Accessibility of 'essential' alcohol in the time of COVID-19: Casting light on the blind spots of licensing?

Among the Australian and UK governments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic has been the designation of outlets selling alcohol for off-premise consumption as 'essential' services, allowing them to remain open while pubs, hotels and restaurants have been forced to close. In a context of restrictions on movement outside the home in both countries, and where alcohol providers are trying to find new ways to reach their customers, this may lead to an intensification of the social and health harms associated with home drinking. By examining the current situation in both Australia and the UK, we argue that heightened risks from home drinking amid COVID-19 bring into sharp focus long-standing weaknesses within licensing systems in both countries: the regulation of off-premise outlets to minimise harms from drinking at home. We call for critical conversations on how licensing systems should be revised to take more responsibility for protecting people from the health and social harms associated with home drinking, both under COVID-19 and in the future.

Identifying opportunities for engaging the 'community' in local alcohol decision-making: A literature review and synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging communities in actions to reduce alcohol harms has been identified as an international priority. While there exist recommendations for community engagement within alcohol licensing legislation, there is limited understanding of how to involve communities in local decision-making to reduce harms from the alcohol environment. METHODS: A scoping literature review was conducted on community engagement in local government decision-making with relevance to the alcohol environment. Academic and grey literature databases were searched between April and June 2018 to identify examples of community engagement in local government in the UK, published since 2000. Texts were excluded if they did not describe in detail the mechanisms or rationale for community engagement. Information was extracted and synthesised through a narrative approach. RESULTS: 3030 texts were identified through the searches, and 30 texts were included in the final review. Only one text described community engagement in alcohol decision-making (licensing); other local government sectors included planning, regeneration and community safety. Four rationales for community engagement emerged: statutory consultation processes; non-statutory engagement; as part of broader participatory initiatives; and community-led activism. While not all texts reported outcomes, a few described direct community influence on decisions. Broader outcomes included improved relationships between community groups and local government. However, lack of influence over decisions was also common, with multiple barriers to effective engagement identified. CONCLUSION: The lack of published examples of community engagement in local alcohol decision-making relevant to the UK suggests little priority has been placed on sharing learning about supporting engagement in this area. Taking a place-shaping perspective, useful lessons can be drawn from other areas of local government with relevance for the alcohol environment. Barriers to engagement must be considered carefully, particularly around how communities are defined, and how different interests toward the local alcohol environment are represented, or not.

Conceptualising the 'community' as a recipient of money--A critical literature review, and implications for health and inequalities.

There is increasing attention on how money may bring about positive changes to health, and money-based development approaches are becoming more commonplace at the 'community' level, including in high-income countries. However, little attention has been paid to how the 'community' might be varyingly conceptualised in these scenarios, or to the potential implications of this for interpreting the impacts of such health improvement approaches. This paper presents a critical interpretive review of literature presenting different scenarios from high-income countries in which the 'community' receives money, to explore how 'community' is conceptualised in relation to this process. Some texts gave explicit definitions of 'community', but multiple other conceptualisations were interpreted across all texts, conveyed through the construction of 'problematics', and descriptions of how and why money was given. The findings indicate that the flow of money shapes how conceptualisations of 'community' are produced, and that the implicit power relations and inequalities can construct and privilege particular sets of identities and relationships throughout the process. This highlights implications for approaching public health evaluations of giving money to 'communities', and for better understanding how it might bring about change to health and inequalities, where the 'community' cannot be interpreted merely as a setting or recipient of such an intervention, but something constructed and negotiated through the flow of money itself.

Quality assurance of qualitative research: a review of the discourse.

BACKGROUND: Increasing demand for qualitative research within global health has emerged alongside increasing demand for demonstration of quality of research, in line with the evidence-based model of medicine. In quantitative health sciences research, in particular clinical trials, there exist clear and widely-recognised guidelines for conducting quality assurance of research. However, no comparable guidelines exist for qualitative research and although there are long-standing debates on what constitutes 'quality' in qualitative research, the concept of 'quality assurance' has not been explored widely. In acknowledgement of this gap, we sought to review discourses around quality assurance of qualitative research, as a first step towards developing guidance. METHODS: A range of databases, journals and grey literature sources were searched, and papers were included if they explicitly addressed quality assurance within a qualitative paradigm. A meta-narrative approach was used to review and synthesise the literature. RESULTS: Among the 37 papers included in the review, two dominant narratives were interpreted from the literature, reflecting contrasting approaches to quality assurance. The first focuses on demonstrating quality within research outputs; the second focuses on principles for quality practice throughout the research process. The second narrative appears to offer an approach to quality assurance that befits the values of qualitative research, emphasising the need to consider quality throughout the research process. CONCLUSIONS: The paper identifies the strengths of the approaches represented in each narrative and recommend these are brought together in the development of a flexible framework to help qualitative researchers to define, apply and demonstrate principles of quality in their research.

Leadership for health improvement--implementation and evaluation.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to present a co-authored reflection on the health improvement leadership development programme and the key evaluation messages derived from piloting in an English National Health Service region. It highlights the specific attributes of this approach to health improvement leadership development and clarifies health improvement development issues. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Appreciative inquiry and soft systems methodology are combined in an evaluation approach designed to capture individual as well as organisation learning and how it impacts on leadership in specific contexts. FINDINGS: The evaluation exposes the health improvement leadership needs of a multi-organisation cohort, offers some explanations for successful achievement of learning needs while also exposing of the challenges and paradoxes faced in this endeavour. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: There are limited reported templates of how to develop leadership for health improvement. This paper details a whole systems approach, acknowledging the impact of context on leadership and an approach to evaluating such complex initiatives.

Understanding distress in people with severe communication difficulties: developing and assessing the Disability Distress Assessment Tool (DisDAT).

BACKGROUND: Meaningful communication with people with profound communication difficulties depends on the ability of carers to recognize and translate many different verbal cues. Carers appear to be intuitively skilled at identifying distress cues, but have little confidence in their observations. To help in this process, a number of pain tools have been developed, but this sits uncomfortably with the lack of evidence that pain has any specific signs or behaviours. A palliative care team working with people with intellectual disabilities developed the Disability Distress Assessment Tool (DisDAT) to document a wide range of signs and behaviours of distress and when an individual is content. METHOD: The tool was piloted with 16 carers and 8 patients. It was then assessed using quantitative and qualitative methods, employing 56 carers in routine clinical situations with 25 patients, most with severe communication difficulties. Carers of 10 patients participated in semi-structured interviews exploring the signs and behaviours demonstrated by patients when distressed and when content. These same 10 patients were observed for distress cues during different activities. RESULTS: It became clear that distress did not have a common meaning among carers, but there was a clear understanding that distress did not just cover physical pain. The range of distress cues was wide, with no evidence that any cues were specific to particular causes. Although some distress cues were common between patients, each patient had a distinct pattern of distress cues. In addition, different carers identified a different range of distress cues, while the length of the relationship did not influence the number of cues identified. Most distress cues were a change from the norm, but some patients demonstrated distress as an absence of content cues. Carers found the DisDAT simple to use and useful, and several felt that DisDAT would have helped advocate for the patients in previous conflicts with clinical teams. CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence that pain has any specific signs or behaviours. The preliminary and assessment phases showed that distress was a useful clinical construct in providing care. The DisDAT reflected patients' distress communication identified by a range of carers, and provided carers with evidence for their intuitive observations of distress.