Living less safely through the pandemic in England for people with serious mental and physical health conditions: qualitative interviews with service users and carers of Black African, Caribbean, and South-Asian descent.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 Ethnic Inequalities in Mental health and Multimorbidities (COVEIMM) is a mixed methods study to explore whether COVID-19 exacerbated ethnic health inequalities in adults with serious mental and physical health conditions. We analysed data from electronic health records for England and conducted interviews in Birmingham and Solihull, Manchester, and South London. Sites were selected because they were pilot sites for the Patient and Carer Race Equality Framework being introduced by NHS England to tackle race inequalities in mental health. Prior to the pandemic people in England with severe mental illnesses (SMIs) faced an 11-17-year reduction in life expectancy, mostly due to preventable, long-term, physical health conditions. During the pandemic there was a marked increase in deaths of those living with an SMI. AIMS: This qualitative interview study aimed to understand the reasons underlying ethnic inequalities in mortality and service use during the COVID-19 pandemic for adult service users and carers of Black African, Black Caribbean, Indian, Pakistani, and Bangladeshi backgrounds living with serious multiple long-term mental and physical health conditions. METHODS: We took a participatory action research approach and qualitative interviews undertaken by experts-by-experience and university researchers Participants were purposively sampled by ethnicity, diagnoses, and comorbidities across three geographically distinct sites in England. Transcriptions were coded inductively and deductively and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Findings indicated multiple points along primary and secondary health pathways for mental and physical health that have the potential to exacerbate the unjust gap in mortality that exists for Black and Asian people with SMIs. Issues such as timely access to care (face-to-face and remote), being treated in a culturally appropriate manner with empathy, dignity and respect, and being able to use services without experiencing undue force, racism or other forms of intersectional discrimination were important themes arising from interviews. CONCLUSION: These poor experiences create systemic and enduring healthcare harms for racialised groups with SMIs that need to be addressed. Our findings suggest a need to address these, not only in mental health providers, but across the whole health and care system and a need to ensure more equitable healthcare partnerships with service users, carers, and communities from racialised backgrounds who are often excluded.

Exploring the use of body worn cameras in acute mental health wards: a mixed-method evaluation of a pilot intervention.

BACKGROUND: Body worn cameras (BWC) are mobile audio and video capture devices that can be secured to clothing allowing the wearer to record some of what they see and hear. This technology is being introduced in a range of healthcare settings as part of larger violence reduction strategies aimed at reducing incidents of aggression and violence on inpatient wards, however limited evidence exists to understand if this technology achieves such goals. AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of BWCs on two inpatient mental health wards, including the impact on incidents, the acceptability to staff and patients, the sustainability of the resource use and ability to manage the use of BWCs on these wards. METHODS: The study used a mixed-methods design comparing quantitative measures including ward activity and routinely collected incident data at three time-points before during and after the pilot implementation of BWCs on one acute ward and one psychiatric intensive care unit, alongside pre and post pilot qualitative interviews with patients and staff, analysed using a framework based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: Results showed no clear relationship between the use of BWCs and rates or severity of incidents on either ward, with limited impact of using BWCs on levels of incidents. Qualitative findings noted mixed perceptions about the use of BWCs and highlighted the complexity of implementing such technology as a violence reduction method within a busy healthcare setting Furthermore, the qualitative data collected during this pilot period highlighted the potential systemic and contextual factors such as low staffing that may impact on the incident data presented. CONCLUSION: This study sheds light on the complexities of using such BWCs as a tool for 'maximising safety' on mental health settings. The findings suggest that BWCs have a limited impact on levels of incidents on wards, something that is likely to be largely influenced by the process of implementation as well as a range of contextual factors. As a result, it is likely that while BWCs may see successes in one hospital site this is not guaranteed for another site as such factors will have a considerable impact on efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility.