A Qualitative Systematic Review of the Barriers and Facilitators of the Reintegration of Men Convicted of a Sexual Offense From Prison or Secure Care into the Community.

This article is the first qualitative systematic review of studies examining the barriers and facilitators to male sex offenders reintegration from prison or secure care into the community. A search of 16 electronic databases produced 14,218 potential sources, which, after screening, resulted in 79 articles for inclusion. Papers were included if they used qualitative research methods about the barriers, facilitators, perceptions, experiences, and attitudes toward community reintegration from prison or secure care for men convicted of sexual offenses. Included papers were critically appraised and the findings were thematically synthesized. The findings identified that formal and cultural aspects of reintegration, such as probation services, stigmatization, and registration, were the three largest barriers that men faced upon their release, with stability aspects, such as positive relationships, religion, and support groups, being key facilitators to their successful reintegration. The implications for future research, and policy and practice, including prioritizing risk assessment and management, offering appropriate and timely treatment and rehabilitation, educating the community, better access to housing and employment, and services adopting a collaborative approach, are discussed.

Barriers and facilitators for people with severe mental illness accessing cancer screening: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence suggests that people with severe mental illness (PwSMI) are 2.1 times more likely to die from cancer before the age of 75, compared to people without Severe mental illness (SMI). Yet, cancer screening uptake is low among PwSMI. This mixed-methods systematic review aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators for PwSMI deciding to access and attend primary cancer screening of the cervix, breast and colon. METHODS: Six electronic databases and two grey literature sources were searched, with 1017 records screened against inclusion criteria. Included papers were appraised and data synthesised using the constructs of Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: Twenty papers met the inclusion criteria. Factors that impact upon uptake of PwSMI accessing cancer screening were found to include age, gender, race, and income. Common barriers to attending screening included poor communication from healthcare staff, stigmatising attitudes, and accessibility problems such as no access to transportation. While, facilitators included social support from friends, family, and healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Due to ease and privacy, colorectal screening was found to have fewer barriers when compared to cervical and breast screening. The review identified multiple barriers that can be addressed and targeted to support decision-making for cancer screening among PwSMI. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022331781).

A protocol to identify the barriers and facilitators for people with severe mental illness and/or learning disabilities for PErson Centred Cancer Screening Services (PECCS).

OBJECTIVES: To identify the barriers and facilitators that people with severe mental illness and people with learning disabilities may encounter when accessing cancer screening and make recommendations for implementing reasonable adjustments throughout cancer screening services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: An 18-month sequential, mixed-methods study comprising of two phases of work and underpinned by Normalisation Process Theory, recruiting from across the North-East and North Cumbria. The first phase aims to identify the barriers and facilitators for people with severe mental illness in accessing cervical, breast and colorectal cancer screening. A systematic review of eight databases (Part 1a; PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022331781) alongside semi-structured interviews of up to 36 people with severe mental illness (Part 1b) will occur. Additional characteristics indicating populations whose perspectives may not have been accounted for in the systematic review will be targeted in the interviews. Potential participants will be identified from a range of settings across the North-East and North Cumbria, including through social media and gatekeepers within National Health Service Trusts and charities. Interviews will be analysed using framework analysis, which will be in line with the Normalisation Process Theory. The second phase of the project (part 2a) involves triangulating the results of the systematic review and interviews with existing research previously completed with people with learning disabilities accessing cancer screening. This will be to identify population specific barriers and facilitators across people with learning disabilities and people with severe mental illness to access cancer screening services. Following triangulation, part 2b will include designing and planning a future study involving stakeholders in cancer screening to explore the feasibility, practicality, and priority for implementing the recommendations to improve person centred cancer screening services (PECCS). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received Teesside University ethical approval, Health Research Authority approval (IRAS: 310622) and favourable opinion (REF: 22/PR/0793). Findings will be disseminated through a range of academic and non-academic modes including infographics, blog posts and academic publications.