midwest had the highest AAMR followed by West, South and Northeast. Utah, Idaho and Minnesota had the highest state-level AAMR.

Conclusions: This study identified significant age, sex, race and geographic disparities in PD-related mortality in the US. Older age, male sex, white race and Midwest locality were associated with the highest AAMR.

Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening/surveillance is implemented widely. Those in AAA-surveillance are at high-risk of cardiovascular-events. We developed an intervention, called CRISP, using intervention-mapping, to reduce cardiovascular-risk in AAA-surveillance. This study tested the CRISP intervention in routine clinical-care.

Methods: The CRISP intervention, consisting of a nurse-led cardiovascular risk assessment and subsequent lifestyle change support using a self-care workbook and low-intensity nurse input was delivered in two screening/surveillance programmes. Those consenting to take part were followed-up with cardiovascular-assessments. Fidelity of intervention-delivery was assessed quantitatively/qualitatively.

Results: 40 men (mean age 75 ± 7 years) took part over four months and followed-up for a minimum six months. A sub-group of 25 patients and nine Health Care Professionals (HCPs) were interviewed. The median number of risk-factors that patients chose to focus on was two (range 0 to 4), with physical activity (n=17) being the most popular. Participants who had a 'red light' risk factor for stress, low mood, smoking or alcohol intake were offered a referral to appropriate services. Two were offered referral to mental-health services and took it up, three declined referrals to smoking or alcohol support services. The fidelity of intervention-delivery (a score intervention components delivered to each patient based on a score from 0 to 5, with 5 being highest delivery fidelity) was generally low. The highest mean score (on a 0-5 scale) for the nurse assessment was 1.5 for engaging the participant, lowest 0.5 for exploring the importance for selected lifestyle behaviours. In qualitative interviews, the intervention was liked by patients/HCPs. Based on qualitative interviews and observations, the low fidelity of intervention-delivery was due to intervention-training not being detailed.

Conclusions: CRISP can be delivered in AAA-surveillance, but fidelity of delivery is low. The intervention and its training need to be refined/tested before wider implementation.

Registration: ISRCTN9399399518/11/20).

Background: There has been increasing emphasis towards adopting strengths-based practice (SBP) within adult social care in England. Whilst there is agreement that SBP is the right approach to discharge adult social care duties, there is limited evidence regarding the implementation of SBP. This paper presents findings from the evaluation of the implementation of SBP in fourteen local authorities in one region in England.

Methods: We employed a mixed methods research design, drawing on data from a scoping review, 36 interviews with practice leaders and two surveys, one with wider adult social care staff and the other, with external organisations like independent care providers and community and voluntary organisations. Our data collection and analysis were guided by two well established implementation theories: the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Normalisation Process Theory (NPT). Interviews were analysed deductively, and surveys were analysed descriptively.

Results: Local authorities are at different stages in their implementation journey. The Care Act 2014 and support for SBP demonstrated by key professional groups were seen as major drivers for implementing SBP. Whilst SBP resonated with the professional principles of social workers and occupational therapists, staff did not always have the confidence and skills to adapt to SBP. Changing paperwork and recording systems, providing training opportunities to develop staff competencies, establishing new care pathways, genuine co-production, and senior management buy-in were key enablers supporting implementation.

Conclusions: To successfully implement SBP, a whole system approach that meaningfully collaborates with key professionals across sectors is essential. When implemented well, SBP has the potential to empower individuals by focusing on what matters to them.

Background: Hypertension is the single leading risk factor for premature death in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Prevalence is high, but awareness, treatment, and control are low. Community-centred interventions show promise for effective hypertension management, but embedding such interventions sustainably requires a good understanding of the wider context within which they are being introduced. This study aims to conduct a systematic health system assessment exploring the micro (patients/carers), meso (health care workers and facilities), and macro (broader system) contexts in rural Gambia and Kenya.

Methods: This study will utilise various qualitative approaches. We will conduct (i) focus group discussions with people living with hypertensive to map a 'typical' patient journey through health systems, and (ii) in-depth interviews with patients and family carers, health care workers, decision-makers, and NCD partners to explore their experiences of managing hypertension and assess the capacity and readiness of the health systems to strengthen hypertension management. We will also review national guidelines and policy documents to map the organisation of services and guidance on hypertension management. We will use thematic analysis to analyse data, guided by the cumulative complexity model, and theories of organisational readiness and dissemination of innovations.

Expected findings: This study will describe the current context for the management of hypertension from the perspective of those involved in seeking (patients), delivering (health care workers) and overseeing (decision-makers) health services in rural Gambia and Kenya. It will juxtapose what should be happening according to health system guidance and what is happening in practice, drawing on the experiences of study participants. It will outline the various barriers to and facilitators of hypertension management, as perceived by patients, providers, and decision-makers, and the conditions that would need to be in place for effective and sustainable implementation of a community-centred intervention to improve the management of hypertension in rural settings.

Background: People with multiple long-term conditions are more likely to have poorer health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Yoga has the potential to improve HRQOL. Gentle Years Yoga© (GYY) is a chair-based yoga programme for older adults. We investigated the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the GYY programme in older adults with multiple long-term conditions.

Methods: In this pragmatic, multi-site, open, randomised controlled trial, we recruited adults aged ≥65 years with ≥2 long-term conditions from 15 primary care practices in England and Wales. Participants were randomly assigned to usual care control or a 12-week, group-based, GYY programme delivered face-to-face or online by qualified yoga teachers. The primary outcome was HRQOL (EQ-5D-5L) over 12 months. Secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression, falls, loneliness, healthcare resource use, and adverse events.

Results: Between October 2019 and October 2021, 454 participants were randomised between the intervention (n=240) and control (n=214) groups. Seven GYY courses were delivered face-to-face and 12 courses were delivered online. The mean number of classes attended among all intervention participants was nine (SD 4, median 10). In our intention-to-treat analysis (n=422), there was no statistically significant difference between trial groups in the primary outcome of HRQOL (adjusted difference in mean EQ-5D-5L = 0.020 [favouring intervention]; 95% CI -0.006 to 0.045, p=0.14). There were also no statistically significant differences in key secondary outcomes. No serious, related adverse events were reported. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £4,546 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and the intervention had a 79% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY. The intervention was acceptable to most participants and perceived as useful by some.

Conclusions: The offer of a 12-week chair-based yoga programme in addition to usual care did not improve HRQOL in older adults with multiple long-term conditions. However, the intervention was safe, acceptable, and probably cost-effective.

Background: This protocol describes a realist review exploring the problem of "missingness" in healthcare, defined as the repeated tendency not to take up offers of care that has a negative impact on the person and their life chances. More specifically, the review looks at the phenomenon of patients missing multiple appointments in primary care in the UK - at the causal factors that influence how patients come to be "missing" in this way, and what interventions might support uptake and "presence" in healthcare. Background research informing this project suggests that a high rate of missed appointments predicted high premature death rates, and patients were more likely to have multiple long-term health conditions and experience significant socioeconomic disadvantage. Most research in this field focuses on population- or service-level characteristics of patients who miss appointments, often making no distinction between causes of single missed appointments and of multiple missed appointments. There have therefore been no interventions for 'missingness', accounting for the complex life circumstances or common mechanisms that cause people to repeatedly miss appointments.

Methods: We use a realist review approach to explore what causes missingness - and what might prevent or address it - for whom, and in what circumstances. The review uses an iterative approach of database searching, citation-tracking and sourcing grey literature, with selected articles providing insight into the causal dynamics underpinning missed appointments and the interventions designed to address them.

Discussion: The findings of this review will be combined with the findings of a qualitative empirical study and the contributions of a Stakeholder Advisory Group (STAG) to inform the development of a programme theory that seeks to explain how missingness occurs, whom it affects and under what circumstances. This will be used to develop a complex intervention to address multiple missed appointments in primary care.

Prospero registration: CRD42022346006.

Introduction: Interventions related to the perpetration of Domestic Violence and Abuse (DVA) have gained traction over the past several years, in response to dissatisfaction by victims, an inadequate response from the criminal justice system, increased demand on police time and a lack of rehabilitative responses to the perpetration of domestic abuse. The CARA model is a conditional diversionary caution, offered by police for first time offenders of 'standard' or 'medium risk' domestic abuse, that engages perpetrators in awareness raising workshops and signposts them onto further services. Although quasi-experimental studies have indicated that CARA showed promise at reducing reoffending, the CARA model has yet to be evaluated nationally and there is no qualitative evidence related to understanding or learning about the lived experience of perpetrators and victims as they engage with the intervention.

Methods: Using a concurrent pragmatic mixed methods design model we will undertake a national evaluation of CARA by triangulating quantitative data from up to nine police forces, and routine data from service providers, with qualitative data from workshop participants, victims and professional stakeholders to: (1) understand the long-term impact of CARA implementation on DVA reoffending and engagement with services and (2) explore perceptions and experiences of both delivery and receipt of CARA. We will use qualitative methodologies that draw on interpretivist and phenomenological perspectives, as well as quantitative methodologies using interrupted time series models, Poisson regression models, Geo mapping and a cost benefits analysis.

Ethics and dissemination: Where currently the CARA model is being introduced as a national option for standard risk first-time offending, we will engage with policymakers and academics nationally in the live debate on its effectiveness and suitability during its roll-out. Ethical approval was approved by the University of Southampton on the 1 ^st June 2022 (Ref: ERGO ID: 71818.A1).