Search

Abstract Background Despite increased awareness of the significant health and healthcare inequalities experienced by minoritised groups, limited research considers the interaction of multiple domains of social disadvantage. This review therefore sought to explore how LGBTQ + adults’ experiences of homelessness, substance use, and criminal justice involvement impact upon their access to and use of health and social care services in the UK and Ireland. Methods A qualitative scoping review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR framework. Electronic database and web searches identified 26 eligible peer-reviewed and grey literature documents published between 2010–2024. The data were charted, coded, and knowledge gaps identified. Results Data were coded thematically, clustered around the concept of normativity. Descriptive qualitative techniques were applied to explore how this was enacted and experienced. Synthesis across the literature identified experiences of discrimination and anticipated stigma that acted as barriers to accessing and engaging with services. Conclusions Structural normativity and the privilege afforded to hegemonic population groups impacted upon this population’s access to and use of services. The review adds depth and context to questions around the lack of visibility or engagement in services by LGBTQ + people with experience of disadvantage, and contributes to the wider literature on improving service access for marginalised, underserved, or disadvantaged communities.

Abstract Background Alcohol-related mortality and morbidity increased during the COVID-19 pandemic in England, with people from lower-socioeconomic groups disproportionately affected. The North East and North Cumbria (NENC) region has high levels of deprivation and the highest rates of alcohol-related harm in England. Consequently, there is an urgent need for the implementation of evidence-based preventative approaches such as identifying people at risk of alcohol harm and providing them with appropriate support. Non-alcohol specialist secondary care clinicians could play a key role in delivering these interventions, but current implementation remains limited. In this study we aimed to explore current practices and challenges around identifying, supporting, and signposting patients with Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) in secondary care hospitals in the NENC through the accounts of staff in the post COVID-19 context. Methods Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 non-alcohol specialist staff (10 doctors, 20 nurses) in eight secondary care hospitals across the NENC between June and October 2021. Data were analysed inductively and deductively to identify key codes and themes, with Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) then used to structure the findings. Results Findings were grouped using the NPT domains ‘implementation contexts’ and ‘implementation mechanisms’. The following implementation contexts were identified as key factors limiting the implementation of alcohol prevention work: poverty which has been exacerbated by COVID-19 and the prioritisation of acute presentations (negotiating capacity); structural stigma (strategic intentions); and relational stigma (reframing organisational logics). Implementation mechanisms identified as barriers were: workforce knowledge and skills (cognitive participation); the perception that other departments and roles were better placed to deliver this preventative work than their own (collective action); and the perceived futility and negative feedback cycle (reflexive monitoring). Conclusions COVID-19, has generated additional challenges to identifying, supporting, and signposting patients with AUD in secondary care hospitals in the NENC. Our interpretation suggests that implementation contexts, in particular structural stigma and growing economic disparity, are the greatest barriers to implementation of evidence-based care in this area. Thus, while some implementation mechanisms can be addressed at a local policy and practice level via improved training and support, system-wide action is needed to enable sustained delivery of preventative alcohol work in these settings.

Abstract Background Innovation for reforming health and social care is high on the policy agenda in the United Kingdom in response to the growing needs of an ageing population. However, information about new innovations of care being implemented is sparse. Methods We mapped innovations for people in later life in two regions, North East England and South East Scotland. Data collection included discussions with stakeholders (n = 51), semi-structured interviews (n = 14) and website searches that focused on technology, evaluation and health inequalities. We analysed qualitative data using framework and thematic analyses. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Results One hundred eleven innovations were identified across the two regions. Interviewees reported a wide range of technologies that had been rapidly introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic and many remained in use. Digital exclusion of certain groups of older people was an ongoing concern. Innovations fell into two groups; system-level ones that aimed to alleviate systems pressures such as preventing hospital (re)admissions, and patient-level ones which sought to enhance health and wellbeing directly. Interviewees were aware of the importance of health inequalities but lacked data to monitor the impact of innovations on these, and evaluation was challenging due to lack of time, training, and support. Quantitative findings revealed that two thirds of innovations (n = 74, 67%) primarily focused on the system level, whilst a third (n = 37, 33%) primarily focused on the patient-level. Overall, over half (n = 65, 59%) of innovations involved technologies although relatively few (n = 12, 11%) utilised advanced technologies. Very few (n = 16, 14%) focused on reducing health inequalities, and only a minority of innovations (n = 43, 39%) had undergone evaluation (most of which were conducted by the service providers themselves). Conclusions We found a wide range of innovative care services being developed for people in later life, yet alignment with key policy priorities, such as addressing health inequalities, was limited. There was a strong focus on technology, with little consideration for the potential to widen the health inequality gap. The absence of robust evaluation was also a concern as most innovations were implemented without support to monitor effectiveness and/or without plans for sustainability and spread.

Abstract Background Opioid use is a major public health concern across the globe. Opioid use and subsequent access to care is often shaped by co-occurring issues faced by people using opioids, such as deprivation, mental ill-health, and other forms of substance use. We investigated the role of social deprivation and comorbid mental health diagnoses in predicting re-engagement with substance use services or contact with crisis and inpatient services for individuals with opioid use disorder in secondary mental health care in inner-city London. Methods We conducted a prospective cohort study which followed individuals diagnosed with a first episode of opioid use disorder who accessed substance use services between September 2015 and May 2020 for up to 12 months, using anonymised electronic health records. We employed negative binominal regression and Cox proportional survival analyses to assess associations between exposures and outcomes. Results Comorbid mental health diagnoses were associated with higher contact rates with crisis/inpatient services among people with opioid use disorder: incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were 3.91 (1.74–9.14) for non-opioid substance use comorbidity, 8.92 (1.81–64.4) for a single comorbid mental health diagnosis, and 15.9 (5.89–47.5) for multiple comorbid mental health diagnoses. Social deprivation was not associated with contact rates with crisis/inpatient services within this sample. Similar patterns were found with time to first crisis/inpatient contact. Social deprivation and comorbid mental health diagnoses were not associated with re-engagement with substance use services. Conclusion Comorbid substance and mental health difficulties amongst people with an opioid use disorder led to earlier and more frequent contact with crisis/inpatient mental health services during the first 12 months of follow up. Given the common co-occurrence of mental health and substance use disorders among those who use opioids, a better understanding of their wider needs (such as social, financial and other non-medical concerns) will ensure they are supported in their treatment journeys.

Objectives To examine the effectiveness of shared medical appointments (SMAs) compared with one-to-one appointments in primary care for improving health outcomes and reducing demand on healthcare services by people with one or more long-term conditions (LTCs).Design A systematic review of the published literature.Data sources Six databases, including MEDLINE and Web of Science, were searched 2013–2023. Relevant pre-2013 trials identified by forward and backward citation searches of the included trials were included.Eligibility criteria Randomised controlled trials of SMAs delivered in a primary care setting involving adults over 18 years with one or more LTCs. Studies were excluded if the SMA did not include one-to-one patient-clinician time. All countries were eligible for inclusion.Data extraction and synthesis Data were extracted and outcomes narratively synthesised, meta-analysis was undertaken where possible.Results Twenty-nine unique trials were included. SMA models varied in terms of components, mode of delivery and target population. Most trials recruited patients with a single LTC, most commonly diabetes (n=16). There was substantial heterogeneity in outcome measures. Meta-analysis showed that participants in SMA groups had lower diastolic blood pressure than those in usual care (d=−0.086, 95% CI=−0.16 to –0.02, n=10) (p=0.014). No statistically significant differences were found across other outcomes. Compared with usual care, SMAs had no significant effect on healthcare service use. For example, no difference between SMAs and usual care was found for admissions to emergency departments at follow-up (d=−0.094, 95% CI=−0.27 to 0.08, n=6, p=0.289).Conclusions There was a little difference in the effectiveness of SMAs compared with usual care in terms of health outcomes or healthcare service use in the short-term (range 12 weeks to 24 months). To strengthen the evidence base, future studies should include a wider array of LTCs, standardised outcome measures and more details on SMA components to help inform economic evaluation.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020173084.

Objectives Lung cancer continues to be the most common cause of cancer-related death and the leading cause of morbidity and burden of disease across Australia. There is an ongoing need to identify and reduce unwarranted clinical variation that may contribute to these poor outcomes for patients with lung cancer. An Australian national strategy acknowledges clinical quality outcome data as a critical component of a continuously improving healthcare system but there is a need to ensure clinical quality indicators adequately measure evidence-based contemporary care, including novel and emerging treatments. This study aimed to develop a suite of lung cancer-specific, evidence-based, clinically acceptable quality indicators to measure quality of care and outcomes, and an associated comparative feedback dashboard to provide performance data to clinicians and hospital administrators.Design A multistage modified Delphi process was undertaken with a Clinical Advisory Group of multidisciplinary lung cancer specialists, with patient representation, to update and prioritise potential indicators of lung cancer care derived from a targeted review of published literature and reports from national and international lung cancer quality registries. Quality indicators were piloted and evaluated with multidisciplinary teams in a retrospective observational cohort study using clinical audit data from the Embedding Research (and Evidence) in Cancer Healthcare Program, a prospective clinical cohort of over 2000 patients with lung cancer diagnosed from May 2016 to October 2021.Setting and participants Six tertiary specialist cancer centres in metropolitan and regional New South Wales, Australia.Results From an initial 37 potential quality indicators, a final set of 10 indicators spanning diagnostic, treatment, quality of life and survival domains was agreed.Conclusions These indicators build on and update previously available measures of lung cancer care and outcomes in use by national and international lung cancer clinical quality registries which, to our knowledge, have not been recently updated to reflect the changing lung cancer treatment paradigm.

Abstract Background Shared medical appointments (SMAs) or group consultations have been promoted in primary care to improve workload pressures, resource-use efficiency and patient self-management of long-term conditions (LTCs). However, few studies have explored stakeholders’ perspectives of this novel care delivery model in the English NHS context, particularly patients’ views and experiences of SMAs. Method Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the perspectives of stakeholders (21 patients, 17 primary care staff, 2 commissioners and 2 SMA training providers) with and without SMA experience from a range of geographical and socio-economic backgrounds in the North East and North Cumbrian region of England. Thematic analysis was conducted to examine perceptions around impact on patient care and outcomes and barriers and facilitators to implementation. Results Three main themes were identified: ‘Value of sharing’, ‘Appropriateness of group setting’, ‘Implementation processes’. Patients experiences and perceptions of SMAs were largely positive yet several reported reservations about sharing personal information, particularly in close-knit communities where the risk of breaching confidentiality was perceived to be greater. SMAs were considered by patients and staff to be inappropriate for certain personal conditions or for some patient groups. Staff reported difficulties engaging sufficient numbers of patients to make them viable and having the resources to plan and set them up in practice. Whilst patients and staff anticipated that SMAs could deliver high quality care more efficiently than 1:1 appointments, none of the practices had evaluated the impact SMAs had on patient health outcomes or staff time. Conclusion Stakeholder experiences of SMA use in English primary care are largely similar to those reported in other countries. However, several important cultural barriers were identified in this setting. Further work is needed to better understand how patient and staff perceptions, experiences and engagement with SMAs change with regular use over time. Concerns regarding staff capacity, additional resource requirements and numbers of eligible patients per practice suggest SMAs may only be feasible in some smaller practices if facilitated by primary care networks. Further mixed-method evaluations of SMAs are needed to inform the evidence base regarding the effectiveness, efficiency and feasibility of SMAs long-term and subsequently their wider roll-out in English primary care.

While nest usurpation and subsequent incubation of eggs and even brooding of chicks from other species has been reported for Common Terns (Sterna hirundo), such behavior is considered rare. We report an observation of a Common Tern pair usurping the Least Tern (Sternula antillarum) nest and brooding the Least Tern chicks. While the Least Tern pair attempted to provide care for the chicks, the Common Terns displayed aggressive behavior and defended the nest. Though both species attempted to feed the chicks, no feeding events were observed due to harassment from the other species. Neither pair was observed nesting prior to or following this event, and all chicks are believed to have been lost to predation. We discuss the possible scenarios leading to the observed usurpation event, the possibility that usurpations are more common than previously believed, and the need for different monitoring methods to elucidate the causes of usurpations.

Objectives: To examine the association between educational level and attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare using population-based surveys of adults in England, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden; and to compare attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare between these four countries.Methods: Cross-sectional surveys were conducted amongst adults in the general population in England (n = 3,499), the Netherlands (n = 2,173), Norway (n = 1,208), and Sweden (n = 3,000). Logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations between attitudes towards alcohol conversations in healthcare and educational level, key demographic variables, alcohol consumption, and country of residence.Results: In all four countries, low educational level (p < 0.001) and male gender (p < 0.001) were associated with holding negative attitudes towards discussing alcohol in healthcare. Risky drinkers had more negative attitudes than low risky drinkers towards discussing alcohol in healthcare (p < 0.001) in all countries except England (p = 0.48), and also reported low levels of perceived honesty and confidence in healthcare (p < 0.001).Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of considering patients’ socio-economic status when developing and implementing alcohol prevention interventions in healthcare.

Researchers and practitioners recognise the importance of context when implementing healthcare interventions, but the influence of wider environment is rarely mapped. This paper identifies the country and policy-related factors potentially explaining the country differences in outcomes of an intervention focused on improving detection and management of heavy alcohol use in primary care in Colombia, Mexico and Peru. Qualitative data obtained through interviews, logbooks and document analysis are used to explain quantitative data on number of alcohol screenings and screening providers in each of the countries. Existing alcohol screening standards in Mexico, and policy prioritisation of primary care and consideration of alcohol as a public health issue in Colombia and Mexico positively contributed to the outcome, while the COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact. In Peru, the context was unsupportive due to a combination of: political instability amongst regional health authorities; lack of focus on strengthening primary care due to the expansion of community mental health centres; alcohol considered as an addiction rather than a public health issue; and the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare. We found that wider environment-related factors interacted with the intervention implemented and can help explain country differences in outcomes.

Background Effective interventions exist for heavy drinking and depression but to date there has been limited translation into routine practice in global health systems. This evidence-to-practice gap is particularly evident in low- and middle-income countries. The international SCALA project (Scale-up of Prevention and Management of Alcohol Use Disorders and Comorbid Depression in Latin America) sought to test the impact of multilevel implementation strategies on rates of primary health care-based measurement of alcohol consumption and identification of depression in Colombia, Mexico, and Peru. Objective To describe the process of development and cultural adaptation of the clinical intervention and training package. Methods We drew on Barrero and Castro’s four-stage cultural adaption model: 1) information gathering, 2) preliminary adaption, 3) preliminary adaption tests, and 4) adaption refinement. The Tailored Implementation in Chronic Diseases checklist helped us identify potential factors that could affect implementation, with local stakeholder groups established to support the tailoring process, as per the Institute for Healthcare Improvement’s Going to Scale Framework. Results In Stage 1, international best practice guidelines for preventing heavy drinking and depression, and intelligence on the local implementation context, were synthesised to provide an outline clinical intervention and training package. In Stage 2, feedback was gathered from local stakeholders and materials refined accordingly. These materials were piloted with local trainers in Stage 3, leading to further refinements including developing additional tools to support delivery in busy primary care settings. Stage 4 comprised further adaptions in response to real-world implementation, a period that coincided with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, including translating the intervention and training package for online delivery, and higher priority for depression screening in the clinical pathway. Conclusion Our experience highlights the importance of meaningful engagement with local communities, alongside the need for continuous tailoring and adaptation, and collaborative decision-making.

Background Initial results from the SCALA study demonstrated that training primary health care providers is an effective implementation strategy to increase alcohol screening in Colombia, Mexico and Peru, but did not show evidence of superior performance for the standard compared to the shorter training arm. This paper elaborates on those outcomes by examining the relationship of training-related process evaluation indicators with the alcohol screening practice. Methods A mix of convergent and exploratory mixed-methods design was employed. Data sources included training documentation, post-training questionnaires, observation forms, self-report forms and interviews. Available quantitative data were compared on outcome measure – providers’ alcohol screening. Results Training reach was high: three hundred fifty-two providers (72.3% of all eligible) participated in one or more training or booster sessions. Country differences in session length reflected adaptation to previous topic knowledge and experience of the providers. Overall, 49% of attendees conducted alcohol screening in practice. A higher dose received was positively associated with screening, but there was no difference between standard and short training arms. Although the training sessions were well received by participants, satisfaction with training and perceived utility for practice were not associated with screening. Profession, but not age or gender, was associated with screening: in Colombia and Mexico, doctors and psychologists were more likely to screen (although the latter represented only a small proportion of the sample) and in Peru, only psychologists. Conclusions The SCALA training programme was well received by the participants and led to half of the participating providers conducting alcohol screening in their primary health care practice. The dose received and the professional role were the key factors associated with conducting the alcohol screening in practice. Plain Language Summary: Primary health care providers can play an important role in detecting heavy drinkers among their consulting patients, and training can be an effective implementation strategy to increase alcohol screening and detection. Existing training literature predominantly focuses on evaluating trainings in high-income countries, or evaluating their effectiveness rather than implementation. As part of SCALA (Scale-up of Prevention and Management of Alcohol Use Disorders in Latin America) study, we evaluated training as implementation strategy to increase alcohol screening in primary health care in a middle-income context. Overall, 72.3% of eligible providers attended the training and 49% of training attendees conducted alcohol screening in practice after attending the training. Our process evaluation suggests that simple intervention with sufficient time to practice, adapted to limited provider availability, is optimal to balance training feasibility and effectiveness; that booster sessions are especially important in context with lower organizational or structural support; and that ongoing training refinement during the implementation period is necessary.

Objective To assess the immediate impact of the introduction of minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland on alcohol consumption and whether the impact differed by sex, level of alcohol consumption, age, social grade and level of residential deprivation of respondents.Design Primary controlled interrupted time series analysis and secondary before-and-after analysis of the impact of introducing MUP in Scotland using alcohol consumption data for England as control.Setting Data from Kantar Worldpanel’s Alcovision survey, a continuous retrospective online timeline follow-back diary survey of the previous week’s alcohol consumption.Participants 53 347 women and 53 143 men.Interventions Introduction of a minimum price of 50 pence per UK unit (6.25 pence/g) for the sale of alcohol in Scotland on 1 May 2018.Main outcome measures Number of grams of alcohol consumed per week, in total, in off-trade (eg, at home) and in on-trade (eg, in pubs, restaurants).Results Primary interrupted time series analyses found that the introduction of MUP was associated with a drop in reported weekly total alcohol consumption of 5.94 g (95% CI 1.29 to 10.60), a drop in off-trade consumption of 3.27 g (95% CI −0.01 to 6.56) and a drop in on-trade consumption of 2.67 g (95% CI −1.48 to 6.82). Associated reductions were larger for women than for men and were greater among heavier drinkers than for lighter drinkers, except for the 5% of heaviest drinking men for whom an associated increase in consumption was found. Secondary before-and-after analyses found that reductions in consumption were greater among older respondents and those living in less deprived areas. The introduction of MUP was not associated with a reduction in consumption among younger men and men living in more deprived areas.Conclusions Greater policy attention needs to be addressed to the heaviest drinking men, to younger men and to men who live in more deprived areas.

Primary care databases extract and combine routine data from the electronic patient records of various participating practices on a regular basis. These databases can be used for innovative and relevant addiction research, but such use requires a thorough understanding of how data were originally collected and how they need to be processed and statistically analysed to produce sound scientific evidence. The aims of this paper are therefore to (1) make a case for why primary care databases should be considered more frequently for addiction research; (2) provide an overview of how primary care databases are constructed; (3) highlight important methodological and statistical strengths and weaknesses of using primary care databases for research; and (4) give practical advice about how a researcher can get access to databases. Three major primary care databases from the UK serve as examples: Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), The Health Improvement Network (THIN), and QResearch.

This paper considers the ethical and practical issues of recruiting for, and administering a quantitative survey with marginalised populations. These issues were identified through a focus group discussion, which consolidated and expanded upon informal conversations held previously by five researchers about their experiences of conducting a face-to-face survey (using predominantly quantitative questions) with people who used amphetamine type substances in North East England, UK. Inductive and deductive thematic analysis of the focus group discussion led to the generation of three key themes: researcher positionality, emotions, and role dilemmas; study design; and ethics in practice. This paper therefore aims to extend literature which explores ethical and practical issues involved in studies with marginalised populations. It makes methodological suggestions for how work across a range of disciplines could make face-to-face survey research, and future studies with marginalised populations, more inclusive for both participants and researchers.