Deaths of despair in England: an observational study of local authority mortality data.

BACKGROUND: Deaths of Despair (DoD) are socially patterned causes of death encompassing drug and alcohol misuse and suicide. DoDs are strongly associated with socioeconomic disadvantage. England has high levels of inequalities, so we hypothesised the existence of marked geographical variations in DoD. We aimed to yield new knowledge on the spatial distribution of DoD, and area-level socioeconomic factors that predict DoD risk in England. METHODS: This observational study was conducted using ICD-10 coded deaths for 307 local authorities in England during 2019-21. Deaths were grouped to non-overlapping categories of drug-related death, alcohol-specific death, and suicide. The mean contributions of each of these causes to the total number of DoD in England were calculated with Poisson exact confidence intervals. Standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) for DoD were generated for each local authority population. A multivariable regression model for DoD risk was developed using 25 socioeconomic variables. FINDINGS: An estimated 46 200 people lost their lives due to DoD between Jan 1, 2019, and Dec 31, 2021. Regional SMRs ranged from 57·4 (SD 16·1) in London to 144·1 (SD 26·8) in the northeast of England (p<0·0001). Alcohol-specific deaths were the largest contributor of DoD, accounting for 44·1% of DoD (95% CI 43·5-44·8), followed by drug-related death (28·1%, 27·7-28·6) and suicide (27·7%, 27·2-28·2). Living in the North, living alone, White British ethnicity, lower inward migration, economic inactivity, income deprivation in older people, employment in elementary occupations, unemployment, and education deprivation in adults were significantly associated with higher DoD rates in England. INTERPRETATION: DoD in England are spatially patterned, with northern regions experiencing a considerably higher burden of mortality from these avoidable causes. A key limitation is ecological bias. This study provides novel insights into area-level risk factors for DoD in England. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration Greater Manchester (ARC-GM).

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy for insomnia in primary care (HABIT): a pragmatic, superiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is prevalent and distressing but access to the first-line treatment, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), is extremely limited. We aimed to assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of sleep restriction therapy, a key component of CBT, which has the potential to be widely implemented. METHODS: We did a pragmatic, superiority, open-label, randomised controlled trial of sleep restriction therapy versus sleep hygiene. Adults with insomnia disorder were recruited from 35 general practices across England and randomly assigned (1:1) using a web-based randomisation programme to either four sessions of nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy plus a sleep hygiene booklet or a sleep hygiene booklet only. There was no restriction on usual care for either group. Outcomes were assessed at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. The primary endpoint was self-reported insomnia severity at 6 months measured with the insomnia severity index (ISI). The primary analysis included participants according to their allocated group and who contributed at least one outcome measurement. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the UK National Health Service and personal social services perspective and expressed in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The trial was prospectively registered (ISRCTN42499563). FINDINGS: Between Aug 29, 2018, and March 23, 2020 we randomly assigned 642 participants to sleep restriction therapy (n=321) or sleep hygiene (n=321). Mean age was 55·4 years (range 19-88), with 489 (76·2%) participants being female and 153 (23·8%) being male. 580 (90·3%) participants provided data for at least one outcome measurement. At 6 months, mean ISI score was 10·9 (SD 5·5) for sleep restriction therapy and 13·9 (5·2) for sleep hygiene (adjusted mean difference -3·05, 95% CI -3·83 to -2·28; p<0·0001; Cohen's d -0·74), indicating that participants in the sleep restriction therapy group reported lower insomnia severity than the sleep hygiene group. The incremental cost per QALY gained was £2076, giving a 95·3% probability that treatment was cost-effective at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000. Eight participants in each group had serious adverse events, none of which were judged to be related to intervention. INTERPRETATION: Brief nurse-delivered sleep restriction therapy in primary care reduces insomnia symptoms, is likely to be cost-effective, and has the potential to be widely implemented as a first-line treatment for insomnia disorder. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Inpatient-level care at home delivered by virtual wards and hospital at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis of complex interventions and their components.

BACKGROUND: Technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home services, such as virtual wards and hospital at home, are being rapidly implemented. This is the first systematic review to link the components of these service delivery innovations to evidence of effectiveness to explore implications for practice and research. METHODS: For this review (registered here https://osf.io/je39y ), we searched Cochrane-recommended multiple databases up to 30 November 2022 and additional resources for randomised and non-randomised studies that compared technology-enabled inpatient-level care at home with hospital-based inpatient care. We classified interventions into care model groups using three key components: clinical activities, workforce, and technology. We synthesised evidence by these groups quantitatively or narratively for mortality, hospital readmissions, cost-effectiveness and length of stay. RESULTS: We include 69 studies: 38 randomised studies (6413 participants; largely judged as low or unclear risk of bias) and 31 non-randomised studies (31,950 participants; largely judged at serious or critical risk of bias). The 69 studies described 63 interventions which formed eight model groups. Most models, regardless of using low- or high-intensity technology, may have similar or reduced hospital readmission risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low-certainty evidence from randomised trials). For mortality, most models had uncertain or unavailable evidence. Two exceptions were low technology-enabled models that involve hospital- and community-based professionals, they may have similar mortality risk compared with hospital-based inpatient care (low- or moderate-certainty evidence from randomised trials). Cost-effectiveness evidence is unavailable for high technology-enabled models, but sparse evidence suggests the low technology-enabled multidisciplinary care delivered by hospital-based teams appears more cost-effective than hospital-based care for those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence suggests that none of technology-enabled care at home models we explored put people at higher risk of readmission compared with hospital-based care. Where limited evidence on mortality is available, there appears to be no additional risk of mortality due to use of technology-enabled at home models. It is unclear whether inpatient-level care at home using higher levels of technology confers additional benefits. Further research should focus on clearly defined interventions in high-priority populations and include comparative cost-effectiveness evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/je39y .

A collaboratively produced model of service design for children and young people with common mental health problems.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the effectiveness of, and implementation complexities associated with, service delivery models for children and young people (CYP) experiencing 'common' mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, behavioural difficulties and self-harm. This paper outlines how a model for high-quality service design for this population group was developed by identifying available services, their effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability, and the barriers and enablers to access. METHODS: Sequential, mixed-methods design, combining evidence syntheses (scoping and integrative reviews of the international literature) with primary research (a collective case study in England and Wales). Data from these two elements were collaboratively synthesised in a subsequent model-building phase. RESULTS: The scoping review yielded a service model typology. The integrative review found effectiveness evidence only for four models: collaborative care (the only service model to also have cost-effectiveness evidence), outreach approaches, brief intervention services and an organisational framework called 'Availability, Responsiveness and Continuity'. No service model seemed more acceptable than others. Three case study themes were identified: pathways to support; service engagement; and learning and understanding. The model-building phase identified rapid access, learning self-care skills, individualised support, clear information, compassionate and competent staff and aftercare planning as core characteristics of high-quality services. These characteristics were underpinned by four organisational qualities: values that respect confidentiality; engagement and involvement; collaborative relationships; and a learning culture. CONCLUSIONS: A consistent organisational evidence-base for service design and delivery in CYP's mental health spanning many years appears to have had little impact on service provision in England and Wales. Rather than impose - often inflexible and untested - specific local or national models or frameworks, those commissioning, designing and delivering mental health services for CYP should (re)focus on already known, fundamental components necessary for high-quality services. These fundamental components have been integrated into a collaboratively produced general model of service design for CYP with common mental health problems. While this general model is primarily focused on British service provision, it is broad enough to have utility for international audiences.

Referral to the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme and conversion from nondiabetic hyperglycaemia to type 2 diabetes mellitus in England: A matched cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NDPP) is a behaviour change programme for adults who are at risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM): people with raised blood glucose levels, but not in the diabetic range, diagnosed with nondiabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH). We examined the association between referral to the programme and reducing conversion of NDH to T2DM. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Cohort study of patients attending primary care in England using clinical Practice Research Datalink data from 1 April 2016 (NDPP introduction) to 31 March 2020 was used. To minimise confounding, we matched patients referred to the programme in referring practices to patients in nonreferring practices. Patients were matched based on age (≥3 years), sex, and ≥365 days of NDH diagnosis. Random-effects parametric survival models evaluated the intervention, controlling for numerous covariates. Our primary analysis was selected a priori: complete case analysis, 1-to-1 practice matching, up to 5 controls sampled with replacement. Various sensitivity analyses were conducted, including multiple imputation approaches. Analysis was adjusted for age (at index date), sex, time from NDH diagnosis to index date, BMI, HbA1c, total serum cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, prescription of metformin, smoking status, socioeconomic status, a diagnosis of depression, and comorbidities. A total of 18,470 patients referred to NDPP were matched to 51,331 patients not referred to NDPP in the main analysis. Mean follow-up from referral was 482.0 (SD = 317.3) and 472.4 (SD = 309.1) days, for referred to NDPP and not referred to NDPP, respectively. Baseline characteristics in the 2 groups were similar, except referred to NDPP were more likely to have higher BMI and be ever-smokers. The adjusted HR for referred to NDPP, compared to not referred to NDPP, was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.73 to 0.87) (p < 0.001). The probability of not converting to T2DM at 36 months since referral was 87.3% (95% CI: 86.5% to 88.2%) for referred to NDPP and 84.6% (95% CI: 83.9% to 85.4%) for not referred to NDPP. Associations were broadly consistent in the sensitivity analyses, but often smaller in magnitude. As this is an observational study, we cannot conclusively address causality. Other limitations include the inclusion of controls from the other 3 UK countries, data not allowing the evaluation of the association between attendance (rather than referral) and conversion. CONCLUSIONS: The NDPP was associated with reduced conversion rates from NDH to T2DM. Although we observed smaller associations with risk reduction, compared to what has been observed in RCTs, this is unsurprising since we examined the impact of referral, rather than attendance or completion of the intervention.

Representativeness in health research studies: an audit of Greater Manchester Clinical Research Network studies between 2016 and 2021.

BACKGROUND: There are increasing concerns that participants in health research in the UK are not representative of the UK population, risking widening health inequities. However, detailed information on the magnitude of the problem is limited. Therefore, we evaluated if the health research conducted in the Greater Manchester region was broadly representative of its diverse population. METHODS: We conducted an audit of all health  research studies conducted exclusively in Greater Manchester, using data from a national research network. Two researchers selected studies that were (1) an interventional or observational study of a health outcome; (2) 'closed' for recruitment between May 2016 and May 2021 and (3) human research. They extracted study information (dates, contacts, sample recruited, clinical speciality). Participant characteristics were sourced from published and unpublished manuscripts and requested directly from principal investigators and named study contacts. Data were extracted, summarised and compared to the Greater Manchester population for the following metrics: ethnicity, sex, age, deprivation and smoking status. A weighted mean age estimate was calculated to account for variation in age reporting. Too few studies provided patient-level deprivation data so, using the area code of the recruitment site, the area level multiple deprivation, health deprivation and disability index and decile was derived. These data were geo-mapped using QGIS 3.26. RESULTS: Overall, 145/153 (95%) studies met inclusion criteria and participant information was sourced for 85/145 (59%) studies, representing 21,797 participants. Participant information was incomplete for all metrics. Where ethnicity (N = 10,259) data were available and compared to Greater Manchester estimates there was evidence that ethnic minorities were under-represented (6% versus 16%). Most of the recruitment occurred in central Manchester (50%) and with NHS hospital settings (74%). CONCLUSIONS: Greater Manchester health research in 2016-2021 was centralised and under-represented ethnic minorities. We could not report which ethnic minority group was least represented because sourcing detailed participant information was challenging. Recommendations to improve the reporting of key participant characteristics with which to monitor representativeness in health research are discussed.

Can we achieve better trial recruitment by presenting patient information through multimedia? Meta-analysis of 'studies within a trial' (SWATs).

BACKGROUND: People need high-quality information to make decisions about research participation. Providing information in written format alone is conventional but may not be the most effective and acceptable approach. We developed a structure for the presentation of information using multimedia which included generic and trial-specific content. Our aim was to embed 'Studies Within A Trial' (SWATs) across multiple ongoing trials to test whether multimedia presentation of patient information led to better rates of recruitment. METHODS: Five trials included a SWAT and randomised their participants to receive a multimedia presentation alongside standard information, or standard written information alone. We collected data on trial recruitment, acceptance and retention and analysed the pooled results using random effects meta-analysis, with the primary outcome defined as the proportion of participants randomised following an invitation to take part. RESULTS: Five SWATs provided data on the primary outcome of proportion of participants randomised. Multimedia alongside written information results in little or no difference in recruitment rates (pooled odds ratio = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.17, p-value = 0.671, I2 = 0%). There was no effect on any other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Multimedia alongside written information did not improve trial recruitment rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN71952900, ISRCTN 06710391, ISRCTN 17160087, ISRCTN05926847, ISRCTN62869767.

Providing multimedia information to children and young people increases recruitment to trials: pre-planned meta-analysis of SWATs.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials are often beset by problems with poor recruitment and retention. Information to support decisions on trial participation is usually provided as printed participant information sheets (PIS), which are often long, technical, and unappealing. Multimedia information (MMI), including animations and videos, may be a valuable alternative or complement to a PIS. The Trials Engagement in Children and Adolescents (TRECA) study compared MMI to PIS to investigate the effects on participant recruitment, retention, and quality of decision-making. METHODS: We undertook six SWATs (Study Within A Trial) within a series of host trials recruiting children and young people. Potential participants in the host trials were randomly allocated to receive MMI-only, PIS-only, or combined MMI + PIS. We recorded the rates of recruitment and retention (varying between 6 and 26 weeks post-randomisation) in each host trial. Potential participants approached about each host trial were asked to complete a nine-item Decision-Making Questionnaire (DMQ) to indicate their evaluation of the information and their reasons for participation/non-participation. Odds ratios were calculated and combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Data from 3/6 SWATs for which it was possible were combined in a meta-analysis (n = 1758). Potential participants allocated to MMI-only were more likely to be recruited to the host trial than those allocated to PIS-only (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.05, 2.28; p = 0.03). Those allocated to combined MMI + PIS compared to PIS-only were no more likely to be recruited to the host trial (OR = 0.89; 95% CI 0.53, 1.50; p = 0.67). Providing MMI rather than PIS did not impact on DMQ scores. Once children and young people had been recruited to host trials, their trial retention rates did not differ according to intervention allocation. CONCLUSIONS: Providing MMI-only increased the trial recruitment rate compared to PIS-only but did not affect DMQ scores. Combined MMI + PIS instead of PIS had no effect on recruitment or retention. MMIs are a useful tool for trial recruitment in children and young people, and they could reduce trial recruitment periods.

Diabetes prevention at scale: Narrative review of findings and lessons from the DIPLOMA evaluation of the NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme in England.

AIMS: The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS DPP) is a large-scale, England-wide behaviour change programme for people at high risk of progressing to type 2 diabetes. We summarise the findings of our six-year DIPLOMA evaluation of its implementation and impact and highlight insights for future programmes. METHODS: Using qualitative interviews, document analysis, observation, surveys and large dataset analysis, eight interlinked work packages considered: equity of access; implementation; service delivery and fidelity; programme outcomes; comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in reducing diabetes incidence; and patient decision making and experience. RESULTS: Delivery of the NHS DPP encountered barriers across many aspects of the programme, and we identified inequalities in terms of the areas, organisations and patient populations most likely to engage with the programme. There was some loss of fidelity at all stages from commissioning to participant understanding. Despite these challenges, there was evidence of significant reductions in diabetes incidence at individual and population levels. The programme was cost-effective even within a short time period. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenge of translating research evidence into routine NHS delivery at scale, our findings suggest that an individual-level approach to the prevention of type 2 diabetes in a 'high-risk' population was more effective than usual care. By embedding evaluation with programme delivery and working closely with the NHS DPP team, we provided actionable insights for improving communications with potential participants, supporting primary care referral, honing the delivery model with better provider relationships and more patient choice, increasing understanding of behaviour change techniques, and enriching the educational and health coaching content.

Household wealth, neighbourhood deprivation and frailty amongst middle-aged and older adults in England: a longitudinal analysis over 15 years (2002-2017).

BACKGROUND: frailty is a condition of reduced function and health due to ageing processes and is associated with a higher risk of falls, hospitalisation, disability and mortality. OBJECTIVE: to determine the relationship between household wealth and neighbourhood deprivation with frailty status, independently of demographic factors, educational attainment and health behaviours. DESIGN: population-based cohort study. SETTING: communities in England. SUBJECTS: in total 17,438 adults aged 50+ from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. METHODS: multilevel mixed-effects ordered logistic regression was used in this study. Frailty was measured using a frailty index. We defined small geographic areas (neighbourhoods) using English Lower layer Super Output Areas. Neighbourhood deprivation was measured by the English Index of Multiple Deprivation, grouped into quintiles. Health behaviours included in this study are smoking and frequency of alcohol consumption. RESULTS: the proportion of respondents who were prefrail and frail were 33.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.0-34.6%] and 11.7 (11.1-12.2)%, respectively. Participants in the lowest wealth quintile and living in the most deprived neighbourhood quintile had 1.3 (95% CI = 1.2-1.3) and 2.2 (95% CI = 2.1-2.4) times higher odds of being prefrail and frail, respectively, than the wealthiest participants living in the least deprived neighbourhoods Living in more deprived neighbourhood and poorer wealth was associated with an increased risk of becoming frail. Those inequalities did not change over time. CONCLUSIONS: in this population-based sample, living in a deprived area or having low wealth was associated with frailty in middle-aged and older adults. This relationship was independent of the effects of individual demographic characteristics and health behaviours.

Telephone treatments in Improving Access to Psychological Therapies services: an analysis of use and impact on treatment uptake.

BACKGROUND: There is debate about how best to increase access to psychological therapy and deliver mental healthcare effectively and efficiently at a national level. One trend is the increased use of the telephone to deliver therapy. However, there is the potential to disadvantage certain patient groups and/or impact on uptake of help. This study aims to answer three questions: (i) Which factors are associated with being offered an assessment by telephone? (ii) Which factors are associated with attendance at assessment? and (iii) What is the impact of an assessment by telephone on subsequent treatment appointment? METHODS: Routine outcome data was provided by seven UK Improving Access to Psychological Therapy services. The analysis sample comprised 49,923 patients who referred to 615 general practices in 2017. Multilevel modelling, including service and GP practice as random factors, was used to answer the three research questions. RESULTS: The offer of an initial assessment by telephone was strongly associated with local service configuration. Patient self-referral, a shorter wait, greater age and lower deprivation were associated with attendance at assessment and subsequent treatment session. Telephone mode assessment had no impact on the uptake of the assessment but may influence the uptake of further treatment if this was also by telephone. The practitioner carrying out the assessment had a significant effect on subsequent treatment uptake. CONCLUSION: Offering telephone assessments does not have a negative impact on uptake of assessment and services may benefit by facilitating and integrating telephone assessments into their systems. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the use of telephone and other remote means of delivery, and results from this study can inform services to consider how best to re-configure post-pandemic.

Enhancing the quality of psychological interventions delivered by telephone in mental health services: increasing the likelihood of successful implementation using a theory of change.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of new and complex interventions in mental health settings can be challenging. This paper explores the use of a Theory of Change (ToC) for intervention design and evaluation to increase the likelihood of complex interventions being effective, sustainable, and scalable. Our intervention was developed to enhance the quality of psychological interventions delivered by telephone in primary care mental health services. METHODS: A ToC represents how our designed quality improvement intervention targeting changes at service, practitioner, and patient levels was expected to improve engagement in, and the quality of, telephone-delivered psychological therapies. The intervention was evaluated following implementation in a feasibility study within three NHS Talking Therapies services through a qualitative research design incorporating semi-structured interviews and a focus group with key stakeholders (patients, practitioners, and service leads) (N = 15). Data were analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the ToC was examined and modified accordingly following the findings. RESULTS: CFIR analysis highlighted a set of challenges encountered during the implementation of our service quality improvement telephone intervention that appeared to have weakened the contribution to the change mechanisms set out by the initial ToC. Findings informed changes to the intervention and refinement of the ToC and are expected to increase the likelihood of successful future implementation in a randomised controlled trial. CONCLUSIONS: Four key recommendations that could help to optimise implementation of a complex intervention involving different key stakeholder groups in any setting were identified. These include: 1-developing a good understanding of the intervention and its value among those receiving the intervention; 2-maximising engagement from key stakeholders; 3-ensuring clear planning and communication of implementation goals; and 4-encouraging the use of strategies to monitor implementation progress.

Is bureaucracy being busted in research ethics and governance for health services research in the UK? Experiences and perspectives reported by stakeholders through an online survey.

BACKGROUND: It has long been noted that the chain from identification of need (research gap) to impact in the real world is both long and tortuous. This study aimed to contribute evidence about research ethics and governance arrangements and processes in the UK with a focus on: what works well; problems; impacts on delivery; and potential improvements. METHODS: Online questionnaire widely distributed 20th May 2021, with request to forward to other interested parties. The survey closed on 18th June 2021. Questionnaire included closed and open questions related to demographics, role, study objectives. RESULTS: Responses were received from 252 respondents, 68% based in universities 25% in the NHS. Research methods used by respondents included interviews/focus groups (64%); surveys/questionnaires (63%); and experimental/quasi experimental (57%). Respondents reported that participants in the research they conducted most commonly included: patients (91%); NHS staff (64%) and public (50%). Aspects of research ethics and governance reported to work well were: online centralised systems; confidence in rigorous, respected systems; and helpful staff. Problems with workload, frustration and delays were reported, related to overly bureaucratic, unclear, repetitive, inflexible and inconsistent processes. Disproportionality of requirements for low-risk studies was raised across all areas, with systems reported to be risk averse, defensive and taking little account of the risks associated with delaying or deterring research. Some requirements were reported to have unintended effects on inclusion and diversity, particularly impacting Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) and engagement processes. Existing processes and requirements were reported to cause stress and demoralisation, particularly as many researchers are employed on fixed term contracts. High negative impacts on research delivery were reported, in terms of timescales for completing studies, discouraging research particularly for clinicians and students, quality of outputs and costs. Suggested improvements related to system level changes / overall approach and specific refinements to existing processes. CONCLUSIONS: Consultation with those involved in Health Services Research in the UK revealed a picture of overwhelming and increasing bureaucracy, delays, costs and demoralisation related to gaining the approvals necessary to conduct research in the NHS. Suggestions for improvement across all three areas focused on reducing duplication and unnecessary paperwork/form filling and reaching a better balance between risks of harm through research and harms which occur because research to inform practice is delayed or deterred.

The influence of demographic, health and psychosocial factors on patient uptake of the English NHS diabetes prevention programme.

BACKGROUND: The prevention of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a major concern for health services around the world. The English NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-DPP) offers a group face-to-face behaviour change intervention, based around exercise and diet, to adults with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH), referred from primary care. Previous analysis of the first 100,000 referrals revealed just over half of those referred to the NHS-DPP took up a place. This study aimed to identify the demographic, health and psychosocial factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake to help inform the development of interventions to improve uptake and address inequities between population groups. METHODS: Drawing on the Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization we developed a survey questionnaire to collect data on a wide range of demographic, health and psychosocial factors that might influence uptake of the NHS-DPP. We distributed this questionnaire to a cross-sectional random sample of 597 patients referred to the NHS-DPP across 17 general practices, chosen for variation. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with NHS-DPP uptake. RESULTS: 325 out of 597 questionnaires were completed (54%). Only a third of responders took up the offer of a place. The best performing model for uptake (AUC = 0.78) consisted of four factors: older age; beliefs concerning personal vulnerability to T2DM; self-efficacy for reducing T2DM risk; and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP. After accounting for these, demographic and health-related factors played only a minor role. CONCLUSION: Unlike fixed demographic characteristics, psychosocial perceptions may be amenable to change. NHS-DPP uptake rates may be improved by targeting the beliefs of patients about their risk of developing T2DM, their ability to carry out and sustain behaviours to reduce this risk, and the efficacy of the NHS-DPP in providing the necessary understanding and skills required. The recently introduced digital version of the NHS DPP could help address the even lower uptake amongst younger adults. Such changes could facilitate proportional access from across different demographic strata.

Influences on Patient Uptake of and Engagement With the National Health Service Digital Diabetes Prevention Programme: Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Digital diabetes prevention programs (digital-DPPs) are being implemented as population-based approaches to type 2 diabetes mellitus prevention in several countries to address problems with the uptake of traditional face-to-face diabetes prevention programs. However, assessments of digital-DPPs have largely focused on clinical outcomes and usability among those who have taken them up, whereas crucial information on decision-making about uptake (eg, whether a user downloads and registers on an app) and engagement (eg, the extent of use of an app or its components over time) is limited. Greater understanding of factors that influence uptake and engagement decisions may support large-scale deployments of digital-DPPs in real-world settings. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the key influences on uptake and engagement decisions of individuals who were offered the National Health Service Healthier You: Digital Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-digital-DPP). METHODS: A qualitative interview study was conducted using semistructured interviews. Participants were adults, aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with nondiabetic hyperglycemia, and those who had been offered the NHS-digital-DPP. Recruitment was conducted via 4 providers of the NHS-digital-DPP and 3 primary care practices in England. Interviews were conducted remotely and were guided by a theoretically informed topic guide. Analysis of interviews was conducted using an inductive thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 32 participants who had either accepted or declined the NHS-digital-DPP. In total, 7 overarching themes were identified as important factors in both decisions to take up and to engage with the NHS-digital-DPP. These were knowledge and understanding, referral process, self-efficacy, self-identity, motivation and support, advantages of digital service, and reflexive monitoring. Perceptions of accessibility and convenience of the NHS-digital-DPP were particularly important for uptake, and barriers in terms of the referral process and health care professionals' engagement were reported. Specific digital features including health coaches and monitoring tools were important for engagement. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the literature on factors that influence the uptake of and engagement with digital-DPPs and suggests that digital-DPPs can overcome many barriers to the uptake of face-to-face diabetes prevention programs in supporting lifestyle changes aimed at diabetes prevention.

Design and Early Use of the Nationally Implemented Healthier You National Health Service Digital Diabetes Prevention Programme: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The Healthier You National Health Service Digital Diabetes Prevention Programme (NHS-digital-DPP) is a 9-month digital behavior change intervention delivered by 4 independent providers that is implemented nationally across England. No studies have explored the design features included by service providers of digital diabetes prevention programs to promote engagement, and little is known about how participants of nationally implemented digital diabetes prevention programs such as this one make use of them. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand engagement with the NHS-digital-DPP. The specific objectives were to describe how engagement with the NHS-digital-DPP is promoted via design features and strategies and describe participants' early engagement with the NHS-digital-DPP apps. METHODS: Mixed methods were used. The qualitative study was a secondary analysis of documents detailing the NHS-digital-DPP intervention design and interviews with program developers (n=6). Data were deductively coded according to an established framework of engagement with digital health interventions. For the quantitative study, anonymous use data collected over 9 months for each provider representing participants' first 30 days of use of the apps were obtained for participants enrolled in the NHS-digital-DPP. Use data fields were categorized into 4 intervention features (Track, Learn, Coach Interactions, and Peer Support). The amount of engagement with the intervention features was calculated for the entire cohort, and the differences between providers were explored statistically. RESULTS: Data were available for 12,857 participants who enrolled in the NHS-digital-DPP during the data collection phase. Overall, 94.37% (12,133/12,857) of those enrolled engaged with the apps in the first 30 days. The median (IQR) number of days of use was 11 (2-25). Track features were engaged with the most (number of tracking events: median 46, IQR 3-22), and Peer Support features were the least engaged with, a median value of 0 (IQR 0-0). Differences in engagement with features were observed across providers. Qualitative findings offer explanations for the variations, including suggesting the importance of health coaches, reminders, and regular content updates to facilitate early engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all participants in the NHS-digital-DPP started using the apps. Differences across providers identified by the mixed methods analysis provide the opportunity to identify features that are important for engagement with digital health interventions and could inform the design of other digital behavior change interventions.

'Finishing the race' - a cohort study of weight and blood glucose change among the first 36,000 patients in a large-scale diabetes prevention programme.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Diabetes Prevention Programme for England, "Healthier You", encourages behaviour change regarding healthy eating and physical exercise among people identified to be at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes. The aim of this research was to examine change, and factors associated with change, in measures of HbA1c and weight in participants and completers of the programme between 2016 and 2019. METHODS: Participant-level data collected by programme service providers on referrals prior to March 2018 was analysed. Changes from baseline to both 6 months and completion in HbA1c and weight were examined using mixed effects linear regression, adjusting for patient characteristics, service provider and site. RESULTS: Completers had average improvements in HbA1c of 2.1 mmol/mol [95% CI: - 2.2, - 2.0] (0.19% [95% CI: - 0.20, - 0.18]) and reductions of 3.6 kg [95% CI: - 3.6, - 3.5] in weight, in absolute terms. Variation across the four providers was observed at both time points: two providers had significantly smaller average reductions in HbA1c and one provider had a significantly smaller average reduction in weight compared to the other providers. At both time points, ex- or current smokers had smaller reductions in HbA1c than non-smokers and those from minority ethnic groups lost less weight than White participants. For both outcomes, associations with other factors were small or null and variation across sites remained after adjustment for provider and case mix. CONCLUSIONS: Participants who completed the programme, on average, experienced improvements in weight and HbA1c. There was substantial variation in HbA1c change and smaller variation in weight loss between providers and across different sites. Aside from an association between HbA1c change and smoking, and between weight loss and ethnicity, results were broadly similar regardless of patient characteristics.

Factors associated with unmet need for support to maintain independence in later life: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative evidence.

BACKGROUND: populations are considered to have an 'unmet need' when they could benefit from, but do not get, the necessary support. Policy efforts to achieve equitable access to long-term care require an understanding of patterns of unmet need. A systematic review was conducted to identify factors associated with unmet need for support to maintain independence in later life. METHODS: seven bibliographic databases and four non-bibliographic evidence sources were searched. Quantitative observational studies and qualitative systematic reviews were included if they reported factors associated with unmet need for support to maintain independence in populations aged 50+, in high-income countries. No limits to publication date were imposed. Studies were quality assessed and a narrative synthesis used, supported by forest plots to visualise data. FINDINGS: forty-three quantitative studies and 10 qualitative systematic reviews were included. Evidence across multiple studies suggests that being male, younger age, living alone, having lower levels of income, poor self-rated health, more functional limitations and greater severity of depression were linked to unmet need. Other factors that were reported in single studies were also identified. In the qualitative reviews, care eligibility criteria, the quality, adequacy and absence of care, and cultural and language barriers were implicated in unmet need. CONCLUSIONS: this review identifies which groups of older people may be most at risk of not accessing the support they need to maintain independence. Ongoing monitoring of unmet need is critical to support policy efforts to achieve equal ageing and equitable access to care.

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of a group self-management support program versus treatment-as-usual for anxiety disorders: study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The integration of a personal recovery-oriented practice in mental health services is an emerging principle in policy planning. Self-management support (SMS) is an intervention promoting recovery that aims at educating patients on the nature of their mental disorder, improving their strategies to manage their day-to-day symptoms, fostering self-efficacy and empowerment, preventing relapse, and promoting well-being. While SMS is well established for chronic physical conditions, there is a lack of evidence to support the implementation of structured SMS programs for common mental disorders, and particularly for anxiety disorders. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of a group-based self-management support program for anxiety disorders as an add-on to treatment-as-usual in community-based care settings. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a multicentre pragmatic randomized controlled trial with a pre-treatment, post-treatment (4-month post-randomization), and follow-ups at 8, 12 and 24-months. TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS: a) group self-management support (10 weekly 2.5-h group web-based sessions with 10-15 patients with two trained facilitators); b) treatment-as-usual. Participants will include adults meeting DSM-5 criteria for Panic Disorder, Agoraphobia, Social Anxiety Disorder, and/or Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The primary outcome measure will be the Beck Anxiety Inventory; secondary outcome measures will comprise self-reported instruments for anxiety and depressive symptoms, recovery, self-management, quality of life, and service utilisation. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data will be analysed based on intention-to-treat with a mixed effects regression model accounting for between and within-subject variations in the effects of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This study will contribute to the limited knowledge base regarding the effectiveness of structured group self-management support for anxiety disorders. It is expected that changes in patients' self-management behaviour will lead to better anxiety management and, consequently, to improved patient outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05124639 . Prospectively registered 18 November 2021.

Association Between Patient Factors and the Effectiveness of Wearable Trackers at Increasing the Number of Steps per Day Among Adults With Cardiometabolic Conditions: Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data From Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports the use of wearable trackers by people with cardiometabolic conditions. However, as the health benefits are small and confounded by heterogeneity, there remains uncertainty as to which patient groups are most helped by wearable trackers. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of wearable trackers in patients with cardiometabolic conditions to identify subgroups of patients who most benefited and to understand interventional differences. METHODS: We obtained individual participant data from randomized controlled trials of wearable trackers that were conducted before December 2020 and measured steps per day as the primary outcome in participants with cardiometabolic conditions including diabetes, overweight or obesity, and cardiovascular disease. We used statistical models to account for clustering of participants within trials and heterogeneity across trials to estimate mean differences with the 95% CI. RESULTS: Individual participant data were obtained from 9 of 25 eligible randomized controlled trials, which included 1481 of 3178 (47%) total participants. The wearable trackers revealed that over the median duration of 12 weeks, steps per day increased by 1656 (95% CI 918-2395), a significant change. Greater increases in steps per day from interventions using wearable trackers were observed in men (interaction coefficient -668, 95% CI -1157 to -180), patients in age categories over 50 years (50-59 years: interaction coefficient 1175, 95% CI 377-1973; 60-69 years: interaction coefficient 981, 95% CI 222-1740; 70-90 years: interaction coefficient 1060, 95% CI 200-1920), White patients (interaction coefficient 995, 95% CI 360-1631), and patients with fewer comorbidities (interaction coefficient -517, 95% CI -1188 to -11) compared to women, those aged below 50, non-White patients, and patients with multimorbidity. In terms of interventional differences, only face-to-face delivery of the tracker impacted the effectiveness of the interventions by increasing steps per day. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cardiometabolic conditions, interventions using wearable trackers to improve steps per day mostly benefited older White men without multimorbidity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019143012; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=143012.