A Mixed-Methods Realist Evaluation of the Implementation and Impact of Community Forensic CAMHS to Manage Risk for Young People With Forensic and Mental Health Needs: Study Protocol.

Introduction: Young people in contact with forensic child and adolescent mental health services present with more complex needs than young people in the general population. Recent policy has led to the implementation of new workstreams and programmes to improve service provision for this cohort. This paper aims to present the protocol for a national study examining the impact and implementation of Community Forensic Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (F:CAMHS). Methods and analysis: The study will use a mixed-methods Realist Evaluation design. Quantitative service activity and feedback data will be collected from all 13 sites, as well as questionnaires from staff. Non-participant observations and qualitative interviews will be conducted with staff, young people and parents/guardians from four focus study sites. An economic evaluation will examine whether Community F:CAMHS provides good value for money. The results will be triangulated to gain an in-depth understanding of young people's, parents/guardians' and staff experiences of the service. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was granted by the Health Research Association and UCL Ethics. The results will be disseminated via project reports, feedback to sites, peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations.

Realist Process Evaluation of the implementation and impact of an organisational cultural transformation programme in the Children and Young People's Secure Estate (CYPSE) in England: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Young people in contact with the youth justice system are more likely to present with complex ongoing needs than young people in the general population. To address this, the Framework for Integrated Care (SECURE STAIRS) is being implemented in the Children and Young People's Secure Estate: a 'whole systems' approach to support secure settings to develop trauma-informed and relationally based environments, supporting staff to provide consistent, therapeutic care. This paper aims to present the protocol for a national cohort study examining the impact and implementation of this cultural transformation programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-methods realist evaluation will be conducted. Data collection will take place between August 2018 and December 2020. Eighteen sites will collect routine service activity data and questionnaires completed by young people, parents/guardians and staff. Semi-structured interviews and non-participant observations will be conducted across five qualitative focus sites with young people and staff. An economic evaluation will examine value for money. The results will be triangulated at the analysis stage to gain an in-depth understanding of experiences. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was granted by the Health Research Authority, Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service and UCL Ethics Committee. Findings will be disseminated via project reports, site feedback, peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations.

Learning Together 1: an educational model for training GPs, paediatricians: initial findings.

Learning Together is primarily an educational intervention, where paediatric registrars [SpRs] and General Practice (GP) registrars [GPSTs] see children together in a primary care setting. Over a six month period in 2013/2014, 44 learning pairs were set up mainly in North East and Central London. Proof of concept for the model at scale was achieved. Reported learning demonstrated: clinical learning themes of new knowledge, skill and communication skills; and collaborative themes of ongoing collaboration, satisfaction with team working and change in attitudes. These themes were identified in both sets of trainees. The self-reported learning is backed up by the results of a retrospective notes review of four common conditions based on NICE guidelines; constipation, asthma, feverish illness and eczema (CAFE). Guidance adherence improved from 57% before the intervention in solo GP training consultations to 72% during the joint clinic intervention (p < 0.01). After the intervention when the GP registrars returned to normal consultations, guidance adherence was 77% compared to before the intervention (p < 0.01). In addition 99% of the parents, who handed in feedback forms or took part in interviews, reported a good experience of care, and 87% reported increased confidence to manage their children's health following the consultation. A second, linked article examines the cost utility of Learning Together in its South London extension.

Learning Together; part 2: training costs and health gain - a cost analysis.

Learning Together is a complex educational intervention aimed at improving health outcomes for children and young people. There is an additional cost as two doctors are seeing patients together for a longer appointment than a standard general practice (GP) appointment. Our approach combines the impact of the training clinics on activity in South London in 2014-15 with health gain, using NICE guidance and standards to allow comparison of training options. METHODS: Activity data was collected from Training Practices hosting Learning Together. A computer based model was developed to analyse the costs of the Learning Together intervention compared to usual training in a partial economic evaluation. The results of the model were used to value the health gain required to make the intervention cost effective. RESULTS: Data were returned for 363 patients booked into 61 clinics across 16 Training Practices. Learning Together clinics resulted in an increase in costs of £37 per clinic. Threshold analysis illustrated one child with a common illness like constipation needs to be well for two weeks, in one Practice hosting four training clinics for the clinics to be considered cost effective. CONCLUSION: Learning Together is of minimal training cost. Our threshold analysis produced a rubric that can be used locally to test cost effectiveness at a Practice or Programme level.

The effectiveness, acceptability and cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for maltreated children and adolescents: an evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Child maltreatment is a substantial social problem that affects large numbers of children and young people in the UK, resulting in a range of significant short- and long-term psychosocial problems. OBJECTIVES: To synthesise evidence of the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of interventions addressing the adverse consequences of child maltreatment. STUDY DESIGN: For effectiveness, we included any controlled study. Other study designs were considered for economic decision modelling. For acceptability, we included any study that asked participants for their views. PARTICIPANTS: Children and young people up to 24 years 11 months, who had experienced maltreatment before the age of 17 years 11 months. INTERVENTIONS: Any psychosocial intervention provided in any setting aiming to address the consequences of maltreatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Psychological distress [particularly post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression and anxiety, and self-harm], behaviour, social functioning, quality of life and acceptability. METHODS: Young Persons and Professional Advisory Groups guided the project, which was conducted in accordance with Cochrane Collaboration and NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance. Departures from the published protocol were recorded and explained. Meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness analyses of available data were undertaken where possible. RESULTS: We identified 198 effectiveness studies (including 62 randomised trials); six economic evaluations (five using trial data and one decision-analytic model); and 73 studies investigating treatment acceptability. Pooled data on cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for sexual abuse suggested post-treatment reductions in PTSD [standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.44 (95% CI -4.43 to -1.53)], depression [mean difference -2.83 (95% CI -4.53 to -1.13)] and anxiety [SMD -0.23 (95% CI -0.03 to -0.42)]. No differences were observed for post-treatment sexualised behaviour, externalising behaviour, behaviour management skills of parents, or parental support to the child. Findings from attachment-focused interventions suggested improvements in secure attachment [odds ratio 0.14 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.70)] and reductions in disorganised behaviour [SMD 0.23 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.42)], but no differences in avoidant attachment or externalising behaviour. Few studies addressed the role of caregivers, or the impact of the therapist-child relationship. Economic evaluations suffered methodological limitations and provided conflicting results. As a result, decision-analytic modelling was not possible, but cost-effectiveness analysis using effectiveness data from meta-analyses was undertaken for the most promising intervention: CBT for sexual abuse. Analyses of the cost-effectiveness of CBT were limited by the lack of cost data beyond the cost of CBT itself. CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to draw firm conclusions about which interventions are effective for children with different maltreatment profiles, which are of no benefit or are harmful, and which factors encourage people to seek therapy, accept the offer of therapy and actively engage with therapy. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions. LIMITATIONS: Studies were largely conducted outside the UK. The heterogeneity of outcomes and measures seriously impacted on the ability to conduct meta-analyses. FUTURE WORK: Studies are needed that assess the effectiveness of interventions within a UK context, which address the wider effects of maltreatment, as well as specific clinical outcomes. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003889. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.