A qualitative process evaluation of universal free school meal provision in two London secondary schools.

BACKGROUND: In the UK, one in five households with children experienced food insecurity in 2022, defined as a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food. Free school meals are a public health intervention aimed at reducing food insecurity amongst children. The provision of universal free school meals (UFSM) to secondary school-aged children is a novel and untested intervention in the UK. This study is a process evaluation of a pilot of UFSM in two secondary schools in England. The aim was to understand the feasibility, acceptability, cost implications and lessons for the implementation of UFSM. METHODS: 20 parents, 28 students and 8 school staff from two intervention schools participated in online qualitative interviews, as well as 4 staff from non-intervention schools. The Framework Method of thematic analysis was applied. These data were supplemented with student-led observations of school meal times, and school lunch uptake-data and cost information provided by the local authority delivering the pilot. RESULTS: UFSM in secondary schools is a feasible and acceptable intervention, with coherent goals of increased access to a healthy meal, reduced food insecurity and better nutrition. All participants perceived these goals were met. Acceptability was further enhanced by the perception that UFSM were supporting a greater proportion of low-income families than the national, targeted Free School Meal scheme, as well as being easier to implement. Potential barriers to implementation include limited school kitchen and dining infrastructure, meal quality and choice, and increased queuing times. Participants' concerns that UFSM may benefit middle- and high- income families not in need were not as prevalent as the perception that UFSM was an effective way to support all families with secondary-aged children experiencing food insecurity. CONCLUSION: This small-scale pilot study suggests that UFSM in secondary schools is feasible and acceptable, but more evidence is required from larger studies on the impact on long-term health, psychosocial and educational outcomes. Future, larger studies should also include detailed economic evaluations so this approach can be compared with other possible interventions.

Prevention of suicide and reduction of self-harm among people with substance use disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: People with substance use disorder (SUD) are at significantly greater risk of suicide compared with the general population. In recent years the number of suicides resulting from drug poisoning in England and Wales has increased. We sought to identify and evaluate the effect of interventions to prevent suicide or reduce self-harm among people with SUD. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for people with SUD that included suicide or self-harm-related primary outcomes. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from inception until 13th January 2019. Studies were assessed for bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. A random effects meta-analysis of standardised mean differences (SMD) was conducted. RESULTS: We identified six RCTs from four countries (Australia, Iran, the United States of America and the United Kingdom) comprising 468 participants in total. All but one study investigated psychosocial interventions. On average across studies there was weak evidence of a small positive effect of interventions on suicide or self-harm outcomes (d=-0.20, 95% CI=-0.39-0.00). LIMITATIONS: Studies were heterogeneous in terms of population, intervention, controls and outcome. There were some concerns regarding bias for all trials. All trials were liable to type II error. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is currently lacking regarding the effectiveness of interventions to prevent suicide and reduce self-harm amongst people with SUD.

"The worst thing is lying in bed thinking 'I want a cigarette'" a qualitative exploration of smoker's and ex-smoker's perceptions of sleep during a quit attempt and the use of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia to aid cessation.

Smokers report poorer sleep quality than non-smokers and sleep quality deteriorates further during cessation, increasing risk of smoking relapse. Despite the use of cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) to aid quit attempts emerging in the area, little is known about smokers and ex smoker's experiences of sleep during a quit attempt or their perceptions of CBT-I. This study addresses this gap by exploring smoker's and ex-smoker's experiences of the link between smoking and sleep and how this may change as a function of smoking/smoking abstinence. It also explores views of traditional CBT-I components (i.e., perceived feasibility, effectiveness, barriers of use). We conducted semi-structured interviews with current and recently quit smokers (n = 17) between January and September 2022. The framework method was used for analysis. Four themes addressing research questions were described. These included: 1) A viscous cycle; poor sleep quality and negative psychological state during cessation; 2) Perceived engagement and effectiveness; the importance of feasibility, experience, value, identity and psychological state in assessing CBT-I as a cessation tool; 3) Striking a balance; tailoring CBT-I to reduce psychological overload in a time of lifestyle transition; and 4) Personalisation and digital delivery helping overcome psychological barriers during cessation. The analysis suggested during quit attempts smokers experienced a range of sleep problems that could increase risk of relapse due to a negative impact on psychological state. It also revealed participants thought that CBT-I is something they would use during a quit attempt but suggested changes and additions that would improve engagement and be better tailored to quitting smokers. Key additions included the integration of smoking-based cognitive restructuring, starting the intervention prior to a quit attempt, and the need for personalisation and tailoring.

Should I Stay or Should I Go? A Qualitative Exploration of Stigma and Other Factors Influencing Opioid Agonist Treatment Journeys.

(1) The harm-reduction benefits of opioid agonist treatment (OAT) are well-established; however, the UK government's emphasis on "recovery" may be contributing to a high proportion of people leaving treatment and low retention rates. We wanted to develop a rich and nuanced understanding of the factors that might influence the treatment journeys of people who use OAT. (2) We explored factors at each level of the socioecological system and considered the ways these interact to influence treatment journeys in OAT. We carried out semi-structured interviews with people who use OAT (n = 12) and service providers (n = 13) and analysed data using reflexive thematic analysis. (3) We developed three themes representing participant perceptions of treatment journeys in OAT. These were: (1) The System is Broken; (2) Power Struggles; and (3) Filling the Void. (4) Conclusions: The data suggest that prioritisation of treatment retention is important to preserve the harm-reduction benefits of OAT. Stigma is a systemic issue which presents multiple barriers to people who use OAT living fulfilling lives. There is an urgent need to develop targeted interventions to address stigma towards people who use OAT.

A Mixed Methods, Quasi-Experimental Evaluation Exploring the Impact of a Secondary School Universal Free School Meals Intervention Pilot.

Food insecurity amongst households with children is a growing concern globally. The impacts in children include poor mental health and reduced educational attainment. Providing universal free school meals is one potential way of addressing these impacts. This paper reports findings on the impact of a universal free school meals pilot in two English secondary schools. We adopted a mixed-methods, quasi-experimental design. The intervention schools were one mainstream school (n = 414) and one school for students with special educational needs (n = 105). Two other schools were used as comparators (n = 619; n = 117). The data collection comprised a cross sectional student survey during the pilot (n = 404); qualitative interviews with students (n = 28), parents (n = 20) and school staff (n = 12); and student observations of lunchtimes (n = 57). Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis, and descriptive analyses and logistic regressions were conducted on the quantitative data. Self-reports of food insecurity were high at both intervention (26.6%) and comparator schools (25.8%). No effects of the intervention were seen in the quantitative findings on either hunger or food insecurity. Qualitative findings indicated that students, families and staff perceived positive impact on a range of outcomes including food insecurity, hunger, school performance, family stress and a reduction in stigma associated with means-tested free school meals. Our research provides promising evidence in support of universal free school meals in secondary schools as a strategy for addressing growing food insecurity. Future research should robustly test the impact of universal free school meals in a larger sample of secondary schools, using before and after measures as well as a comparator group.