Enhancing the health of NHS staff: eTHOS - protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial of an employee health screening clinic for NHS staff to reduce absenteeism and presenteeism, compared with usual care.

BACKGROUND: Staff absenteeism and presenteeism incur high costs to the NHS and are associated with adverse health outcomes. The main causes are musculoskeletal complaints and mental ill-health, which are potentially modifiable, and cardiovascular risk factors are also common. We will test the feasibility of an RCT to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an employee health screening clinic on reducing sickness absenteeism and presenteeism. METHODS: This is an individually randomised controlled pilot trial aiming to recruit 480 participants. All previously unscreened employees from four hospitals within three UK NHS hospital Trusts will be eligible. Those randomised to the intervention arm will be invited to attend an employee health screening clinic consisting of a screening assessment for musculoskeletal (STarT MSK and STarT Back), mental (PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and cardiovascular (NHS Health Check if aged ≥ 40, lifestyle check if < 40 years) health. Screen positives will be given advice and/or referral to recommended services. Those randomised to the control arm will receive usual care. Participants will complete a questionnaire at baseline and 26 weeks; anonymised absenteeism and staff demographics will also be collected from personnel records. The co-primary outcomes are as follows: recruitment, referrals and uptake of recommended services in the intervention arm. Secondary outcomes include the following: results of screening assessments, uptake of individual referrals, reported changes in health behaviours, acceptability and feasibility of intervention, indication of contamination and costs. Outcomes related to the definitive trial include self-reported and employee records of absenteeism with reasons. Process evaluation to inform a future trial includes interviews with participants, intervention delivery staff and service providers receiving referrals. Analyses will include presentation of descriptive statistics, framework analysis for qualitative data and costs and consequences presented for health economics. DISCUSSION: The study will provide data to inform the design of a definitive RCT which aims to find an effective and cost-effective method of reducing absenteeism and presenteeism amongst NHS staff. The feasibility study will test trial procedures, and process outcomes, including the success of strategies for including underserved groups, and provide information and data to help inform the design and sample size for a definitive trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN reference number 10237475 .

Hepatitis C virus testing, liver disease assessment and direct-acting antiviral treatment uptake and outcomes in a service for people who are homeless in Sydney, Australia: The LiveRLife homelessness study.

People who are homeless have increased hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection risk, and are less likely to access primary healthcare. We aimed to evaluate HCV RNA prevalence, liver disease burden, linkage to care and treatment uptake and outcomes among people attending a homelessness service in Sydney. Participants were enrolled in an observational cohort study with recruitment at a homelessness service over eight liver health campaign days. Finger-stick whole-blood samples for Xpert® HCV Viral Load and venepuncture blood samples were collected. Participants completed a self-administered survey and received transient elastography and clinical assessment by a general practitioner or nurse. Clinical follow-up was recommended 2-12 weeks after enrolment. For participants initiating direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, medical records were audited retrospectively and treatment outcome data were collected. Among 202 participants (mean age, 48 years), 82% were male (n = 165), 39% (n = 78) reported ever injecting drugs, of whom 63% (n = 49) injected in the previous month. Overall, 23% (n = 47) had detectable HCV RNA and 6% (n=12) had cirrhosis. HCV RNA prevalence among participants with either injecting or incarceration history was 35% (37/105), compared to 4% (3/73) among participants without these risk factors. Among those with detectable HCV RNA, 23 (49%) commenced therapy, of whom 65% (n = 15) achieved sustained virological response, while the remainder had no available treatment outcome. No participant had documented virological failure. HCV DAA treatment uptake among people attending a homelessness service was encouraging, but innovative models of HCV care are required to improve linkage to care and treatment uptake among this highly marginalized population.

Supporting the use of theory in cross-country health services research: a participatory qualitative approach using Normalisation Process Theory as an example.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and reflect on the process of designing and delivering a training programme supporting the use of theory, in this case Normalisation Process Theory (NPT), in a multisite cross-country health services research study. DESIGN: Participatory research approach using qualitative methods. SETTING: Six European primary care settings involving research teams from Austria, England, Greece, Ireland, The Netherlands and Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: RESTORE research team consisting of 8 project applicants, all senior primary care academics, and 10 researchers. Professional backgrounds included general practitioners/family doctors, social/cultural anthropologists, sociologists and health services/primary care researchers. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Views of all research team members (n=18) were assessed using qualitative evaluation methods, analysed qualitatively by the trainers after each session. RESULTS: Most of the team had no experience of using NPT and many had not applied theory to prospective, qualitative research projects. Early training proved didactic and overloaded participants with information. Drawing on RESTORE's methodological approach of Participatory Learning and Action, workshops using role play, experiential interactive exercises and light-hearted examples not directly related to the study subject matter were developed. Evaluation showed the study team quickly grew in knowledge and confidence in applying theory to fieldwork.Recommendations applicable to other studies include: accepting that theory application is not a linear process, that time is needed to address researcher concerns with the process, and that experiential, interactive learning is a key device in building conceptual and practical knowledge. An unanticipated benefit was the smooth transition to cross-country qualitative coding of study data. CONCLUSION: A structured programme of training enhanced and supported the prospective application of a theory, NPT, to our work but raised challenges. These were not unique to NPT but could arise with the application of any theory, especially in large multisite, international projects. The lessons learnt are applicable to other theoretically informed studies.

Developing, delivering and evaluating primary mental health care: the co-production of a new complex intervention.

BACKGROUND: Health services face the challenges created by complex problems, and so need complex intervention solutions. However they also experience ongoing difficulties in translating findings from research in this area in to quality improvement changes on the ground. BounceBack was a service development innovation project which sought to examine this issue through the implementation and evaluation in a primary care setting of a novel complex intervention. METHODS: The project was a collaboration between a local mental health charity, an academic unit, and GP practices. The aim was to translate the charity's model of care into practice-based evidence describing delivery and impact. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was used to support the implementation of the new model of primary mental health care into six GP practices. An integrated process evaluation evaluated the process and impact of care. RESULTS: Implementation quickly stalled as we identified problems with the described model of care when applied in a changing and variable primary care context. The team therefore switched to using the NPT framework to support the systematic identification and modification of the components of the complex intervention: including the core components that made it distinct (the consultation approach) and the variable components (organisational issues) that made it work in practice. The extra work significantly reduced the time available for outcome evaluation. However findings demonstrated moderately successful implementation of the model and a suggestion of hypothesised changes in outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The BounceBack project demonstrates the development of a complex intervention from practice. It highlights the use of Normalisation Process Theory to support development, and not just implementation, of a complex intervention; and describes the use of the research process in the generation of practice-based evidence. Implications for future translational complex intervention research supporting practice change through scholarship are discussed.

Rethinking how we understand individual healthcare needs for people living with long-term conditions: a qualitative study.

It has been suggested that we need to 'Think Differently' about how we organise care for people with long-term conditions. Current approaches prioritise reducing population disease burden, meaning health need is defined predominantly in terms of disease status, or even risk of disease. However, the result is care which overburdens some individuals. The World Health Organisation has described the need to view health as a 'resource for living' and not an end in itself. This study considers whether this view of health offers an alternative view of healthcare need in people living with long-term conditions. We know that chronic disease can be disruptive for some people; but not all. Our research question asked: Why do people experience long-term conditions differently, and what are the implications for understanding healthcare need? Our phenomenographic study involved qualitative interviews with 24 people living with at least one of the three conditions (diabetes, depression and chronic pain) and explored resources for and demands on daily living. Interviews all took place during 2012 and 2013. A narrative form analysis identified three patterns of illness experience (Gliding Swan, Stormy Seas and Stuck Adrift). Narrative content analysis revealed four factors explaining the variation: personalising care, existence of meaningful anchors, partnership and excess demands. We thus propose three new categories of healthcare need described by a consideration of health as a resource for living: Resilient, Vulnerable and Disconnected. We discuss how the emerging findings may offer scope to develop new needs assessment and patient-reported outcome measure tools. And so, offer a different way of thinking about the organisation for care for people with long-term conditions.