Commissioning and co-production in health and care services in the United Kingdom and Ireland: An exploratory literature review.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory literature review seeks to examine the literature around commissioning processes in the co-production of health and care services, focusing on two questions: How do health and care commissioning processes facilitate and/or pose barriers to co-production in service design and delivery? What are the contextual factors that influence these processes? METHOD: A systematic search of three databases (Medline, Public Health and Social Policy and Practice) and a search platform (Web of Science) was conducted for the period 2008-2023. A total of 2675 records were retrieved. After deduplication, 1925 were screened at title and abstract level. Forty-seven reports from 42 United Kingdom and Ireland studies were included in the review. A thematic synthesis of included studies was conducted in relation to the research questions. RESULTS: The review identified one overarching theme across the synthesised literature: the complexity of the commissioning landscape. Three interconnected subthemes illuminate the contextual factors that influence this landscape: commissioners as leaders of co-production; navigating relationships and the collective voice. CONCLUSION: Commissioning processes were commonly a barrier to the co-production of health and care services. Though co-production was an aspiration for many commissioners, the political and economic environment and service pressures meant that it was often not fully realised. More flexible funding models, longer-term pilot projects, an increased emphasis in social value across the health and care system and building capacity for strong leadership in commissioning is needed. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and the public did not contribute to this review as it was a small piece of work following on from a completed project, with no budget for public involvement.

Physical Activity Inclusion in Dementia-Friendly Communities: A Mixed Methods Study.

Dementia-friendly communities (DFCs) are a policy-endorsed approach to community engagement in England that promotes social inclusion to enable people affected by dementia to live well. Research suggests that physical activity is beneficial in encouraging social connection and improving health. A mixed method sequential study design in England involving a national survey (n = 31) and semistructured interviews (n = 65) in three DFCs was carried out. The aim was to understand how DFCs enable people affected by dementia to participate in physical activities. An evaluation framework for DFCs was used to organize and interpret the data, and analysis was informed by the inclusive (social) citizen lens. Findings showed that DFCs offered a range of adapted dementia-inclusive and dementia-specific activities; however, people were not routinely offered information at time of diagnosis. Local authorities (councils) were key to enable access to information and infrastructure change to support sustainable inclusion within their local community.

Exploring English policymakers' attitudes towards dementia risk reduction: A qualitative study.

AIM: A growing evidence-base indicates that dementia occurrence can be changed. This has been linked to potentially modifiable risk factors. Risk reduction and primary prevention strategies are increasingly recognized as needing to include population-level policies to tackle the social and commercial determinants of health. How this knowledge can influence policymaking on dementia prevention is unknown. Understanding attitudes of policymakers is an important step in translating evidence into practice, helping to gauge system readiness for implementation, and potential barriers and enablers for influencing policy. The aim of this qualitative study is to explore the understanding of, and attitudes to, dementia risk reduction and population-level prevention strategies amongst English policymakers at national, regional, and local level. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with a range of dementia and prevention policymakers, with purposive sampling of national and local policymakers, including politicians, government officials, health system leaders, academics, and dementia charity directors. Analysis of interview transcripts was undertaken by thematic analysis. RESULTS: 14 policymakers were interviewed between November 2021 and February 2022. Three main themes were identified (1) Preventability of dementia, (2) Prevention approach, (3) Barriers and facilitators to improving the approach. DISCUSSION: Policymakers generally held dementia to be partially preventable. Policymakers recognised that both individual- and population-level approaches to primary prevention of dementia are required - with some policymakers perceiving that population-level approaches are under-utilised. Key barriers to implementing more population-level approaches were identified as the complexity and co-ordination required to effectively tackle upstream determinants of health.

Dementia Friendly Communities in England: A scoping study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of Dementia Friendly Communities (DFCs) across England in order to inform a national evaluation of their impact on the lives of those affected by dementia. METHODS: DFCs in England were identified through online searches and Alzheimer's Society records. A subsample (n = 100) were purposively selected for in-depth study based on online searches and, where necessary, follow-up telephone calls. Data collection and analysis were guided by a pilot evaluation tool for DFCs that addressed how DFCs are organised and resourced and how their impact is assessed. The evidence was predominantly qualitative, in addition to some descriptive quantitative information. RESULTS: Of 284 DFCs identified, 251 were defined by geographical location, while 33 were communities of interest. Among 100 sampled DFCs, 89 had been set up or started activities following policy endorsement of DFCs in 2012. In the resourcing of DFCs, statutory agencies and charities played an important role. Among DFC activities, awareness raising was cited most commonly. There was some evidence of involvement of people living with dementia in organisational and operational aspects of DFCs. Approaches to evaluation varied, with little evidence of findings having effected change. CONCLUSIONS: DFCs are characterised by variation in type, resourcing, and activities. England has policy endorsement and a recognition system for DFCs. These can be important catalysts for initiation and growth. A systematic approach to evaluation is lacking. This would enable DFCs to be consistent in how they demonstrate progress and how they enable people living with dementia to live well.

The place for dementia-friendly communities in England and its relationship with epidemiological need.

OBJECTIVES: The dementia-friendly community (DFC) initiative was set up to enable people living with dementia to remain active, engaged, and valued members of society. Dementia prevalence varies nationally and is strongly associated with the age and sex distribution of the population and level of social deprivation. As part of a wider project to evaluate DFCs, we examined whether there is a relationship between provision of DFCs and epidemiological need. METHODS: Dementia-friendly communities were identified through the formal recognition process of DFC status by the Alzheimer's Society and mapped against areas defined by English Clinical Commissioning Groups. We tested whether provision of a DFC was associated with: (1) dementia prevalence, (2) number of known cases, and (3) known plus estimated number of unknown cases. RESULTS: Of the 209 English Clinical Commissioning Group areas, 115 had at least one DFC. The presence of a DFC was significantly associated with number of known dementia cases (mean difference = 577; 95% CI, 249 to 905; P = 0.001) and unknown dementia cases (mean difference = 881; 95% CI, 349 to 1413; P = 0.001) but not prevalence (mean difference = 0.03; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.16; P = 0.61). This remains true when controlling for potential confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that DFC provision is consistent with epidemiological-based need. Dementia-friendly communities are located in areas where they can have the greatest impact. A retrospective understanding of how DFCs have developed in England can inform how equivalent international initiatives might be designed and implemented.

Reciprocal relationships and the importance of feedback in patient and public involvement: A mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Reciprocal relationships between researchers and patient and public involvement (PPI) contributors can enable successful PPI in research. However, research and anecdotal evidence suggest that researchers do not commonly provide feedback to PPI contributors thus preventing them from knowing whether, how or where their contributions were useful to researchers and research overall. AIMS: The aim of this study was to explore the variation, types, importance of, and satisfaction with feedback given by researchers to PPI contributors in six PPI groups in England, and identify the barriers to the process of feedback. METHODS: An explanatory mixed methods sequential study design with a questionnaire survey followed by semi-structured interviews with researchers and PPI contributors in six PPI groups. PPI contributors were involved in all stages of the research process. RESULTS: Researchers do not routinely give feedback to PPI contributors. Feedback was found to have different meanings: an acknowledgement, impact and study success and progress. PPI contributors who receive feedback are motivated for further involvement; it supports their learning and development and prompts researchers to reflect on PPI impact. The importance of the role of a PPI lead or coordinator to facilitate the process of providing feedback was also highlighted. CONCLUSION: This study found no generic way to give feedback indicating that mutual feedback expectations should be discussed at the outset. PPI feedback needs to become integral to the research process with appropriate time and resources allocated. PPI feedback can be seen as a key indicator of mature, embedded PPI in research.

Age-appropriate services for people diagnosed with young onset dementia (YOD): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Literature agrees that post-diagnostic services for people living with young onset dementia (YOD) need to be age-appropriate, but there is insufficient evidence of 'what works' to inform service design and delivery. OBJECTIVE: To provide an evidence base of age-appropriate services and to review the perceived effectiveness of current interventions. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review including all types of research relating to interventions for YOD. We searched PubMed, CINHAL Plus, SCOPUS, EBSCO Host EJS, Social Care Online and Google Scholar, hand-searched journals and carried out lateral searches (July-October 2016). Included papers were synthesised qualitatively. Primary studies were critically appraised. RESULTS: Twenty articles (peer-reviewed [n = 10], descriptive accounts [n = 10]) discussing 195 participants (persons diagnosed with YOD [n = 94], caregivers [n = 91] and other [n = 10]) were identified for inclusion. Services enabled people with YOD to remain living at home for longer. However, service continuity was compromised by short-term project-based commissioning and ad-hoc service delivery. CONCLUSION: The evidence on the experience of living with YOD is not matched by research and the innovation needed to mitigate the impact of YOD. The inclusion of people with YOD and their caregivers in service design is critical when planning support in order to delay institutional care.

End of life care interventions for people with dementia in care homes: addressing uncertainty within a framework for service delivery and evaluation.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increase in research on improving end of life (EoL) care for older people with dementia in care homes. Findings consistently demonstrate improvements in practitioner confidence and knowledge, but comparisons are either with usual care or not made. This paper draws on findings from three studies to develop a framework for understanding the essential dimensions of end of life care delivery in long-term care settings for people with dementia. METHODS: The data from three studies on EoL care in care homes: (i) EVIDEM EoL, (ii) EPOCH, and (iii) TTT EoL were used to inform the development of the framework. All used mixed method designs and two had an intervention designed to improve how care home staff provided end of life care. The EVIDEM EoL and EPOCH studies tracked the care of older people in care homes over a period of 12 months. The TTT study collected resource use data of care home residents for three months, and surveyed decedents' notes for ten months, RESULTS: Across the three studies, 29 care homes, 528 residents, 205 care home staff, and 44 visiting health care professionals participated. Analysis of showed that end of life interventions for people with dementia were characterised by uncertainty in three key areas; what treatment is the 'right' treatment, who should do what and when, and in which setting EoL care should be delivered and by whom? These uncertainties are conceptualised as Treatment uncertainty, Relational uncertainty and Service uncertainty. This paper proposes an emergent framework to inform the development and evaluation of EoL care interventions in care homes. CONCLUSION: For people with dementia living and dying in care homes, EoL interventions need to provide strategies that can accommodate or "hold" the inevitable and often unresolvable uncertainties of providing and receiving care in these settings.

Exploring resource use and associated costs in end-of-life care for older people with dementia in residential care homes.

OBJECTIVE: The goals of this study are to describe end-of-life care costs of older people with dementia (OPWD) residents in care homes (CHs) with no on-site nursing and evaluate the economic case for an intervention designed to improve end-of-life care for OPWD in CHs. METHODS: Phase 1 tracked for a year, from March 2009, health services received by 133 OPWD in six residential CHs in the East of England. CH and resident characteristics were obtained through standardised assessment tools, interviews with CH managers and publicly available information from the independent regulator of social care services in England. Phase 2 used a modified Appreciative Inquiry intervention that ran for 6 months from January 2011, in three of the six CHs. Wilcoxon matched-pairs sign-rank tests were conducted to compare total cost and cost components during Phases 1 and 2 for those residents who had participated in both. RESULTS: Costs for each resident in Phase 1 were about £2800 per month, including service, accommodation and medication. Resource use was associated with resident characteristics. The intervention was perceived as having a positive impact on working relationships between CHs and visiting health care practitioners. Following the intervention total service costs fell by 43%. Hospital care costs fell by 88%. CONCLUSIONS: Results presented here represent early work in an under-researched area of care. Appreciative Inquiry appears to improve and change working relationships with promising outcomes, but more research is needed to test these findings further with larger samples and more robust controls.

Emergency ambulance service involvement with residential care homes in the support of older people with dementia: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Older people resident in care homes have a limited life expectancy and approximately two-thirds have limited mental capacity. Despite initiatives to reduce unplanned hospital admissions for this population, little is known about the involvement of emergency services in supporting residents in these settings. METHODS: This paper reports on a longitudinal study that tracked the involvement of emergency ambulance personnel in the support of older people with dementia, resident in care homes with no on-site nursing providing personal care only. 133 residents with dementia across 6 care homes in the East of England were tracked for a year. The paper examines the frequency and reasons for emergency ambulance call-outs, outcomes and factors associated with emergency ambulance service use. RESULTS: 56% of residents used ambulance services. Less than half (43%) of all call-outs resulted in an unscheduled admission to hospital. In addition to trauma following a following a fall in the home, results suggest that at least a reasonable proportion of ambulance contacts are for ambulatory care sensitive conditions. An emergency ambulance is not likely to be called for older rather than younger residents or for women more than men. Length of residence does not influence use of emergency ambulance services among older people with dementia. Contact with primary care services and admission route into the care home were both significantly associated with emergency ambulance service use. The odds of using emergency ambulance services for residents admitted from a relative's home were 90% lower than the odds of using emergency ambulance services for residents admitted from their own home. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency service involvement with this vulnerable population merits further examination. Future research on emergency ambulance service use by older people with dementia in care homes, should account for important contextual factors, namely, presence or absence of on-site nursing, GP involvement, and access to residents' family, alongside resident health characteristics.

'Seamless care? Just a list would have helped!' Older people and their carer's experiences of support with medication on discharge home from hospital.

BACKGROUND: Many older people use one or more prescribed medicines on a daily basis. Effective medicines management at hospital discharge can support appropriate use of medicines following discharge and help avoid unnecessary hospital re-admission. Many people, however, feel they receive insufficient information about medicines on discharge from hospital. OBJECTIVES: To explore older people and their family carers' experience of hospital discharge in relationship to the organization and management of medicines. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews with older people over 75 years old, taking four or more medicines, and their carers, following discharge from hospital in the United Kingdom (UK). Participants completed medication diaries prior to the interview. SETTING: Interviews took place in the participant's home. RESULTS: Nineteen interviews were conducted involving 12 carers and seven older people. Participants were generally not satisfied with the discharge process, particularly concerning perceived delays in discharge. Inadequate explanations about medicines at discharge were commonly reported and led to omission of medicines, incorrect dosage, anxiety and confusion. Poor communication between the hospital and general practitioners or community pharmacists was also evident. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant policy recommendations and research in this area, many problems with the management of medicines during hospital discharge were shown, and a lack of partnership was evident between hospital staff and patients/family carers regarding the use of medicines post-discharge. Improved medicines management during hospital discharge is required to ensure older people take their medications as prescribed and to protect them from the adverse effects of medicines not being taken correctly.

An uncertain future: the unchanging views of care home residents about living and dying.

BACKGROUND: Older people living in a care home have a limited life expectancy, and care homes are an important setting for end-of-life care provision. AIM: This research aimed to explore the views, experiences and expectations of end-of-life care among care home residents to understand if key events or living in a residential environment influenced their views. DESIGN: The research used a prospective design. The paper draws on the qualitative interviews of 63 care home residents who were interviewed up to three times over a year. This was a sub-sample of the larger data set of 121 care home residents. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The residents were recruited from six care homes (providing personal care with no on-site nursing) in the UK. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified; Living in the Past, Living in the Present, Thinking about the Future and Actively Engaged with planning the future. Many residents said they had not spoken to the care staff about end-of-life care; many assumed their family or General Practitioner would take responsibility. CONCLUSIONS: Core to the older person's ability to discuss end-of-life care is their acceptance of being in a care home, the involvement of family members in making decisions and the extent to which they believed they could influence decision making within their everyday lives. Advance care plans should document ongoing dialogue. These findings can inform how primary health and palliative care services introduce, discuss and tailor existing frameworks and programmes of end-of-life care.

A Case Study of Co-production Within a Mental Health Recovery College Dementia Course: Perspectives of A Person With Dementia, Their Family Supporter and Mental Health Staff.

Background: Undertaking co-production as a power-sharing way to improve mental health dementia services remains uncommon, suggesting opportunities to apply knowledge from lived experience of people with dementia, may often be missed. One barrier is stigma, assuming people with progressive cognitive impairment cannot manage this level of participation, support peers nor offer a "valid" perspective. Purpose: This paper shares knowledge gained from a service evaluation that explored various experiences of a person with dementia, their family supporter and mental health staff, involved in co-producing a course about "living well" with dementia, within a mental health Recovery College. Design: A qualitative, case study approach used semi-structured interviewing and inductive thematic analysis. Findings: Co-production activities generated a shared sense of positivity, pride and privilege, highlighting positive effects in breaking down the "them and us" barriers common in traditional healthcare professional-service user relationships. Each individual had both something to offer and something to gain during the process. Staff identified challenges in the co-production process; in that balancing all the voices during meetings could be complex at times, and the process overall required considerable time commitment. Conclusion: Taking part in co-production at an appropriate level and with peer support is a relational activity seen to be valuable in powerfully, yet gently, challenging stigma and assumptions around dementia. Findings show that while the process of co-production requires time and dedication, there is overall value in involving people living with dementia both in co-production and in peer support. This provided a straightforward and beneficial means to inclusively improve post-diagnosis support and care quality within a memory service.

Changes to household food shopping practices during the COVID-19 restrictions: Evidence from the East of England.

Measures to control the spread of COVID-19 have changed the way we shop for food and interact with food environments. This qualitative study explored food shopping practices in the East of England, a large diverse region including coastal, urban and rural settings. In 2020/2021 we interviewed 38 people living in the region and 27 professionals and volunteers providing local support around dietary health. Participants reported disruption to supermarket shopping routines; moving to online shopping; and increased reliance on local stores. COVID-19 has impacted disproportionately upon lower-income households and neighbourhoods. The longer-term implications for dietary health inequalities must be investigated.

Dementia-friendly communities: The involvement of people living with dementia.

BACKGROUND: Dementia Friendly Communities (DFCs) offer an approach to community engagement to improve the lives of people living with dementia and their family supporters. The involvement of those living with dementia is key to creating successful DFCs. This paper examines how people affected by dementia were involved in developing and designing DFCs in England, and the impact of their involvement. METHODS: This study used a mixed method case study design in six DFCs in England. Data collection involved documentary analysis, a survey, and interviews and focus groups with service providers and people living with dementia and their supporters. FINDINGS: All six DFCs aspired to involve people living with dementia and their family supporters, but often relied on a small number of people living with dementia. The range of involvement activities in DFCs included Steering Group meetings, wider public consultations, and enabling feedback through data collection methods such as surveys and 'ad hoc' conversations. Organisations within the DFCs with experience of public consultation offered structured opportunities for involvement. There was no evidence of people living with dementia initiating or co-leading the organisation, its direction and/or the activities of the DFCs. CONCLUSION: The involvement of people living with dementia in DFCs went beyond rhetoric, with some evidence of context sensitive and meaningful participation. Approaches towards involvement should focus on involvement in strategic planning, and on harnessing expertise in delivering different involvement activities to optimise participation of a greater breadth of people living with dementia. Engagement with local organisations who work with, and for, people living with dementia, and dedicating the resources needed for involvement work, are crucial for creating DFCs. The success of DFCs are determined by how the needs of people living with dementia are identified, discussed and reviewed by those within the community who are most affected.

A suite of evaluation resources for Dementia Friendly Communities: Development and guidance for use.

OBJECTIVES: In the context of a growing number of dementia friendly communities (DFCs) globally, a need remains for robust evaluation, and for tools to capture relevant evidence. This paper reports the development of a suite of evaluation resources for DFCs through a national study in England. METHODS: Fieldwork took place in six diverse case study sites across England. A mixed methods design was adopted that entailed documentary analysis, focus groups, interviews, observations, and a survey. Participants were people affected by dementia and practice-based stakeholders. A national stakeholder workshop was held to obtain input beyond the research sites. A workshop at the end of the study served to check the resonance of the findings and emerging outputs with stakeholders from the case study DFCs. RESULTS: The study had three key outputs for the evaluation of DFCs: First, an evaluation framework that highlights thematic areas to be considered in evaluating DFCs. Second, a Theory of Change that presents inputs into a DFC and short, medium and longer term outcomes. Third, a matrix for assessing a DFC's degree of maturity, which enables a sense of the kinds of outcomes a DFC might realistically aspire to. These three outputs form a suite of interlinking and complementary evaluation resources for DFCs. CONCLUSIONS: The study has contributed evidence-based resources for monitoring and evaluation that complement existing frameworks. They can be applied to arrive at a detailed assessment of how well a DFC works for people affected by dementia, and at insights into the underlying factors that can guide future policy and practice.

Sedative load of medications prescribed for older people with dementia in care homes.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to determine the sedative load and use of sedative and psychotropic medications among older people with dementia living in (residential) care homes. METHODS: Medication data were collected at baseline and at two further time-points for eligible residents of six care homes participating in the EVIDEM-End Of Life (EOL) study for whom medication administration records were available. Regular medications were classified using the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system and individual sedative loads were calculated using a previously published model. RESULTS: At baseline, medication administration records were reviewed for 115 residents; medication records were reviewed for 112 and 105 residents at time-points 2 and 3 respectively. Approximately one-third of residents were not taking any medications with sedative properties at each time-point, while a significant proportion of residents had a low sedative load score of 1 or 2 (54.8%, 59.0% and 57.1% at baseline and time-points 2 and 3 respectively). More than 10% of residents had a high sedative load score (≥ 3) at baseline (12.2%), and this increased to 14.3% at time-points 2 and 3. Approximately two-thirds of residents (66.9%) regularly used one or more psychotropic medication(s). Antidepressants, predominantly selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs), were most frequently used, while antipsychotics, hypnotics and anxiolytics were less routinely administered. The prevalence of antipsychotic use among residents was 19.0%, lower than has been previously reported for nursing home residents. Throughout the duration of the study, administration of medications recognised as having prominent sedative adverse effects and/or containing sedative components outweighed the regular use of primary sedatives. CONCLUSIONS: Sedative load scores were similar throughout the study period for residents with dementia in each of the care homes. Scores were lower than previously reported in studies conducted in long-term care wards which have on-site clinical support. Nevertheless, strategies to optimise drug therapy for care home residents with dementia which rely on clinicians external to the care home for support and medication review are required.

Talking about living and dying with the oldest old: public involvement in a study on end of life care in care homes.

BACKGROUND: Public involvement in research on sensitive subjects, such as death and dying, can help to ensure that questions are framed to reflect the interests of their peers, develop a shared understanding of issues raised, and moderate the often unequal power relationship between researcher and participant. This paper describes the contribution and impact of older members of a Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg) to a study on living and dying in care homes. METHODS: A longitudinal study, with a mixed method approach, its aims were to capture key experiences, events and change over one year, of older people resident in participating care homes in the East of England. Residents were interviewed up to three times and their case notes were reviewed four times over the year. Interviews were semi structured, and recorded. Four members of a Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg) contributed to preliminary discussions about the research and three were involved with many of the subsequent stages of the research process including the facilitation of discussion groups with residents. RESULTS: There were three areas where the involvement of the Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg) positively influenced the study process. These were recruitment, governance and safeguarding, and in collaboration with the residents in the care homes, the discussion and interpretation of emergent findings. PIRg members were of similar age to the residents and their involvement provided different and often more reflective insights of the significance of the findings for the participants. There were examples where decision making about the range of PIRg participation was not always negotiable, and this raised issues about power relationships within the team. Nevertheless, PIRg members expressed personal benefit and satisfaction through participating in the research and a commitment to continue to support research with this older age group. CONCLUSIONS: The contribution of the PIRg supported a successful recruitment process that exceeded response rates of other studies in care homes. It safeguarded residents during the conduct of research on a sensitive topic and helped in validating the interview data gathered by the researchers through the discussion groups facilitated by the PIRg. There were power differentials that persisted and affected PIRg participation. The study has showed the value of developing job descriptions and a more formal means of setting out respective expectations. Future research may wish to elicit the views of focal participants in such studies about the mediation of research by public involvement in research.

A survey of the experience of living with dementia in a dementia-friendly community.

Dementia-friendly communities (DFCs) are one way in which people living with dementia can be supported to be active, engaged and valued citizens. Quantitative evaluations of the experiences of those with dementia living within these communities are scarce. This article reports findings from a survey of people living with dementia on their experience of living in a DFC. Two-hundred and forty people living with dementia completed a cross-sectional survey in six DFCs across England. Around half of respondents reported they were aware they were living in a DFC. Being aware of living in a DFC was associated with taking part in leisure activities (p = 0.042), community centre attendance (p = 0.009), being involved in organised activities or groups (p < 0.001), feeling understood (p = 0.008), and feeling valued for their own contributions to the community (p = 0.002). This study illustrates the contribution that surveys can make in facilitating the expression of views and experiences of people living with dementia. Awareness of living within a DFC is associated with greater involvement in, and belonging to, the wider community.

Reporting on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research publications: using the GRIPP2 checklists with lay co-researchers.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement (PPI) in health and social care research is considered important internationally, with increasing evidence that PPI improves the quality, relevance and outcomes of research. There has been a growth in research publications that describe PPI in the research process, but the frequency and detail of PPI reporting varies considerably. This paper reports on a collaborative study that aimed to describe the extent of PPI in publications from research funded by the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) in the East of England (EoE), part of the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in England (2014-2019). METHODS: A descriptive study of all research publications (1st January 2014 to 31st October 2017) funded by the NIHR CLAHRC EoE. Members of the Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg), at the University of Hertfordshire, were actively involved, with four PIRg co-researchers. We used an internationally recognised reporting checklist for PPI called the GRIPP2 (Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public, Version 2) to guide the reviewing process. RESULTS: Out of 148 research papers identified, 16 (14%) reported some aspect of PPI activity and were included for review. Ten of the publications (63%) acknowledged the contributions of PPI individuals and/or groups and five had PPI co-authors. There was considerable variation in the PPI reported in the publications, with some 'missed opportunities' to provide detail of PPI undertaken. The perspectives of the co-researchers shaped the reporting of the results from this study. The co-researchers found the GRIPP2-SF (short form) to be useful, but the GRIPP2-LF (long form) was considered over complicated and not user-friendly. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to involve lay co-researchers in the review of PPI reporting using the GRIPP2 reporting checklists (GRIPP2-SF and GRIPP2-LF). We make recommendations for a revised version of the GRIPP2-SF, with clearer instructions and three additional sections to record whether PPI is reported in the abstract or key words, in the acknowledgements section, and whether there are PPI co-authors. We also recommend the provision of training and support for patient and public peer reviewers.

Involving patients, family carers and members of the public in research is known as patient and public involvement, or PPI. In health and social care research, PPI is considered important by many, including patients and research funders. Increasingly, research publications include an account of how members of the public have been involved in research being reported. But often there is not much detail regarding who was involved, what they did, and what difference their involvement made.In our study, we reviewed publications from research funded by an organisation called the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) in the East of England (EoE), to understand how members of the public had been involved. We also wanted to see how lay co-researchers found the use of a checklist developed to assess the reporting of PPI: the 'Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public, Version 2' (GRIPP2).Members of a Public Involvement in Research group (PIRg), based at the University of Hertfordshire, were actively involved in the study, with four PIRg members becoming co-researchers. The GRIPP2 has a long form and short form, and we used these to review 16 research publications.We found great variation in the PPI activities reported in the publications. The lay co-researchers thought the GRIPP2 short form was useful, but the long form was considered over complicated and not user-friendly. We recommend a revised version of the GRIPP2 short form, with clearer instructions, additional sections and training and support for patient and public reviewers.