A Low-Cost Method for Understanding How Nature-Based Early Learning and Childcare Impacts Children's Health and Wellbeing.

Nature-based play and learning provision is becoming increasingly popular across the early learning and childcare (ELC) sector in Scotland. However, there remains a lack of understanding of how the program is expected to function. This has implications for program learning and may affect wider rollout of the program. Secondary data analysis of parent interviews (n = 22) and observations (n = 7) in Scottish ELC settings, and review of internationally published studies (n = 33) were triangulated to develop a program theory using the Theory of Change approach. This approach makes a program's underlying assumptions explicit by systematically demonstrating the relationship between each component: inputs, activities, outcomes, impact, and the contexts of the program. Findings suggested that location of outdoor nature space, affordances, availability of trained practitioners, and transport to location lead to activities such as free play, educator-led activities, and interactions with nature, resulting in longer durations of physical activity, interactions with peers and educators, and increased engagement with the natural environment. These activities are vital for supporting children's physical, cognitive, social, and emotional development. Our results demonstrate the value of using secondary data analysis to improve our understanding of the underlying theory of nature-based ELC which can support future evaluation designs. These findings will be of interest to program evaluators, researchers, practitioners, and funders, who find themselves with limited resources and want to better understand their program before investing in an evaluation. We encourage researchers and evaluators in the field of early years and outdoor play in other countries to refine this logic model in their own context-specific setting.

Exploring the provision and motives behind the adoption of health-promotion programmes in professional football clubs across four European countries.

This study mapped existing health-promotion provisions targeting adults in professional football clubs across England, the Netherlands, Norway, and Portugal, and explored motives behind the clubs' adoption of the European Fans in Training (EuroFIT) programme. We surveyed top-tier football clubs in the four countries and interviewed representatives from football clubs and the clubs' charitable foundation who delivered EuroFIT. The findings showed large between-country differences, with football clubs in England reporting far greater healthy lifestyle provision than other countries. Relatively few health-promotion programmes targeted adults, particularly in the Netherlands, Portugal, and Norway. Club representatives reported that the motives for adopting the EuroFIT programme often involved adhering to both the social objectives of the football club or club's foundation and business-related objectives. They viewed the scientific evidence and evaluation underpinning EuroFIT as helpful in demonstrating the value and potential future impact of both the programme and the clubs' wider corporate social responsibility provision.

Implementing social prescribing in primary care in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: process evaluation of the 'Deep End' community Links Worker Programme.

BACKGROUND: Social prescribing involving primary care-based 'link workers' is a key UK health policy that aims to reduce health inequalities. However, the process of implementation of the link worker approach has received little attention despite this being central to the desired impact and outcomes. AIM: To explore the implementation process of such an approach in practice. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative process evaluation of the 'Deep End' Links Worker Programme (LWP) over a 2-year period, in seven general practices in deprived areas of Glasgow. METHOD: The study used thematic analysis to identify the extent of LWP integration in each practice and the key factors associated with implementation. Analysis was informed by normalisation process theory (NPT). RESULTS: Only three of the seven practices fully integrated the LWP into routine practice within 2 years, based on the NPT constructs of coherence, cognitive participation, and collective action. Compared with 'partially integrated practices', 'fully integrated practices' had better shared understanding of the programme among staff, higher staff engagement with the LWP, and were implementing all aspects of the LWP at patient, practice, and community levels of intervention. Successful implementation was associated with GP buy-in, collaborative leadership, good team dynamics, link worker support, and the absence of competing innovations. CONCLUSION: Even in a well-resourced government-funded programme, the majority of practices involved had not fully integrated the LWP within the first 2 years. Implementing social prescribing and link workers within primary care at scale is unlikely to be a 'quick fix' for mitigating health inequalities in deprived areas.

Effectiveness of Community-Links Practitioners in Areas of High Socioeconomic Deprivation.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of a primary care-based community-links practitioner (CLP) intervention on patients' quality of life and well-being. METHODS: Quasi-experimental cluster-randomized controlled trial in socioeconomically deprived areas of Glasgow, Scotland. Adult patients (aged 18 years or older) referred to CLPs in 7 intervention practices were compared with a random sample of adult patients from 8 comparison practices at baseline and 9 months. PRIMARY OUTCOME: health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, a standardized measure of self-reported health-related quality of life that assesses 5 dimensions at 5 levels of severity). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: well-being (Investigating Choice Experiments for the Preferences of Older People Capability Measure for Adults [ICECAP-A]), depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Depression [HADS-D]), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Anxiety [HADS-A]), and self-reported exercise. Multilevel, multiregression analyses adjusted for baseline differences. Patients were not blinded to the intervention, but outcome analysis was masked. RESULTS: Data were collected on 288 and 214 (74.3%) patients in the intervention practices at baseline and follow-up, respectively, and on 612 and 561 (92%) patients in the comparison practices. Intention-to-treat analysis found no differences between the 2 groups for any outcome. In subgroup analyses, patients who saw the CLP on 3 or more occasions (45% of those referred) had significant improvements in EQ-5D-5L, HADS-D, HADS-A, and exercise levels. There was a high positive correlation between CLP consultation rates and patient uptake of suggested community resources. CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to prove the effectiveness of referral to CLPs based in primary care in deprived areas for improving patient outcomes. Future efforts to boost uptake and engagement could improve overall outcomes, although the apparent improvements in those who regularly saw the CLPs may be due to reverse causality. Further research is needed before wide-scale deployment of this approach.

Delivering a primary care-based social prescribing initiative: a qualitative study of the benefits and challenges.

BACKGROUND: Social prescribing is a collaborative approach to improve inter-sectoral working between primary health care and community organisations. The Links Worker Programme (LWP) is a social prescribing initiative in areas of high deprivation in Glasgow, Scotland, that is designed to mitigate the negative impacts of the social determinants of health. AIM: To investigate issues relevant to implementing a social prescribing programme to improve inter-sectoral working to achieve public health goals. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study with community organisation representatives and community links practitioners (CLPs) in LWP areas. METHOD: Audiorecordings of semi-structured interviews with 30 community organisation representatives and six CLPs were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Participants identified some benefits of collaborative working, particularly the CLPs' ability to act as a case manager for patients, and their position in GP practices, which operated as a bridge between organisations. However, benefits were seen to flow from new relationships between individuals in community organisations and CLPs, rather than more generally with the practice as a whole. Challenges to the LWP were related to capacity and funding for community organisations in the context of austerity. The capacity of CLPs was also an issue given that their role involved time-consuming, intensive case management. CONCLUSION: Although the LWP appears to be a fruitful approach to collaborative case management, integration initiatives such as social prescribing cannot be seen as 'magic bullets'. In the context of economic austerity, such approaches may not achieve their potential unless funding is available for community organisations to continue to provide services and make and maintain their links with primary care.

The Glasgow 'Deep End' Links Worker Study Protocol: a quasi-experimental evaluation of a social prescribing intervention for patients with complex needs in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation.

BACKGROUND: 'Social prescribing' can be used to link patients with complex needs to local (non-medical) community resources. The 'Deep End' Links Worker Programme is being tested in general practices serving deprived populations in Glasgow, Scotland. OBJECTIVES: To assess the implementation and impact of the intervention at patient and practice levels. METHODS: Study design: Quasi-experimental outcome evaluation with embedded theory-driven process evaluation in 15 practices randomized to receive the intervention or not. Complex intervention: Comprising a practice development fund, a practice-based community links practitioner (CLP), and management support. It aims to link patients to local community organizations and enhance practices' social prescribing capacity. Study population: For intervention practices, staff and adult patients involved in referral to a CLP, and a sample of community organization staff. For comparison practices, all staff and a random sample of adult patients. Sample size: 286 intervention and 484 comparator patients. Outcomes: Primary patient outcome is health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). Secondary patient outcomes include capacity, depression/anxiety, self-esteem, and healthcare utilization. Practice outcome measures include team climate, job satisfaction, morale, and burnout. Outcomes measured at baseline and 9 months. Processes: Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the programme and possible mechanisms through which outcomes are achieved. Analysis plan: For outcome, intention-to-treat analysis with differences between groups tested using mixed-effects regression models. For process, case-study approach with thematic analysis. DISCUSSION: This evaluation will provide new evidence about the implementation and impact of social prescribing by general practices serving patients with complex needs living in areas of high deprivation.