Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care. AIM: To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices. METHOD: Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD. CONCLUSION: The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Series: Public engagement with research. Part 3: Sharing power and building trust through partnering with communities in primary care research.

BACKGROUND: This article focuses on potential strategies to support primary care researchers in working in partnership with the public and healthcare professionals. Partnership working can potentially to improve the relevance and usefulness of research and ensure better research and health outcomes. DISCUSSION: We describe what we mean by partnership working and the importance of reflecting on power and building trusting relationships. To share power in partnership working, it is essential to critically reflect on the multiple dimensions of power, their manifestations, and your own power. Power can influence relationships and therefore, it is essential to build trust with partners. Next, we outline how the context of primary care research and decisions about who you work with and how to work together, are vital considerations that are imbued with power. Lastly, we suggest different ways of working in partnership to address different dimensions of power. We provide examples from primary care research across Europe regarding how to recognise, tackle, and challenge, invisible, hidden and visible power. CONCLUSION: We conclude by proposing three calls to actions to encourage researchers working in primary care to consider the multiple dimensions of power and move towards partnership working. First is to use participatory methods to improve the inclusivity of your research. Second is to include patients and the public in decisions about the design, delivery and development of research and its outcomes. Third is to address various systemic and institutional barriers which hinder partnership working.

Partnership approaches to primary care research can potentially improve the relevance, usefulness and inclusivity of research.Working in partnership involves researchers and the public sharing power in important research decisions and building trusting relationships.Recognising and addressing power differentials and building trusting relationships requires time and effort.

Improving access to general practice for people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a realist review protocol (The Connection Study).

Introduction: Despite having high unmet health need, people with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD, including combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, poor mental health and domestic violence and abuse) have poor access to general practice. This realist review will examine the existing evidence on interventions or aspects of routine care in general practice that are likely to increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD. Methods and analysis: he aim of this review is to identify how these interventions or aspects of routine care increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD, in which contexts and for which patients. This review will involve a process comprising five sequential phases: (1) identifying established theories, (2) conducting an extensive search for proof, (3) selecting appropriate articles, (4) gathering and organising relevant data, and (5) utilising a realist analytical approach to synthesise evidence and make conclusions. Local implementation documents, in addition to published research studies, will be incorporated to enrich the analysis. We will collaborate with a stakeholder group consisting of people with lived experience of SMD and those who support them to advise us throughout. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required. Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and lay summaries and will be used to develop a complex intervention for improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023390495.

Create to Collaborate: using creative activity and participatory performance in online workshops to build collaborative research relationships.

BACKGROUND: Creative methods/practices have been highlighted as helpful to develop more collaborative, equitable research partnerships between researchers and communities/public-participants. We asked artist partners to design four online workshops, one on each research priority area: school environments and mental health; wellbeing within the Somali community; air pollution; health data. We aimed to understand whether creative processes can enable public-participants and researcher- participants to meet in a neutral space to discuss a research theme and begin to build collaborative relationships through more equal engagement. Ideas could be taken forwards with seed funding, providing opportunity for collaboration to continue beyond initial workshops. METHODS: Different artist partners designed and facilitated four workshops. Evaluation data was collected on each workshop using participatory observation and fieldnotes, alongside chatlog data, and one-to-one interviews with 21 workshop participants, providing a contextually rich, comparative evaluation across four diverse workshops. Analysis was thematically driven. RESULTS: Artist partners took different approaches to designing workshops. The workshops began with introductory games and activities, and there was less emphasis on introductions of people's roles, with the intention to avoid hierarchical dynamics. Whilst public-participants enjoyed this, some researchers found it challenging and reported confusions over their workshop roles. Disrupting usual practice and challenging norms was not always an easy experience. There were examples where emergent, co-created knowledge was enabled. However, it was more challenging to facilitate longer-term collaborative research projects from the workshops due to different stakeholder priorities, and lack of staff time/ less sense of ownership for further work. CONCLUSIONS: Creative activities can influence and impact the types of conversations between public-participants and researchers in a way that changes and challenges power dynamics, shifting towards public-participant driven discussion. Whilst deconstructing hierarchies is important, supporting researchers is key so that any discomfort can be productive and experienced as a vital part of co-production. Longer term collaborative research projects were limited, highlighting a need for facilitation beyond initial workshops, and a sense of ownership from workshop participants to take things forwards. Workshops like these may lend themselves well to research prioritisation. However, taking community-led ideas forwards within research funding landscapes remains challenging.

Create to Collaborate aimed to develop and facilitate creative public involvement workshops with members of the public, researchers, and community organisations, who were potentially interested in collaborating on a future health research project. We wanted to evaluate the extent to which creative, external facilitation by different artists could enable the development of more equal relationships and reduce power differences at the beginning of a research process. We worked with artists who designed and facilitated an online workshop, and community partners who helped recruit members of the public to increase diversity in participation. Then, we delivered and evaluated the workshops to understand different participants' experiences. Four workshops are reported in this article, each focused on a different topic: mental health in school environments, wellbeing in Bristol's Somali community, air pollution, and health data. We took observational notes at the workshops and conducted one-to-one qualitative interviews with 21 workshop participants. Feedback from public-participants taking part in creative workshops led by artist facilitators described them as 'engaging', 'comfortable' and 'equitable'. Researcher-participants reported workshops as 'open', 'inclusive' and 'engaging', whilst also reporting some confusion over what their own roles were and how much they could contribute as academic researchers. The project demonstrates a need for further clarity, particularly for researchers, over what roles may be in setting up a collaborative relationship, and possible disparity in expectations between those attending in an employment capacity and those joining as a public-participant in their own time.

Non-randomised feasibility study of training workshops for Talking Therapies service high-intensity therapists to optimise depression and anxiety outcomes for individuals with co-morbid personality difficulties: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The NHS Talking Therapies for Anxiety and Depression programme ('TTad'; formerly Improving Access to Psychological Therapies 'IAPT') delivers high-intensity cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) to over 200,000 individuals each year for common mental health problems like depression and anxiety. More than half of these individuals experience comorbid personality difficulties, who show poorer treatment outcomes. TTad therapists report feeling unskilled to work with clients with personality difficulties, and enhancing the training of TTad therapists may lead to improved treatment outcomes for individuals presenting with secondary personality difficulties alongside depression and anxiety. METHODS: This is a pre-post non-randomised mixed-method feasibility study, exploring the feasibility and acceptability of a 1-day training workshop for high-intensity (HI) CBT therapists. The workshop is focused on understanding and assessing personality difficulties and adapting HICBT treatments for anxiety and depression to accommodate client needs. The feasibility and acceptability of the workshop and the evaluation procedures will be investigated. It will be examined to what extent the workshop provision leads to improvements in therapist skills and confidence and explored to what extent the training has the potential to enhance clinical outcomes for this client group. DISCUSSION: This feasibility study will provide data on the acceptability and feasibility of delivering brief therapist training to adapt usual HICBT to optimise care for individuals with secondary personality difficulties seeking treatment in TTad services for a primary problem of depression and/or anxiety. The study will also evaluate proof of concept that such an approach has the potential to improve clinical outcomes for those with secondary personality difficulties and report any possible harms identified. The study will inform the design of a future randomised controlled trial designed to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the training. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN81104604 . Submitted on 6th June 2022. Registration date: 3rd January 2023.

Trauma-informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs.

INTRODUCTION: Health, social care, charitable and justice sectors are increasingly recognising the need for trauma-informed services that seek to recognise signs of trauma, provide appropriate paths to recovery and ensure that services enable people rather than retraumatise. Foundational to the development of trauma-informed services is collaboration with people with lived experience of trauma. Co-production principles may provide a useful framework for this collaboration, due to their emphasis on lived experience, and intent to address power imbalances and promote equity. This article aims to examine trauma-informed and co-production principles to consider the extent to which they overlap and explore how to tailor co-production approaches to support people who have experienced trauma. METHODS: Bridging Gaps is a collaboration between women who have experienced complex trauma, a charity that supports them, primary care clinicians and health researchers to improve access to trauma-informed primary care. Using co-production principles, we aimed to ensure that women who have experienced trauma were key decision-makers throughout the project. Through reflective notes (n = 19), observations of meetings (n = 3), interviews with people involved in the project (n = 9) and reflective group discussions on our experiences, we share learning, successes and failures. Data analysis followed a framework approach, using trauma-informed principles. RESULTS: Co-production processes can require adaptation when working with people who have experienced trauma. We emphasise the need for close partnership working, flexibility and transparency around power dynamics, paying particular attention to aspects of power that are less readily visible. Sharing experiences can retrigger trauma. People conducting co-production work need to understand trauma and how this may impact upon an individual's sense of psychological safety. Long-term funding is vital to enable projects to have enough time for the establishment of trust and delivery of tangible results. CONCLUSIONS: Co-production principles are highly suitable when developing trauma-informed services. Greater consideration needs to be given as to whether and how people share lived experiences, the need for safe spaces, honesty and humility, difficult dynamics between empowerment and safety and whether and when blurring boundaries may be helpful. Our findings have applicability to policy-making, funding and service provision to enable co-production processes to become more trauma-informed. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Bridging Gaps was started by a group of women who have experienced complex trauma, including addiction, homelessness, mental health problems, sexual exploitation, domestic and sexual violence and poverty, with a general practitioner (GP) who provides healthcare to this population, alongside a support worker from the charity One25, a charity that supports some of the most marginalised women in Bristol to heal and thrive. More GPs and healthcare researchers joined the group and they have been meeting fortnightly for a period of 4 years with the aim of improving access to trauma-informed primary care. The group uses co-production principles to work together, and we aim to ensure that women who have experienced trauma are key decision-makers throughout our work together. This article is a summary of our learning, informed by discussion, observations and interviews with members of the group.

Unintended consequences of patient online access to health records: a qualitative study in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Health systems are seeking to harness digital tools to promote patient autonomy and increase the efficiency of care worldwide. The NHS Long Term Plan created the right for patients to access 'digital first' primary care by 2023-2024, including online patient access to full medical records. AIM: To identify and understand the unintended consequences of online patient access to medical records. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study in 10 general practices in South West and North West England. METHOD: Semi-structured individual interviews with 13 patients and 16 general practice staff with experience of patient online access to health records. RESULTS: Online access generated unintended consequences that negatively impacted patients' understanding of their health care, with patients finding surprising or difficult to interpret information. Online access impacted GPs' documentation practices, such as when GPs pre-emptively attempted to minimise potential misunderstandings to aid patient understanding of their health care. In other cases, this negatively impacted the quality of the records and patient safety when GPs avoided documenting speculations or concerns. Contrary to assumptions that workload would be reduced, online access introduced extra work, such as managing and monitoring access, and taking measures to prevent possible harm to patients. CONCLUSION: The unintended consequences described by both staff and patients show that, to achieve the intended consequences set out in NHS policy, additional work is necessary to prepare records for sharing and to prepare patients about what to expect. It is crucial that practices are adequately supported and resourced to manage the unintended consequences of online access, now that it is the default position. A table of potential unintended consequences and mitigation measures is provided to aid practice managers and clinicians implementing online access.

The experience of conducting collaborative and intensive pragmatic qualitative (CLIP-Q) research to support rapid public health and healthcare innovation.

A key challenge for qualitative methods in applied health research is the fast pace that can characterize the public health and health and care service landscape, where there is a need for research informed by immediate pragmatic questions and relevant findings are required quickly to inform decision-making. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the pace at which evidence was needed to inform urgent public health and healthcare decision-making. This required qualitative researchers to step up to the challenge of conducting research at speed whilst maintaining rigor and ensuring the findings are credible. This article illustrates how working with multidisciplinary, collaborative teams and the tailoring of qualitative methods to be more pragmatic and efficient can provide timely and credible results. Using time-limited case studies of applied qualitative health research drawn from the work of the Behavioral and Qualitative Science Team from the National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration West (NIHR ARC West), we illustrate our collaborative and intensive pragmatic qualitative (CLIP-Q) approach. CLIP-Q involves (i) collaboration at all stages of the design, conduct and implementation of projects and, where possible, co-production with people with lived experience, (ii) an intensive team-based approach to data collection and analysis at pace, and (iii) pragmatic study design and efficient strategies at each stage of the research process. The case studies include projects conducted pre COVID-19 and during the first wave of the pandemic, where urgent evidence was required in weeks rather than months to inform rapid public health and healthcare decision making.

Providing men at risk of suicide with emotional support and advice with employment, housing and financial difficulties: a qualitative evaluation of the Hope service.

BACKGROUND: Men at risk of suicide often face difficulties with finances, employment, or housing, yet support services are usually psychologically based. This study evaluated the Hope service which provides integrated psychosocial support alongside practical, financial and specialist advice. AIMS: To examine how the Hope service supports men at risk of suicide and factors that influence its impact and usefulness. METHODS: Twenty-six qualitative interviews with 16 service users, six Hope staff, two specialist money advice workers funded to work for Hope and two NHS referral staff, thematically analysed. RESULTS: The Hope service provided an essential service for men at risk of suicide, with complex needs including addiction, job loss, homelessness, debt, relationship-breakdown and bereavement who often would otherwise have fallen through service provision gaps. Working in a person-centred, non-judgemental way elicited trust and specialist advice tackled problems such as housing needs, debt, benefit claims and employment, enabling men to regain a sense of control over their lives. Some men shared histories of abuse, for which specialist counselling was hard to access. CONCLUSIONS: Hope provides an effective integrated support package for suicidal men. Funding for services like Hope are important to tackle structural issues such as homelessness and debt, alongside emotional support.

Preventing male suicide through a psychosocial intervention that provides psychological support and tackles financial difficulties: a mixed method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: To help resolve high suicide rates in Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire, the charity Second Step was commissioned to roll-out the Hope service offering a psychosocial intervention for men, supporting them through acute distress and addressing financial difficulties. This study evaluated the impact of the Hope service on men at risk of suicide experiencing financial and other difficulties. METHODS: Mixed methods study using: (i) a prospective cohort study design to compare depression, suicidal ideation and financial self-efficacy scores of men aged 30-64, referred to the service between October 2018 and July 2020, at baseline and 6 months follow-up and between low and moderate to high-intensity service users; and (ii) a qualitative interview study to evaluate the acceptability and impact of the Hope service to Hope service users. RESULTS: There was a 49% reduction in depression score (mean reduction - 10.0, 95% CI - 11.7 to - 8.3) and in the proportion of service users with suicidal ideation (percent reduction - 52.5, 95% CI - 64.1% to - 40.9%) at 6 months follow-up compared to baseline. Financial self-efficacy scores increased by 26% (mean increase 2.9, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.9). Qualitative accounts illustrated how 'Hope saved my life' for several men interviewed; most respondents described being able to move forward and tackle challenges with more confidence following the Hope intervention. Professional advice to tackle financial and other difficulties such as housing helped to relieve anxiety and stress and enable practical issues to be resolved. CONCLUSIONS: The Hope service offered practical and emotional support to men who have experienced suicidal feelings, redundancy, homelessness and poverty and occupies an important space between mental health and social care provision. Hope demonstrates the value of an intervention which cuts across traditional boundaries between psychiatric care and social advice agencies to provide, what is, in effect, an integrated care service.

Unintended consequences of online consultations: a qualitative study in UK primary care.

BACKGROUND: Health services are increasingly using digital tools to deliver care, and online consultations are being widely adopted in primary care settings. The intended consequences of online consultations are to increase patient access to care and increase the efficiency of care. AIM: To identify and understand the unintended consequences of online consultations in primary care. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interview study in eight general practices using online consultation tools in South West and North West England between February 2019 and January 2020. METHOD: Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 19 patients and 18 general practice staff. RESULTS: Consequences of online consultations were identified that restricted patient access to care by making it difficult for some patients to communicate effectively with a GP and disadvantaging digitally-excluded patients. This stemmed from patient uncertainty about how their queries were dealt with, and whether practices used online consultations as their preferred method for patients to contact the practice. Consequences were identified that limited increases in practice efficiency by creating additional work, isolation, and dissatisfaction for some staff. CONCLUSION: Unintended consequences often present operational challenges that are foreseeable and partly preventable. However, these challenges must be recognised and solutions resourced sufficiently. Not everyone may benefit and local decisions will need to be made about trade-offs. Process changes tailored to local circumstances are critical to making effective use of online consultation tools. Unintended consequences also present clinical challenges that result from asynchronous communication. Online consultation tools favour simple, well-formulated information exchange that leads to diffuse relationships and a more transactional style of medicine.

Experiences of Patient-Led Chronic Pain Peer Support Groups After Pain Management Programs: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: A qualitative study of patients' experiences and the impacts of peer support groups that patients maintained after UK NHS group pain management programs (PMPs). DESIGN: Long-term impacts of group PMPs remain unclear, with indications that positive effects can fade. We evaluated a model of continued peer support, co-produced by patients and clinicians, to maintain the therapeutic impact of PMP groups. A protocol was implemented that encouraged patients to continue to meet in their established PMP group for patient-led peer support (without clinical input) after PMPs finished. Peer support aimed to consolidate self-management, and advance social life recovery. We examined the impacts that groups had on attendees, and why some dropped out. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 38 patients and 7 clinicians, analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Friendship bonds and mutual understandings of effective ways of coping with pain encouraged participants to maintain recovery following PMPs. After PMP professional involvement has ended, these meetings enabled patients to develop greater agency from the shared sense of helping bring about new achievements or averting setbacks. Peer support extended the understanding of what is possible when living with pain. However, continuing meetings were not right for all. Reasons for not attending included lack of connection with peers. CONCLUSIONS: Co-produced peer support groups after PMPs can be a low-cost, effective social intervention, providing emotional, practical and social benefits, with improved self-management skills, stronger social connections and some reduced use of health services. Project resources for developing peer support meetings after PMPs are freely available online.

How acceptable is adolescent self-consent for the HPV vaccination: Findings from a qualitative study in south-west England.

BACKGROUND: Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programmes have the potential to reduce the incidence of cervical cancer. The preferred age for HPV vaccination is 12-13 years for optimal benefit. The legal framework in England allows adolescents to be vaccinated without parental consent if they are assessed as competent. A 'South West Template Pathway on Self Consent for School Aged Immunisations' was developed to improve uptake of immunisations in south-west England. STUDY AIM: To examine how acceptable the new procedures are to the young women, parents and carers, school staff and immunisation nurses involved. METHODS: The research was undertaken in two local authorities in south-west England during the 2017/18 and 2018/19 programme years. Semi-structured digitally recorded interviews were undertaken with 53 participants: one health service manager, three immunisation nurses, five staff at alternative education providers, three staff at mainstream schools, 19 young women and 22 parents. All recordings were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was undertaken, assisted by NVivo software. RESULTS: Most participants were not fully aware of the legal framework that enables a young person to self-consent to vaccination. There was a strong presumption that parents should make decisions affecting the health of their children. The preferred age at which the HPV vaccination is administered (12-13 years) contributed to reluctance in endorsing self-consent which was thought to have the potential to break down trust between parents and school staff, and within families. In practice, formal self-consent was rare. CONCLUSION: Unresolved issues in relation to adolescent self-consent include public and professional perceptions of young people's rights and abilities to take responsibility for decisions affecting their health, and concerns about the impact of self-consent on relationships both within families and between professionals and the families they serve.

"Let's Talk about Physical Activity": Understanding the Preferences of Under-Served Communities when Messaging Physical Activity Guidelines to the Public.

Despite many countries having physical activity guidelines, there have been few concerted efforts to mobilize this information to the public. The aim of this study was to understand the preferences of under-served community groups about how the benefits of physical activity, and associated guidelines, can be better communicated to the public. Participatory workshops, co-developed between researchers, a local charity, and a community artist, were used to gather data from four groups in Bristol, UK: young people (n = 17); adults (n = 11); older adults (n = 5); and Somali women (n = 15). Workshop content was structured around the study aims. The community artist and/or the local charity delivered the workshops, with researchers gathering data via observation, photos, and audio-recordings, which were analysed using the framework method. All four groups noted that the benefits of physical activity should be included within any communications efforts, though not restricted to health-related benefits. Language used should be simple and jargon-free; terms such as "sedentary", "vigorous" and "intensity" were deemed inaccessible, however all groups liked the message "some is good, more is better". Views about preferred mechanisms, and messenger, for delivering physical activity messages varied both between, and within, groups. Recommendations for those working in physical activity communications, research, and policy are provided.

Impact of electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS) on care at the end of life across multiple care sectors, in one clinical commissioning group area, in England: a realist evaluation protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS) aim to support people approaching the end of life (EOL) to receive consistent care, according to their wishes, that is coordinated effectively across multiple care sectors. They are in use across the UK although empirical evidence into their effectiveness is poor. This paper presents a protocol of a mixed-methods study, to understand how, and by whom, EPaCCS are being used and whether EPaCCS are enabling Healthcare Professionals (HCPs) to coordinate patients' EOL care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods study, carried out within a realist paradigm, to evaluate the impact of an EPaCCS on EOL care as provided by a Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) in England. This study has two aims: (1) Describe the socio-demographic characteristics of patients who die with an EPaCCS record, their underlying cause of death and place of death and compare these with patients who die without an EPaCCS record. (2) Explore the impact of an EPaCCS on the experience of receiving EOL care for patients and their carers, and understand HCPs' views and experiences of utilising an EPaCCS to coordinate care for their patients. The study will be conducted in five phases: (1) development of the initial programme theory; (2) focus group with CCG stakeholder board; (3) individual interviews with HCPs, patients, current and bereaved carers; (4) retrospective cohort study of routinely collected data on EPaCCS usage and (5) data analysis and synthesis of study findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by National Health Service South West-Frenchay Research Ethics Committee (REC reference number: 18/SW/0198). Findings will be published in a wide range of outputs targeted at key audiences.

Implementing a Digital Tool to Support Shared Care Planning in Community-Based Mental Health Services: Qualitative Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Mental health services aim to provide recovery-focused care and facilitate coproduced care planning. In practice, mental health providers can find supporting individualized coproduced care with service users difficult while balancing administrative and performance demands. To help meet this aim and using principles of coproduction, an innovative mobile digital care pathway tool (CPT) was developed to be used on a tablet computer and piloted in the West of England. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine mental health care providers' views of and experiences with the CPT during the pilot implementation phase and identify factors influencing its implementation. METHODS: A total of 20 in-depth telephone interviews were conducted with providers participating in the pilot and managers in the host organization. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, anonymized, and thematically analyzed guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS: The tool was thought to facilitate coproduced recovery-focused care planning, a policy and organizational as well as professional priority. Internet connectivity issues, system interoperability, and access to service users' health records affected use of the tool during mobile working. The organization's resources, such as information technology (IT) infrastructure and staff time and IT culture, influenced implementation. Participants' levels of use of the tool were dependent on knowledge of the tool and self-efficacy; perceived service-user needs and characteristics; and perceptions of impact on the therapeutic relationship. Training and preparation time influenced participants' confidence in using the tool. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of congruence between staff, organization, and external policy priorities and digital technologies in aiding intervention engagement, and the need for ongoing training and support of those intended to use the technology during and after the end of implementation interventions.

The importance of power, context and agency in improving patient experience through a patient and family centred care approach.

BACKGROUND: Research shows that the way that healthcare staff experience their job impacts on their individual performance, patient experience and outcomes as well as on the performance of organisations. This article builds on this literature by investigating, with multi-disciplinary clinical teams as well as patients and relatives, what factors help or hinder changes designed to improve patient experience. METHODS: Qualitative research looking at patient- and family-centred care (PFCC) on two care pathways (stroke and hip fracture) was conducted in England and Wales. A realist approach combined with participatory action research was used to account for the complexity of organisational context and power relations. Multiple methods were used, including documentary analysis, participatory steering groups with staff and patient representatives, observations of the care pathways (n = 7), staff and patient and relative focus groups (n = 8), and hospital staff, patient and PFCC staff interviews (n = 47). RESULTS: Findings highlight multiple factors that support and hinder good patient experiences. Within individual care, paternalistic values and a lack of shared decision-making and patient-centred care still exist. Supportive interdisciplinary teamwork is needed to address issues of hierarchy, power and authority amongst staff and managers. At the organisational level, key issues of waiting times, patient flow, organisational resources and timely discharge affect staff's time and capacity to deliver care. In addition, macro contextual factors, such as finance, policy, targets and measures, set particular limits for improvement projects. CONCLUSIONS: Given this context, improving patient experience needs to go well beyond small-scale projects at the micro and meso level to incorporate a more critical understanding of systems, the wider organisational context and how power operates at multiple levels to enable and constrain action. In order to more meaningfully understand and address the factors that can help or hinder activities to improve patient experiences, PFCC frameworks and methods need to account for how power inequities operate and require the adoption of more participatory co-produced and empowering approaches to involve patients, relatives, carers and staff in improving complex healthcare environments.

Pilot implementation of co-designed software for co-production in mental health care planning: a qualitative evaluation of staff perspectives.

Background: Mental health policies advocate service user participation in care planning. However, service users often feel they're not fully involved and direct access to users' own electronic care plans in the community can be an obstacle. To address this, an electronic care pathway tool (CPT) was co-designed by service users, staff and software developers, to facilitate co-production of care and crisis plans. Aims: To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of the pilot implementation of the CPT in professionals' practice to co-produce care plans and enable efficient working. Method: Qualitative interviews with fifteen mental health practitioners, and five service development/management staff. Normalisation process theory, which outlines the social processes involved in implementing technology, and co-production theory, informed interviews and data analysis. Results: Multiple factors influenced CPT usage, including people's views of technology, practitioners' relationships with service users, service users' mental health needs, and their capacity for reflective thinking. The CPT's visual and interactive features could enable co-production of care plans. The CPT supported practitioners' efficiency, but its features did not easily streamline with electronic patient records. Conclusions: CPT interactive touchpoints supported service users' therapeutic reflection and facilitated care planning involvement. Information technology system interoperability was an obstacle.

Embracing complexity and uncertainty to create impact: exploring the processes and transformative potential of co-produced research through development of a social impact model.

The potential use, influence and impact of health research is seldom fully realised. This stubborn problem has caused burgeoning global interest in research aiming to address the implementation 'gap' and factors inhibiting the uptake of scientific evidence. Scholars and practitioners have questioned the nature of evidence used and required for healthcare, highlighting the complex ways in which knowledge is formed, shared and modified in practice and policy. This has led to rapid expansion, expertise and innovation in the field of knowledge mobilisation and funding for experimentation into the effectiveness of different knowledge mobilisation models. One approach gaining prominence involves stakeholders (e.g. researchers, practitioners, service users, policy-makers, managers and carers) in the co-production, and application, of knowledge for practice, policy and research (frequently termed integrated knowledge translation in Canada). Its popularity stems largely from its potential to address dilemmas inherent in the implementation of knowledge generated using more reductionist methods. However, despite increasing recognition, demands for co-produced research to illustrate its worth are becoming pressing while the means to do so remain challenging. This is due not only to the diversity of approaches to co-production and their application, but also to the ways through which different stakeholders conceptualise, measure, reward and use research. While research co-production can lead to demonstrable benefits such as policy or practice change, it may also have more diffuse and subtle impact on relationships, knowledge sharing, and in engendering culture shifts and research capacity-building. These relatively intangible outcomes are harder to measure and require new emphases and tools. This opinion paper uses six Canadian and United Kingdom case studies to explore the principles and practice of co-production and illustrate how it can influence interactions between research, policy and practice, and benefit diverse stakeholders. In doing so, we identify a continuum of co-production processes. We propose and illustrate the use of a new 'social model of impact' and framework to capture multi-layered and potentially transformative impacts of co-produced research. We make recommendations for future directions in research co-production and impact measurement.

Implementing online consultations in primary care: a mixed-method evaluation extending normalisation process theory through service co-production.

OBJECTIVES: To examine patient and staff views, experiences and acceptability of a UK primary care online consultation system and ask how the system and its implementation may be improved. DESIGN: Mixed-method evaluation of a primary care e-consultation system. SETTING: Primary care practices in South West England. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with 23 practice staff in six practices. Patient survey data for 756 e-consultations from 36 practices, with free-text survey comments from 512 patients, were analysed thematically. Anonymised patients' records were abstracted for 485 e-consultations from eight practices, including consultation types and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative data. Analysis of implementation and the usage of the e-consultation system were informed by: (1) normalisation process theory, (2) a framework that illustrates how e-consultations were co-produced and (3) patients' and staff touchpoints. RESULTS: We found different expectations between patients and staff on how to use e-consultations 'appropriately'. While some patients used the system to try and save time for themselves and their general practitioners (GPs), some used e-consultations when they could not get a timely face-to-face appointment. Most e-consultations resulted in either follow-on phone (32%) or face-to-face appointments (38%) and GPs felt that this duplicated their workload. Patient satisfaction of the system was high, but a minority were dissatisfied with practice communication about their e-consultation. CONCLUSIONS: Where both patients and staff interact with technology, it is in effect 'co-implemented'. How patients used e-consultations impacted on practice staff's experiences and appraisal of the system. Overall, the e-consultation system studied could improve access for some patients, but in its current form, it was not perceived by practices as creating sufficient efficiencies to warrant financial investment. We illustrate how this e-consultation system and its implementation can be improved, through mapping the co-production of e-consultations through touchpoints.