Search

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic had wide-ranging negative impacts on mental health. The pandemic also placed extraordinary strain on frontline workers who were required to continue working and putting themselves at risk to provide essential services at a time when their normal support mechanisms may not have been available. This paper presents an evaluation of the Time for You service, a rapidly developed and implemented intervention aimed at providing frontline workers with quick access to flexible online mental health support. Time for You provided service users with three service options: self-guided online cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) resources; guided engagement with online CBT resources; 1-1 psychological therapy with trainee sport and exercise psychologists and trainee health psychologists. A process evaluation informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research considered service fidelity, adaptations, perceived impact, reach, barriers, and facilitators. Interviews with project managers (n = 5), delivery staff (n = 10), and service users (n = 14) explored perceptions of the service implementation and outcomes, supported by data regarding engagement with the online CBT platform (n = 217). Findings indicated that service users valued the flexibility of the service and the speed with which they were able to access support. The support offered by Trainee Psychologists was perceived to be of high quality, and the service was perceived by service users to have improved mental health and wellbeing. The rapid implementation contributed to issues regarding appropriate service user screening that led to trainee psychologists being unable to provide the service users with the support they needed as the presenting issues were outside of trainees' competencies. Overall, the findings suggest that interventions offering flexible, online psychological support to frontline workers can be an effective model for future interventions. Trainee psychologists are also able to play an important role in delivering such services when clear screening processes are in place.

Background: Prompt, effective cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) increases survival in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. However, CPR is often not provided, even by people with training. Low confidence, perceptions of risks and high emotion can prevent initiation of CPR. Behaviour-change techniques may be helpful in increasing CPR rates. Aim: To pilot a text-message behavioural intervention designed to increase intentions to initiate CPR, explore participant responses and pilot methods for future randomised controlled trial of effectiveness. Methods: A ‘before and after’ pilot study plus qualitative interviews was undertaken. Participants were lay-people who had undertaken CPR training in previous 2 years.Participants were sent an intervention, comprising 35 text-messages containing 14 behaviour-change techniques, to their mobile phone over 4–6 weeks.Primary outcome: intentions to initiate CPR assessed in response to 4 different scenarios.Secondary outcomes: theory-based determinants of intention (attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and self-efficacy) and self-rated competence. Results: 20 participants (6 female, 14 male), aged 20–84 provided baseline data. 17 received the full suite of 35 text messages.15 provided follow-up data. Intentions to perform CPR in scenarios where CPR was indicated were high at baseline and increased (18.1 ± 3.2–19.5 ± 1.8/21) after the intervention, as did self-efficacy and self-rated competency. Self-efficacy, attitudes, perceived behavioural control and subjective norms were positively correlated with intentions. Qualitative data suggest the intervention was perceived as useful. Additional options for delivery format and pace were suggested. Conclusions: Pilot-testing suggests a text-message intervention delivered after CPR training is acceptable and may be helpful in increasing/maintaining intentions to perform CPR.

Abstract Background Men, particularly those living in disadvantaged areas, are less likely to participate in weight management programmes than women despite similar levels of excess weight. Little is known about how best to recruit men to weight management interventions. This paper describes patient and public involvement in pre-trial decisions relevant to recruitment and aims to report on recruitment to the subsequent men-only weight management feasibility trial, including the: i) acceptability and feasibility of recruitment; and ii) baseline sample characteristics by recruitment strategy. Methods Men with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and/or waist circumference ≥ 40 in. were recruited to the feasibility trial via two strategies; community outreach (venue information stands and word of mouth) and GP letters, targeting disadvantaged areas. Recruitment activities (e.g. letters sent, researcher venue hours) were recorded systematically, and baseline characteristics questionnaire data collated. Qualitative interviews (n = 50) were conducted three months post-recruitment. Analyses and reporting followed a complementary mixed methods approach. Results 105 men were recruited within four months (community n = 60, GP letter n = 45). Community outreach took 2.3 recruiter hours per participant and GP letters had an opt-in rate of 10.2% (n = 90/879). More men were interested than could be accommodated. Most participants (60%) lived in more disadvantaged areas. Compared to community outreach, men recruited via GP letters were older (mean = 57 vs 48 years); more likely to report an obesity-related co-morbidity (87% vs 44%); and less educated (no formal qualifications, 32% vs 10%, degree educated 11% vs 41%). Recruitment strategies were acceptable, a sensitive approach and trusting relationships with recruiters valued, and the ‘catchy’ study name drew attention. Conclusions Targeted community outreach and GP letters were acceptable strategies that successfully recruited participants to a men-only weight management feasibility trial. Both strategies engaged men from disadvantaged areas, a typically underserved population. Using two recruitment strategies produced samples with different health risk profiles, which could add value to research where either primary or secondary prevention is of interest. Further work is required to examine how these strategies could be implemented and sustained in practice. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03040518 , 2nd February 2017.

Abstract Background Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT) has been shown to be effective for pelvic organ prolapse in women, but its implementation in routine practice is challenging due to lack of adequate specialist staff. It is important to know if PFMT can be delivered by different staff skill mixes, what barriers and facilitators operate in different contexts, what strategies enable successful implementation and what are the underlying mechanisms of their action. PROPEL intervention was designed to maximise the delivery of effective PFMT in the UK NHS using different staff skill mixes. We conducted a realist evaluation (RE) of this implementation to understand what works, for whom, in what circumstances and why. Methods Informed by the Realist and RE-AIM frameworks, the study used a longitudinal, qualitative, multiple case study design. The study took place in five, purposively selected, diverse NHS sites across the UK and proceeded in three phases to identify, test and refine a theory of change. Data collection took place at 4 time points over an 18 month implementation period using focus groups and semi-structured interviews with a range of stakeholders including service leads/managers, senior practitioners, newly trained staff and women receiving care in the new service models. Data were analysed using thematic framework approach adapted to identify Context, Mechanism and Outcome (CMO) configurations of the RE. Results A heightened awareness of the service need among staff and management was a mechanism for change, particularly in areas where there was a shortage of skilled staff. In contrast, the most established specialist physiotherapist-delivered PFMT service activated feelings of role protection and compromised quality, which restricted the reach of PFMT through alternative models. Staff with some level of prior knowledge in women’s health and adequate organisational support were more comfortable and confident in new role. Implementation was seamless when PFMT delivery was incorporated in newly trained staff’s role and core work. Conclusion Roll-out of PFMT delivery through different staff skill mixes is possible when it is undertaken by clinicians with an interest in women’s health, and carefully implemented ensuring adequate levels of training and ongoing support from specialists, multi-disciplinary teams and management.

Abstract Background Pelvic organ prolapse is a common urogenital condition affecting 41–50% of women over the age of 40. To achieve early diagnosis and appropriate treatment, it is important that care is sensitive to and meets women’s needs, throughout their patient journey. This study explored women’s experiences of seeking diagnosis and treatment for prolapse and their needs and priorities for improving person-centred care. Methods Twenty-two women receiving prolapse care through urogynaecology services across three purposefully selected NHS UK sites took part in three focus groups and four telephone interviews. A topic guide facilitated discussions about women’s experiences of prolapse, diagnosis, treatment, follow-up, interactions with healthcare professionals, overall service delivery, and ideals for future services to meet their needs. Data were analysed thematically. Results Three themes emerged relating to women’s experiences of a) Evaluating what is normal b) Hobson’s choice of treatment decisions, and c) The trial and error of treatment and technique. Women often delayed seeking help for their symptoms due to lack of awareness, embarrassment and stigma. When presented to GPs, their symptoms were often dismissed and unaddressed until they became more severe. Women reported receiving little or no choice in treatment decisions. Choices were often influenced by health professionals’ preferences which were subtly reflected through the framing of the offer. Women’s embodied knowledge of their condition and treatment was largely unheeded, resulting in decisions that were inconsistent with women’s preferences and needs. Physiotherapy based interventions were reported as helping women regain control over their symptoms and life. A need for greater awareness of prolapse and physiotherapy interventions among women, GPs and consultants was identified alongside greater focus on prevention, early diagnosis and regular follow-up. Greater choice and involvement in treatment decision making was desired. Conclusions As prolapse treatment options expand to include more conservative choices, greater awareness and education is needed among women and professionals about these as a first line treatment and preventive measure, alongside a multi-professional team approach to treatment decision making. Women presenting with prolapse symptoms need to be listened to by the health care team, offered better information about treatment choices, and supported to make a decision that is right for them.

Background: Pelvic organ prolapse is estimated to affect 41–50% of women aged > 40 years. A multicentre randomised controlled trial of individualised pelvic floor muscle training found that pelvic floor muscle training was effective in reducing symptoms of prolapse, improved quality of life and showed clear potential to be cost-effective. Provision of pelvic floor muscle training for prolapse has continued to vary across the UK, with limited availability of specialist physiotherapists to deliver it. Objectives: This project aimed to study the implementation and outcomes of different models of delivery to increase the service provision of pelvic floor muscle training, and to follow up treatment outcomes for the original trial participants. Design: A realist evaluation of pelvic floor muscle training implementation conducted within three full case study sites and two partial case study sites; an observational prospective cohort study comparing patient-reported outcomes pre and post intervention in all five sites; and a long-term follow-up study linking previous trial participants to routine NHS hospital data. Setting: The setting for the realist evaluation was pelvic floor muscle training service delivery models in three NHS sites. The setting for the patient-reported outcome measures study was pelvic floor muscle training services in five NHS sites. Methods: Realist evaluation qualitative data were collected at four time points in three case study sites to understand the implementation models, uptake, adherence and impact. Interviews involved service managers/leads, consultants, staff delivering pelvic floor muscle training and women receiving pelvic floor muscle training. Main outcomes measures: Patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and at 6 and 12 months across five sites, including the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score, health-related quality of life (measured using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, questionnaire), prolapse severity (measured using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System), urinary incontinence (measured using International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire – Urinary Incontinence Short Form) and need for further treatment. Results: A total of 102 women were recruited to the patient-reported outcome measures cohort study (target, n = 120), and 65 women had matched baseline and 6-month Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Scores. The mean Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score was 10.18 (standard deviation 5.63) at baseline and 6.98 (standard deviation 5.23) at 6 months, representing a statistically significant and clinically meaningful difference. There was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes obtained from delivery by specialist physiotherapists and the outcomes obtained from delivery by other health-care professionals (mean change in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score: –3.95 vs. –2.81, respectively). Services delivered using higher-band physiotherapists only were more costly than services delivered using other staff mixes. The effect of the original pelvic floor muscle training intervention, over a post-intervention period of > 10 years, was a reduction in the odds of any treatment during follow-up (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.99). The realist evaluation revealed stark differences in implementation. The site with a specialist physiotherapy service resisted change because of perceived threats to the specialist role and concerns about care quality. Pelvic floor muscle training delivery by other health-care staff was easier when there was a lack of any existing specialist service; staff had prior training and interest in pelvic health; staff had support, autonomy, time and resources to deliver pelvic floor muscle training as part of their core role; and surrounding services supported a flow of pelvic floor muscle training referrals. Limitations: The number of available matched pre and post outcomes for women and the lack of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System examinations were limitations of this study. Conclusions: It is possible to train different staff to effectively deliver pelvic floor muscle training to women. Women’s self-reported outcomes significantly improved across all service models. Training should be adequately tailored to differential skill mix needs. Future work: Future work should include further implementation of pelvic floor muscle training and should include pre- and post-outcome data collection using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score. Study registration: This study is registered as Research Registry 4919. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 47. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: In 2016, 26% of UK men were estimated to be obese. Systematic reviews suggest that few men engage in formal weight loss interventions that support weight reduction and improve health. Objective: To co-produce, with patient and public involvement, an acceptable and feasible randomised controlled trial design to test a men-only weight management intervention. Design: This was a two-phase feasibility study. Phase 1 was the development of intervention components, study procedures and materials including a discrete choice experiment with survey questions. Phase 2 was an individually randomised three-arm feasibility trial over 12 months. Qualitative interviews were conducted at 3 and 12 months. Setting: The setting was two sites in Scotland that had disadvantaged urban and rural areas and differed in employment levels and ethnic groups. Participants: In phase 1, 1045 men with obesity were recruited by Ipsos MORI (London, UK; www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk) to represent the UK population. In phase 2, 105 men with obesity were recruited in the community or through general practice obesity registers. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 50 men at 3 months and with 33 men at 12 months. Interventions: The trial arms were narrative short message service (SMS) for 12 months (SMS only), financial endowment incentive informed by loss aversion and linked to achievement of weight loss targets plus narrative SMS for 12 months (SMS + I), and waiting list control group for 12 months followed by 3 months of an alternative SMS style developed based on feedback from men who had received the narrative SMS (control). Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were acceptability and feasibility of recruitment, retention, engagement, intervention components and trial procedures. Outcomes were assessed by examining procedural, quantitative and qualitative data at 3, 6 and 12 months. Results: The most acceptable incentive strategy, based on the discrete choice experiment results, was to verify weight loss of 5% at 3 months, verify weight loss of 10% at 6 months and maintain weight loss of 10% at 12 months. Overall, 105 men with obesity from across the socioeconomic spectrum were successfully recruited to target, 59% of whom lived in more disadvantaged areas. Retention at 12 months was acceptable (74%) and was higher among individuals from disadvantaged areas. Narrative SMS were acceptable to many men, with a minority reporting negative reactions. Incentives were acceptable but were not the primary motivation for behaviour change. Twelve men in the incentive arm (33%) secured at least some money and three (8%) secured the full amount. Both intervention arms lost some weight, with greater weight loss in the arm that received SMS and incentives. The alternative SMS based on men’s feedback received no strong negative reactions. Limitations: Fewer participants from the SMS + I arm (64%) completed the study at 12 months than did those in the SMS-only (79%) and control (83%) arms. The reasons for this difference were complex. Conclusions: The men-only weight management intervention consisting of narrative SMS and financial incentives was acceptable and feasible, meeting the progression criteria for a full trial. Tailoring of SMS may improve acceptability and retention. Future work: Minor refinements to the intervention components based on the study findings will be made prior to testing in a multisite definitive randomised controlled trial. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03040518. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 8, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ObjectivesTo examine the acceptability and feasibility of narrative text messages with or without financial incentives to support weight loss for men.DesignIndividually randomised three-arm feasibility trial with 12 months’ follow-up.SettingTwo sites in Scotland with high levels of disadvantage according to Scottish Index for Multiple Deprivation (SIMD).ParticipantsMen with obesity (n=105) recruited through community outreach and general practitioner registers.InterventionsParticipants randomised to: (A) narrative text messages plus financial incentive for 12 months (short message service (SMS)+I), (B) narrative text messages for 12 months (SMS only), or (C) waiting list control.OutcomesAcceptability and feasibility of recruitment, retention, intervention components and trial procedures assessed by analysing quantitative and qualitative data at 3, 6 and 12 months.Results105 men were recruited, 60% from more disadvantaged areas (SIMD quintiles 1 or 2). Retention at 12 months was 74%. Fewer SMS+I participants (64%) completed 12-month assessments compared with SMS only (79%) and control (83%). Narrative texts were acceptable to many men, but some reported negative reactions. No evidence emerged that level of disadvantage was related to acceptability of narrative texts. Eleven SMS+I participants (31%) successfully met or partially met weight loss targets. The cost of the incentive per participant was £81.94 (95% CI £34.59 to £129.30). Incentives were acceptable, but improving health was reported as the key motivator for weight loss. All groups lost weight (SMS+I: −2.51 kg (SD=4.94); SMS only: −1.29 kg (SD=5.03); control: −0.86 kg (SD=5.64) at 12 months).ConclusionsThis three-arm weight management feasibility trial recruited and retained men from across the socioeconomic spectrum, with the majority from areas of disadvantage, was broadly acceptable to most participants and feasible to deliver.Trial registration numberNCT03040518.

Abstract Background Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) is estimated to affect 41%–50% of women aged over 40. Findings from the multi-centre randomised controlled “Pelvic Organ Prolapse PhysiotherapY” (POPPY) trial showed that individualised pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) was effective in reducing symptoms of prolapse, improved quality of life and showed clear potential to be cost-effective. However, provision of PFMT for prolapse continues to vary across the UK, with limited numbers of women’s health physiotherapists specialising in its delivery. Implementation of this robust evidence from the POPPY trial will require attention to different models of delivery (e.g. staff skill mix) to fit with differing care environments. Methods A Realist Evaluation (RE) of implementation and outcomes of PFMT delivery in contrasting NHS settings will be conducted using multiple case study sites. Involving substantial local stakeholder engagement will permit a detailed exploration of how local sites make decisions on how to deliver PFMT and how these lead to service change. The RE will track how implementation is working; identify what influences outcomes; and, guided by the RE-AIM framework, will collect robust outcomes data. This will require mixed methods data collection and analysis. Qualitative data will be collected at four time-points across each site to understand local contexts and decisions regarding options for intervention delivery and to monitor implementation, uptake, adherence and outcomes. Patient outcome data will be collected at baseline, six months and one year follow-up for 120 women. Primary outcome will be the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score (POP-SS). An economic evaluation will assess the costs and benefits associated with different delivery models taking account of further health care resource use by the women. Cost data will be combined with the primary outcome in a cost effectiveness analysis, and the EQ-5D-5L data in a cost utility analysis for each of the different models of delivery. Discussion Study of the implementation of varying models of service delivery of PFMT across contrasting sites combined with outcomes data and a cost effectiveness analysis will provide insight into the implementation and value of different models of PFMT service delivery and the cost benefits to the NHS in the longer term.

Background: Annual reviews of people living with long-term conditions (LTCs) are mostly conducted by practice nurses (PNs), who focus on the physical needs of patients. The broader mental well-being and social needs of patients are also important if they are to live well. The Patient Centred Assessment Method (PCAM) is a new tool to help PNs conduct biopsychosocial assessments of patients’ needs. Research questions: Is it feasible and acceptable to use the PCAM in primary care nurse-led reviews for those with LTCs? Is it feasible and acceptable to run a cluster randomised trial of the PCAM in primary care? Methods: Four practitioner and two patient focus groups explored the acceptability and implementation requirements of the PCAM, which was then tested in a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial aiming to recruit eight general practitioner (GP) practices and 16 nurses. Baseline data collection was conducted with nurses prior to randomisation, with a cohort of 10 patients per nurse, including patient demographics, patient evaluation of consultation, patient-completed outcomes (measured via the Consultation and Relational Empathy, Patient Enablement Instrument, Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, General Health Questionnaire and the Short Form questionnaire-12 items) and nurse referrals/signposting to services. Patient follow-up questionnaires were completed at 8 weeks. Practices were then randomised to the PCAM intervention or care as usual (CAU). Data collection was repeated for a second cohort of patients. Fidelity was tested by comparing a sample of recorded consultations before and after PCAM training. Qualitative interviews were conducted with PCAM nurses and a sample of patients. Results: Approaches to 159 eligible practices resulted in the recruitment of six practices (10 nurses), with five practices (seven nurses) completing both data collection phases. Nurses collected baseline data on 113 patients, 71 of whom (62.8%) completed follow-up questionnaires. Five practices were randomised: three practices (six nurses) to the PCAM arm and two practices (four nurses) to the CAU arm. In phase 2, seven nurses collected data on 77 patients, of whom 40 (52%) completed follow-up. Only four PCAM nurses agreed to recording consultations, with five pre- and four post-PCAM recordings obtained. Post PCAM training, there was evidence of more attention being given to patients’ mental well-being and social issues. The PCAM was fairly easily integrated into consultation, although some nurses reflected that this benefited from early support. Patients were not always aware of its use, but most were happy to have their needs assessed. Limitations: Recruitment of GP practices, and nurse recruitment and retention. Conclusions: The PCAM is feasible and acceptable for use by primary care nurses and may have potential for encouraging biopsychosocial assessment of patients. Efforts required to recruit and retain staff indicate that a full trial is not feasible or cost-effective at this time. Future work: The PCAM intervention warrants further exploration as an effective mechanism for improving care for people with LTCs; this could be conducted within an implementation study. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98973169. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research Vol. 6, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.