"FREED instils a bit of hope in the eating disorder community that things can change.": an investigation of clinician views on implementation facilitators and challenges from the rapid scaling of the First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders programme.

Introduction: First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) is the leading eating disorder (ED) early intervention model for young people. Research has shown that it reduces the duration of untreated illness, improves clinical outcomes, and has cost savings. However, less is known about the experience of implementing FREED. This study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of adopting, implementing, and sustaining FREED from the perspective of clinical staff. Methods: Seven focus groups were conducted involving 26 clinicians. Thematic analysis was used, with the Non-Adoption, Abandonment and Challenges to Scale-up, Spread and Sustainability (The NASSS framework) framework being applied to organise subthemes and determine facilitators and barriers. The NASSS framework was also used to rate the complexity of themes as either simple (straightforward, predictable, few components), complicated (multiple interrelating components), or complex (dynamic, unpredictable, not easily divisible into constituent components). Results: There were 16 subthemes identified under seven broader themes representing each domain of the NASSS framework. Key barriers and areas of complexity included factors related to EDs as an illness (e.g., high acuity and prevalence), and organisational complexity (e.g., staffing shortages, lack of managerial/team support). Key facilitators included positive clinician/adopter attitudes, a supportive national network, and the ability for FREED to be flexible/adaptable over time. Conclusion: The FREED model appears to be desirable to clinical staff. Wider team and managerial support was perceived to be particularly important to its successful implementation, as were the national network and supervision. Key areas of complexity include staffing issues and high ED acuity/prevalence. These barriers to implementation need to be managed and investment continued to expand and improve early intervention for EDs further.

National roll-out of early intervention for eating disorders: Process and clinical outcomes from first episode rapid early intervention for eating disorders.

AIM: First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) is an early intervention model for young people with recent-onset eating disorders (ED). Promising results from a previous single-centre study and a four-centre study (FREED-Up) have led to the rapid national scaling of FREED to ED services in England (FREED-4-All). Our aim was to evaluate duration of an untreated ED (DUED), wait time target adherence, and clinical outcomes in FREED-4-All and compare these to the (benchmark) findings of the earlier FREED-Up study. METHOD: FREED services submit de-identified data to the central FREED team quarterly. The current study covers the period between September 2018 and September 2021. This FREED-4-All dataset includes 2473 patients. These were compared to 278 patients from the FREED-Up study. RESULTS: DUED was substantially shorter in the FREED-4-All dataset relative to the FREED-Up study (15 vs. 18 months). Adherence to the wait time targets was comparable in both cohorts (~85% of engagement calls attempted in <2 days, ~50%-60% of assessments offered in <14 days, ~40% of treatment offered in <28 days). Patients in the FREED-4-All dataset experienced significant improvements in ED and general psychological symptoms from pre- to post-treatment that were comparable to the FREED-Up study. These findings should be interpreted cautiously as only 6% of FREED-4-All patients had post-treatment data. CONCLUSIONS: Data from the FREED-4-All evaluation suggest that FREED is replicating at scale. However, these data are flawed, uncertain, proximate, and sparse and should therefore be used carefully alongside other evidence and clinical experience to inform decision making.

"Early intervention isn't an option, it's a necessity": learning from implementation facilitators and challenges from the rapid scaling of an early intervention eating disorders programme in England.

Introduction: The First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service has shown promising outcomes for young people with an eating disorder, leading to national scaling and implementation across England. Between 2020 and 2023, the national implementation of FREED was supported by the Academic Health Science Networks (AHSNs), which are publicly funded organisations with the mission to spread innovations at scale and pace. This study aimed to investigate the views and experiences of AHSN programme leads on the national roll-out of FREED and the perceived sustainability of the model. Methods and results: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 programme leads across the AHSNs with direct experience supporting the national implementation of FREED. Thematic analysis was adopted using a critical realist approach. Initial sub-themes were inductively generated and then organised under seven larger themes representing the domains of the Non-adoption, Abandonment, and Challenges to Scale-Up, Spread and Sustainability (NASSS) framework. Each sub-theme was classified as a facilitator and/or barrier and then each larger theme/domain was assessed for its complexity (simple, complicated, complex). Data analysis revealed 28 sub-themes, 10 identified as facilitators, 13 as barriers, and five as both. Two domains were classed as simple, three as complicated, and two as complex. Sub-themes ranged from illness-related complexities to organisational pressures. Key facilitators included a high-value proposition for FREED and a supportive network. Key barriers included staffing issues and illness-related factors that challenge early intervention. Discussion: Participants described broad support for FREED but desired sustained investment for continued provision and improving implementation fidelity. Future development areas raised by participants included enlarging the evidence base for early intervention, increasing associated training opportunities, and widening the reach of FREED. Results offer learning for early intervention in eating disorders and the scaling of new health initiatives.

Quantifying the benefits of peer support for people with dementia: A Social Return on Investment (SROI) study.

Objective Peer support for people with dementia and carers is routinely advocated in national strategies and policy as a post-diagnostic intervention. However there is limited evidence to demonstrate the value these groups offer. This study looked at three dementia peer support groups in South London to evaluate what outcomes they produce and how much social value they create in relation to the cost of investment. Methods A Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis was undertaken, which involves collecting data on the inputs, outputs and outcomes of an intervention, which are put into a formula, the end result being a SROI ratio showing how much social value is created per £1 of investment. Results Findings showed the three groups created social value ranging from £1.17 to £5.18 for every pound (£) of investment, dependent on the design and structure of the group. Key outcomes for people with dementia were mental stimulation and a reduction in loneliness and isolation. Carers reported a reduction in stress and burden of care. Volunteers cited an increased knowledge of dementia. Conclusions This study has shown that peer groups for people with dementia produce a social value greater than the cost of investment which provides encouraging evidence for those looking to commission, invest, set up or evaluate peer support groups for people with dementia and carers. Beyond the SROI ratio, this study has shown these groups create beneficial outcomes not only for the group members but also more widely for their carers and the group volunteers.

Evidence for prolonged and unique amenorrhea-related symptoms in women with premature ovarian failure/primary ovarian insufficiency.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe premature ovarian failure (POF)/primary ovarian insufficiency (POI) symptoms experienced by women from a non-clinic-based sample of members of a POF/POI-specific support group. METHODS: Two hundred ninety women were surveyed for 6 weeks. The survey included demographics, health history, and a validated menopause-related quality-of-life questionnaire. Symptom prevalence was described. RESULTS: One hundred sixty (55%) women aged 18 to 63 years (mean [SD], 39.3 [7.3] y) responded. Age at diagnosis ranged from 10 to 39 years (median [interquartile range], 30 [24-35] y). Most respondents were white (87%), college educated (76%), and employed full time (61%). Among women reporting a history of depression (43%), 26% reported that depression occurred more than 5 years before POF/POI diagnosis. Of 29 commonly assessed menopausal symptoms, women reported a mean (SD) of 14.7 (7.4) symptoms; symptom scores did not substantially decrease with time since diagnosis, and relationship with age at diagnosis was negligible. Other common symptoms included mood swings and mental fog (>75%); hair loss, dry eyes, cold intolerance, and joint clicking (>50%); tingling in limbs and low blood pressure (∼33%); hypothyroidism (17%); hypoglycemia (16%); and gluten allergies (10%). Ninety unique symptoms were written in as free text. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom checklists created for age-appropriate postmenopausal women do not adequately capture the scope of symptoms observed in this sample. Menopausal symptoms do not seem to diminish across time in women with POF/POI, in contrast to women with age-appropriate menopause. Depression is very commonly reported in this sample, with some women clearly experiencing depression well before their diagnosis of POF/POI. Hypothyroidism in this sample is more than three times the population mean.