Social prescribing: Exploring general practitioners' and healthcare professionals' perceptions of, and engagement with, the NHS model.

Social prescribing (SP) has rapidly expanded over recent years. Previously a bottom-up, community-led phenomenon, SP is now a formal part of structured NHS policy and practice. This study was designed to ascertain how general practitioners and other primary healthcare professionals (HCPs) within one clinical commissioning group (CCG) perceive and engage with this new NHS model. The research comprised an online survey distributed to HCPs within a predominately rural, English CCG between June and August 2021. Qualitative data were gathered and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Positive portrayals of SP were found, although definitions and perceptions varied greatly. Many HCPs reported high levels of engagement with SP services; yet referral rates appeared to remain significantly lower than the previously estimated 20% of primary care attendees referred for social reasons. Moreover, 96% of HCPs reported signposting patients directly to community or external services, rather than referring them to SP. This signposting, which has been positioned as a model of SP, reflects engagement with SP in practice, which is likely to have pre-dated the introduction of the fuller NHS model. HCPs may be unaware that this could be classed as a social prescription, and this type of SP remains uncaptured within NHS statistics. These results indicate an underuse of the national system set up to deliver one particular model of SP, rather than that SP does not occur. Additionally, despite national guidance issued to accompany the NHS model, practices such as referral and feedback processes, and link worker presence within practices, were not uniform even within this single CCG. Nevertheless, understanding is increasing as SP becomes embedded within primary care. The lack of consistency in referrals between practices warrants further examination in terms of equity of service choices to patients, as does the very low self-reported referral rate to SP.

The 'nuts and bolts' of including service users and carers in the recruitment of health and social work students in an English university-An interdisciplinary critique.

BACKGROUND: The literature regarding inclusion of service users and carers (SUACs) in the recruitment processes for future health and social work professionals has primarily presented such inclusion as positive for all. This study is novel in its exploration of the detail of SUACs' involvement and in its reach across a whole university department of health and social care disciplines. OBJECTIVE: To examine the detail of ways in which SUACs were actually involved in student selection and whether they have any real influence on recruitment decisions. METHOD: This co-produced study took place in an English university. A qualitative, semi-structured interviewing approach was undertaken with 12 staff across social work, nursing, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, paramedicine and physician associate disciplines. Thematic analysis was employed independently with both researchers agreeing resultant themes. FINDINGS: A range of recruitment activities which included SUACs were found, evidencing both full and partial involvement in decision making. Nine themes emerged-The quality of SUACs' inclusion; Understanding reasons for including SUACs; SUACs being more knowledgeable than academic staff; SUACs influencing final decisions; The high expectations of candidates by SUACs; SUACs' need for training; Marketization and scepticism; and Logistics and the presumption of ableism. CONCLUSIONS: Transparent protocols are essential if SUACs are to be equitably included in student recruitment processes. A shared model of SUACs' inclusion should be attainable across disciplines, even if the 'nuts and bolts' of recruitment processes vary. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This work was co-produced with a SUACs' group from conception and design through to fieldwork and write-up.

Paradoxical and severe hypotension in response to adrenaline infusions in massive quetiapine overdose.

Atypical antipsychotics (quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone and clozapine) are increasingly prescribed in Australia, and emergency departments report growing rates of overdose of these agents. As these drugs are comparatively new, the spectrum of toxicity may be unfamiliar to critical care physicians. Severe hypotension is a recognised consequence of quetiapine poisoning. We describe three patients with massive quetiapine overdose who developed significant hypotension resistant to fluid resuscitation. In each case, blood pressure fell dramatically after commencement of adrenaline infusions. Haemodynamic stability was restored when noradrenaline was substituted for adrenaline. The pharmacodynamics of quetiapine and the literature on overdose are reviewed. We present these cases to broaden the knowledge of physicians treating quetiapine overdose and to publicise the potential deleterious interaction with adrenaline. We recommend use of noradrenaline in preference to adrenaline in pharmacological management of shock in these patients.