What makes for effectiveness when starting early - Learning from an integrated school-based violence and abuse prevention programme for children under 12.

BACKGROUND: Integrated programmes addressing varying forms of violence and abuse are increasingly delivered to children under 12 but uncertainty remains about what should be delivered to whom, when and in what dose. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of Speak Out Stay Safe (SOSS) - an integrated prevention programme for children under 12 - and whether impact varied by age, gender and context. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: A representative UK sample of primary schools in receipt of SOSS was matched with comparison schools not receiving SOSS. At 6 months follow-up, 1553 children from 36 schools completed the survey. METHODS: The matched control study incorporated economic and process evaluations. Survey measures included: children's knowledge and understanding of different forms of violence and abuse, readiness to seek help, knowledge of sexual abuse, perceptions of school culture and health and wellbeing. Perceptions of children, teachers, and facilitators were captured. RESULTS: At 6 months, children aged 9-10 who received SOSS retained their improved knowledge of neglect and their ability to identify a trusted adult who they would tell about violence or abuse. Children aged 6-7 receiving a shorter version of the programme were less likely to benefit and boys made fewer gains than girls. SOSS improved the knowledge of children with low knowledge of abuse. School culture was closely associated with programme impact. CONCLUSION: School-based prevention programmes deliver benefits at low cost but should acknowledge and engage with the specific school context to achieve school readiness and embed programme messages.

Beyond social prescribing-The use of social return on investment (SROI) analysis in integrated health and social care interventions in England and Wales: A protocol for a systematic review.

With increasing costs of healthcare in England and Wales following the COVID-19 pandemic, finding alternatives to traditional medical interventions is more important than ever. Social prescribing provides a way of addressing health and well-being through using non-medical methods that may help relieve costs to the NHS. Evaluating interventions, such as social prescribing, which have high social (but not easily quantifiable) value, can be problematic. Social return on investment (SROI) is a method of assigning monetary values to both social value as well as traditional assets, so provides a way of evaluating social prescribing initiatives. This protocol outlines the steps that will be taken in a systematic review of the SROI literature surrounding social prescribing-type integrated health and social care interventions based in the community in England and Wales. Online academic databases such as PubMed Central, ASSIA and Web of Science will be searched, as will grey literature sources such as Google Scholar, the Wales School for Social Prescribing Research (WSSPR) and Social Value UK. Titles and abstracts from the articles returned by the searches will be reviewed by one researcher. Those selected for full text review will be independently reviewed and compared by two researchers. Where the researchers disagree a third reviewer will help resolve any differences. Information collected will include identifying stakeholder groups, assessing the quality of SROI analyses, identifying intended and unintended changes of social prescribing interventions, and comparing social prescribing initiatives in terms of SROI costs and benefits. Quality assessment will be independently conducted on the selected papers by two researchers. The researchers will discuss to obtain consensus. Where there is disagreement, a third researcher will resolve these cases. A pre-existing quality framework will be developed and used to assess the quality of the literature. Protocol registration Prospero registration number: CRD42022318911.

The Development of Videoconference-Based Support for People Living With Rare Dementias and Their Carers: Protocol for a 3-Phase Support Group Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: People living with rarer dementias face considerable difficulty accessing tailored information, advice, and peer and professional support. Web-based meeting platforms offer a critical opportunity to connect with others through shared lived experiences, even if they are geographically dispersed, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVE: We aim to develop facilitated videoconferencing support groups (VSGs) tailored to people living with or caring for someone with familial or sporadic frontotemporal dementia or young-onset Alzheimer disease, primary progressive aphasia, posterior cortical atrophy, or Lewy body dementia. This paper describes the development, coproduction, field testing, and evaluation plan for these groups. METHODS: We describe a 3-phase approach to development. First, information and knowledge were gathered as part of a coproduction process with members of the Rare Dementia Support service. This information, together with literature searches and consultation with experts by experience, clinicians, and academics, shaped the design of the VSGs and session themes. Second, field testing involved 154 Rare Dementia Support members (people living with dementia and carers) participating in 2 rounds of facilitated sessions across 7 themes (health and social care professionals, advance care planning, independence and identity, grief and loss, empowering your identity, couples, and hope and dementia). Third, a detailed evaluation plan for future rounds of VSGs was developed. RESULTS: The development of the small groups program yielded content and structure for 9 themed VSGs (the 7 piloted themes plus a later stages program and creativity club for implementation in rounds 3 and beyond) to be delivered over 4 to 8 sessions. The evaluation plan incorporated a range of quantitative (attendance, demographics, and geography; pre-post well-being ratings and surveys; psycholinguistic analysis of conversation; facial emotion recognition; facilitator ratings; and economic analysis of program delivery) and qualitative (content and thematic analysis) approaches. Pilot data from round 2 groups on the pre-post 3-word surveys indicated an increase in the emotional valence of words selected after the sessions. CONCLUSIONS: The involvement of people with lived experience of a rare dementia was critical to the design, development, and delivery of the small virtual support group program, and evaluation of this program will yield convergent data about the impact of tailored support delivered to geographically dispersed communities. This is the first study to design and plan an evaluation of VSGs specifically for people affected by rare dementias, including both people living with a rare dementia and their carers, and the outcome of the evaluation will be hugely beneficial in shaping specific and targeted support, which is often lacking in this population. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/35376.

Lay-therapist-delivered, low-intensity, psychosocial intervention for refugees and asylum seekers (PROSPER): protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Asylum seekers and refugees (AS&Rs) experience impaired mental health and wellbeing, related to stresses in their country of origin, experiences in transit and reception on arrival, including significant barriers to accessing mainstream services. Their contact with health care is often crisis-driven and mediated through non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Problem Management Plus (PM+) is a psychosocial intervention recommended by the World Health Organisation to address distress experienced by adults affected by humanitarian crises. We are investigating its application for the first time in a high-income country. METHODS: In a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT), PM+ will be delivered to AS&Rs in contact with NGOs in Liverpool City Region, UK by lay therapists who have lived experience of forced migration. Following systematic review and stakeholder engagement, PM+ has been adapted to the local context, and lay therapists have been trained in its delivery. We will assess the feasibility of conducting a three-arm RCT of five 90-min sessions of PM+, delivered individually or in groups by lay therapists to AS&Rs experiencing emotional distress and functional impairment, compared with each other and with usual support offered by local NGOs. Distress and impairment at baseline will be measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS). We aim to recruit 105 participants, 35 per arm. Primary health outcomes are anxiety and depressive symptoms at 3 months, measured by HADS. Secondary outcomes include subjective wellbeing, functional status, progress on identified problems, presence of post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder and service usage. Longer-term impact will be assessed at 6 months post baseline, on the same parameters. We will assess the feasibility of conducting a full RCT in relation to the following elements: recruitment and retention of lay therapists and study participants; fidelity of delivery of PM+; and suitability of the study measures, including any linguistic or cultural barriers. DISCUSSION: We will use these findings to specify the parameters for a full RCT to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of PM+ in reducing emotional distress and health inequalities, and improving functional ability and wellbeing, amongst asylum seekers and refugees. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ID: ISRCTN15214107. Registered on 10 September 2019.

Protocol for the Rare Dementia Support Impact study: RDS Impact.

OBJECTIVES: The Rare Dementia Support (RDS) Impact study will be the first major study of the value of multicomponent support groups for people living with or supporting someone with a rare form of dementia. The multicentre study aims to evaluate the impact of multicomponent support offered and delivered to people living with a rare form of dementia, comprising the following five work packages (WPs): (a) longitudinal cohort interviews, (b) theoretical development, (c) developing measures, (d) novel interventions, and (e) economic analysis. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods design, including a longitudinal cohort study (quantitative and qualitative) and a feasibility randomised control trial (RCT). A cohort of more than 1000 individuals will be invited to participate. The primary and secondary outcomes will be in part determined through a co-design nominal groups technique prestudy involving caregivers to people living with a diagnosis of a rare dementia. Quantitative analyses of differences and predictors will be based on prespecified hypotheses. A variety of quantitative (eg, analysis of variance [ANOVA] and multiple linear regression techniques), qualitative (eg, thematic analysis [TA]), and innovative analytical methods will also be developed and applied by involving the arts as a research method. RESULTS: The UCL Research Ethics Committee have approved this study. Data collection commenced in January 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The study will capture information through a combination of longitudinal interviews, questionnaires and scales, and novel creative data collection methods. The notion of "impact" in the context of support for rare dementias will involve theoretical development, novel measures and methods of support interventions, and health economic analyses.

Costs and outcomes of improving population health through better social housing: a cohort study and economic analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the impact of warmth-related housing improvements on the health, well-being, and quality of life of families living in social housing. METHODS: An historical cohort study design was used. Households were recruited by Gentoo, a social housing contractor in North East England. Recruited households were asked to complete a quality of life, well-being, and health service use questionnaire before receiving housing improvements (new energy-efficient boiler and double-glazing) and again 12 months afterwards. RESULTS: Data were collected from 228 households. The average intervention cost was £3725. At 12-month post-intervention, a 16% reduction (-£94.79) in household 6-month health service use was found. Statistically significant positive improvements were observed in main tenant and household health status (p < 0.001; p = 0.009, respectively), main tenant satisfaction with financial situation (p = 0.020), number of rooms left unheated per household (p < 0.001), frequency of household outpatient appointments (p = 0.001), and accident/emergency department attendance (p < 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Warmth-related housing improvements may be a cost-effective means of improving the health of social housing tenants and reducing health service expenditure, particularly in older populations.