What approaches to social prescribing work, for whom, and in what circumstances? A realist review.

The use of non-medical referral, community referral or social prescribing interventions has been proposed as a cost-effective alternative to help those with long-term conditions manage their illness and improve health and well-being. However, the evidence base for social prescribing currently lags considerably behind practice. In this paper, we explore what is known about whether different methods of social prescribing referral and supported uptake do (or do not) work. Supported by an Expert Advisory Group, we conducted a realist review in two phases. The first identified evidence specifically relating to social prescribing in order to develop programme theories in the form of 'if-then' statements, articulating how social prescribing models are expected to work. In the second phase, we aimed to clarify these processes and include broader evidence to better explain the proposed mechanisms. The first phase resulted in 109 studies contributing to the synthesis, and the second phase 34. We generated 40 statements relating to organising principles of how the referral takes place (Enrolment), is accepted (Engagement), and completing an activity (Adherence). Six of these statements were prioritised using web-based nominal group technique by our Expert Group. Studies indicate that patients are more likely to enrol if they believe the social prescription will be of benefit, the referral is presented in an acceptable way that matches their needs and expectations, and concerns elicited and addressed appropriately by the referrer. Patients are more likely to engage if the activity is both accessible and transit to the first session supported. Adherence to activity programmes can be impacted through having an activity leader who is skilled and knowledgeable or through changes in the patient's conditions or symptoms. However, the evidence base is not sufficiently developed methodologically for us to make any general inferences about effectiveness of particular models or approaches.

Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Young People and Their Carers: a Mixed-Method Feasibility Study.

We aimed to evaluate whether mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) was feasible and acceptable for young people, their parents and the clinicians working with them; whether a parallel course for parents was a useful addition; and whether attendance at MBCT was associated with improved outcomes. The design was a mixed-method service evaluation of an eight-session MBCT programme for young people who were recovering from depression. The course was a manualised eight-session group intervention. Both young people (n = 18) and parents (n = 21) completed validated measures before and after the course. Semi-structured interviews were completed with some group participants and clinical staff working in the service. Care records were searched for additional contact following the intervention. Qualitative data from young people, parents and clinicians suggested that MBCT was acceptable and feasible and provided strategies to cope. The parent course was reported to provide personal support to parents and helped them cope with their child's depression whilst also impacting the family, promoted shared understanding of depression and strategies to combat it and addressed intergenerational aspects of depression. Eighty-four per cent of participants attended at least 6/8 sessions, and 48% required no further intervention within the following year. Young people had statistically significant improvements across all outcome measures, whilst parents had statistically significant improvements in rumination, self-compassion and decentring.

What approaches to social prescribing work, for whom, and in what circumstances? A protocol for a realist review.

BACKGROUND: The use of non-drug, non-health-service interventions has been proposed as a cost-effective alternative to help those with long-term conditions manage their illness and improve their health and well-being. Interventions typically involve accessing activities run by the third sector or community agencies and may also be described as non-medical referral, community referral or social prescribing. To be effective, patients need to be "transferred" from the primary care setting into the community and to maintain their participation in activities. However, it is not currently known how and why these approaches enable which people under what circumstances to reach community services that may benefit their health and well-being. METHODS: Database searches and extensive searching of grey sources will be carried out in an attempt to find evidence associated with referral and retention in social prescribing. After initial scoping searches, two main phases of searching will be conducted: (a) will focus on the identification of programme theories to illustrate how approaches to social prescribing work for different people and in different contexts and (b) will consist of targeted searches to locate evidence to refine these candidate theories into configurations of the contexts in which populations and the main mechanisms outcomes are achieved. Inclusion criteria will initially be broad in order to develop a clear picture of the ways in which social prescriptions might operate but may iteratively become more focused in response to initially identified evidence, for example, in terms of the population group. An expert advisory group consisting of professionals working in a range of organisations involved in social prescribing will be convened to check the approaches in the review and provide real-life experience of social prescribing. Findings from the review will be disseminated to commissioners, published in a peer-reviewed journal and used to help refine an intervention model for an outdoor nature-based group intervention. DISCUSSION: This realist review will explore why mechanisms of social prescribing work, for what groups of people and their impact on enrolment, attendance and adherence to programmes. The use of realist approaches to detail the social prescribing process is novel and will offer insights into effective transfer of patients. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016039491.