The impact of alcohol minimum unit pricing on people with experience of homelessness: Qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) was introduced in Scotland in May 2018. Existing evidence suggests MUP can reduce alcohol consumption in the general population, but there is little research about its impact on vulnerable groups. This qualitative study explored experiences of MUP among people with experience of homelessness. METHODS: We conducted qualitative semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 46 people with current or recent experience of homelessness who were current drinkers when MUP was introduced. Participants (30 men and 16 women) were aged 21 to 73 years. Interviews focused on views and experiences of MUP. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: People with experience of homelessness were aware of MUP but it was accorded low priority in their hierarchy of concerns. Reported impacts varied. Some participants reduced their drinking, or moved away from drinking strong white cider, in line with policy intentions. Others were unaffected because the cost of their preferred drink (usually wine, vodka or beer) did not change substantially. A minority reported increased involvement in begging. Wider personal, relational and social factors also played an important role in responses to MUP. CONCLUSION: This is the first qualitative study to provide a detailed exploration of the impact of MUP among people with experience of homelessness. Our findings suggest that MUP worked as intended for some people with experience of homelessness, while a minority reported negative consequences. Our findings are of international significance to policymakers, emphasising the need to consider the impact of population level health policies on marginalised groups and the wider contextual factors that affect responses to policies within these groups. It is important to invest further in secure housing and appropriate support services and to implement and evaluate harm reduction initiatives such as managed alcohol programmes.

Exploring the experiences of alcohol service use among LGBTQ+ people in Scotland: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People who identify as LGBTQ+ are more likely to drink excessively compared to heterosexual and cisgender people. Perceived barriers to accessing alcohol services may further increase the potential for alcohol related harm for LGBTQ+ people. This qualitative study explores the experiences of LGBTQ+ people who have used alcohol services, including peer support groups, in Scotland and their suggestions for how alcohol services could be improved. METHODS: Participants were recruited using social media adverts, dating websites, organisations that work with LGBTQ+ clients and snowball sampling. Participants' (n = 14) experiences of alcohol services and peer support groups were explored through semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using the Framework Approach and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Many participants thought their drinking was closely associated with their LGBTQ+ identity, as a response to shame, stigma, or family rejection. Some service users had positive experiences of alcohol services. However, participants were rarely asked about their sexuality / gender identity and some reported a lack of discussion about how identity might impact drinking. There were common views across the sample that barriers experienced by others in the LGBTQ+ community were amplified for trans people. Service users recommended that services need to signal LGBTQ+ inclusivity and provide a safe space to discuss multiple issues (e.g., alcohol use, mental health, gender identity). Participants highlighted the importance of alcohol-free spaces in the LGBTQ+ communities. CONCLUSION: The study has clear practice and policy implications. Alcohol services should provide a safe space for LGBTQ+ people and clearly indicate that. Service providers should be trained to discuss potential connections between LGBTQ+ identity and substance use. At a broader level, alcohol-free social spaces would help reduce alcohol-related harm in LGBTQ+ communities.

The Case for Targeted Parenting Interventions with Reference to Intergenerational Transmission of Parenting: Qualitative Evidence from Three Studies of Marginalised Mothers' and Fathers' Participation in Parenting Programmes.

The idea that how you were parented is key to how you parent your own children is widely recognisable. It is present in popular cultural references, underpins much policy on families and parenting in the UK, and is supported by a substantive body of academic literature. We explore this concept of intergenerational transmission of parenting, understanding it as the context in which parenting interventions have been implemented. We draw on interview data from three Scottish samples of marginalised parents (n = 54) to explore how participants think their own parenting behaviours have been shaped by their experience of being parented and how they talk about participation in a parenting intervention in relation to this. We find that how these parents have been parented is salient in considering their own parenting behaviour, and is a key context for their engagement with the intervention. We make the case for parenting interventions targeted at marginalised parents, arguing that they are acceptable to, and useful for, these parents and may, potentially, be effective in breaking cycles of negative parenting. Policy-makers should not shy away from implementing targeted parenting programmes as part of endeavours to address negative parenting.

Exploring the utility of self-determination theory in complex interventions in multimorbidity: A qualitative analysis of patient experiences of the CARE Plus intervention.

OBJECTIVES: CARE Plus is a primary-care-based complex intervention for patients with multimorbidity living in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. This study explores patients' experience of the intervention and whether self-determination theory is useful to understand reported impacts. METHOD: Thematic analysis of semistructured interviews of 14 participants conducted during a randomised controlled trial of CARE Plus. Improvement in wellbeing in daily lives following CARE Plus was estimated from participants' accounts of their experiences of the intervention. FINDINGS: Participants valued the CARE Plus consultations irrespective of perceived improvements. Six participants reported changes in wellbeing that improved daily life, three reported slight improvement (not impacting daily life) and five no improvement. Evidence of satisfaction of the three major self-determination theory psychological needs - relatedness, competence and autonomy - was prominent in the accounts of those experiencing improved wellbeing in daily life; this group also spoke in ways congruent with more self-determined motivational regulation. These changes were not evident in those with little or no improvement in wellbeing. DISCUSSION: This study suggests self-determination theory has utility in understanding the impact of CARE Plus on patients and may be a useful theory to inform development of future interventions to improve outcomes for patients with multimorbidity.

A realist process evaluation of Enhanced Triple P for Baby and Mellow Bumps, within a Trial of Healthy Relationship Initiatives for the Very Early years (THRIVE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: THRIVE is a three-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) that aims to evaluate whether antenatal and early postnatal interventions, Enhanced Triple B for Baby (ETPB) plus care as usual (CAU) or Mellow Bumps (MB) plus CAU (versus CAU alone), can: 1) improve the mental health and well-being of pregnant women with complex health and social care needs; 2) improve mother-infant bonding and interaction; 3) reduce child maltreatment; and 4) improve child language acquisition. This paper focuses on THRIVE's realist process evaluation, which is carefully monitoring what is happening in the RCT. METHODS: Realistic evaluation provides the theoretical rationale for the process evaluation. We question: 1) how faithfully are MB and ETPB implemented? 2) What are the mechanisms by which they work, if they do, and who do they work for and how? 3) What contextual factors are necessary for the programmes to function, or might prevent them functioning? The mixed-methods design includes quantitative measures, which are pre- and post-training/intervention questionnaires for facilitators and mothers-to-be, and post-session evaluation forms. Qualitative data collection methods include participant observation of facilitator training and the delivery of a series of antenatal sessions in selected intervention groups (n = 3 for ETPB and n = 3 for MB), semi-structured interviews with facilitators, pregnant women, partners, and referring facilitators, and telephone interviews examining the content of the postnatal components of ETPB and MB. DISCUSSION: The findings of this process evaluation will help researchers and decision makers interpret the outcomes of THRIVE. It will provide a greater understanding of: how the interventions work (if they do); the extent and quality of their implementation; contextual factors facilitating and constraining intervention functioning; variations in response within and between subgroups of vulnerable parents; and benefits or unintended consequences of either intervention. Few studies to date have published detailed research protocols illustrating how realist process evaluation is designed and conducted as an integral part of a randomised controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN21656568 . Registered on 8 November 2013.

The reflective component of the Mellow Bumps parenting intervention: Implementation, engagement and mechanisms of change.

Understanding why parenting programmes work or do not work, and for whom, is crucial for development of more effective parenting interventions. In this paper we focus on a specific component of Mellow Bumps: reflection on one's own childhood/past/life. We explore how this component was implemented, how participants engaged with it, the facilitating and constraining factors shaping this, whether and how it appeared to work, or not, and for whom. The paper analyses data from the Process Evaluation of the Trial of Healthy Relationships Initiatives for the Very Early years, which is evaluating two antenatal interventions delivered to vulnerable women, one of which is Mellow Bumps. Data were collected from January 2014 to June 2018 for 28 groups, 108 participants and 24 facilitators in a comprehensive and rigorous Process Evaluation designed to complement the Outcome Evaluation. Data were gathered at various time points using multiple methods, and were synthesised to triangulate findings. The reflective component was implemented with fidelity and participants engaged with it to varying degrees, dependent largely on the coherence of the group. Patchy attendance compromised the coherence of some groups, with the development of rapport, which is key to delivering reflective exercises, more difficult when group composition varied from week to week. Where there was a coherent group, powerful mechanisms of change, leading to stress reduction, included: relief through unburdening, empowerment through support given and received, reduced isolation through sharing anxieties, and control through self-care advice. A minority of highly vulnerable mothers seemed not to benefit from the reflective exercises and were marginalised within their groups. In order to minimise potential harmful effects of such exercises, allocation of participants to groups should strive to maximise group homogeneity. More research is needed to explore how very vulnerable parents can be supported in attending parenting interventions from start to finish.

The CARE Plus study - a whole-system intervention to improve quality of life of primary care patients with multimorbidity in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial and cost-utility analysis.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is common in deprived communities and reduces quality of life. Our aim was to evaluate a whole-system primary care-based complex intervention, called CARE Plus, to improve quality of life in multimorbid patients living in areas of very high deprivation. METHODS: We used a phase 2 exploratory cluster randomised controlled trial with eight general practices in Glasgow in very deprived areas that involved multimorbid patients aged 30-65 years. The intervention comprised structured longer consultations, relationship continuity, practitioner support, and self-management support. Control practices continued treatment as usual. Primary outcomes were quality of life (EQ-5D-5L utility scores) and well-being (W-BQ12; 3 domains). Cost-effectiveness from a health service perspective, engagement, and retention were assessed. Recruitment and baseline measurements occurred prior to randomisation. Blinding post-randomisation was not possible but outcome measurement and analysis were masked. Analyses were by intention to treat. RESULTS: Of 76 eligible practices contacted, 12 accepted, and eight were selected, randomised and participated for the duration of the trial. Of 225 eligible patients, 152 (68 %) participated and 67/76 (88 %) in each arm completed the 12-month assessment. Two patients died in the control group. CARE Plus significantly improved one domain of well-being (negative well-being), with an effect size of 0.33 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.11-0.55) at 12 months (p = 0.0036). Positive well-being, energy, and general well-being (the combined score of the three components) were not significantly influenced by the intervention at 12 months. EQ-5D-5L area under the curve over the 12 months was higher in the CARE Plus group (p = 0.002). The incremental cost in the CARE Plus group was £929 (95 % CI: £86-£1788) per participant with a gain in quality-adjusted life years of 0.076 (95 % CI: 0.028-0.124) over the 12 months of the trial, resulting in a cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,224 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Modelling suggested that cost-effectiveness would continue. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to conduct a high-quality cluster randomised control trial of a complex intervention with multimorbid patients in primary care in areas of very high deprivation. Enhancing primary care through a whole-system approach may be a cost-effective way to protect quality of life for multimorbid patients in deprived areas. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 34092919 , assigned 14/1/2013.

The development and optimisation of a primary care-based whole system complex intervention (CARE Plus) for patients with multimorbidity living in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and optimise a primary care-based complex intervention (CARE Plus) to enhance the quality of life of patients with multimorbidity in the deprived areas. METHODS: Six co-design discussion groups involving 32 participants were held separately with multimorbid patients from the deprived areas, voluntary organisations, general practitioners and practice nurses working in the deprived areas. This was followed by piloting in two practices and further optimisation based on interviews with 11 general practitioners, 2 practice nurses and 6 participating multimorbid patients. RESULTS: Participants endorsed the need for longer consultations, relational continuity and a holistic approach. All felt that training and support of the health care staff was important. Most participants welcomed the idea of additional self-management support, though some practitioners were dubious about whether patients would use it. The pilot study led to changes including a revised care plan, the inclusion of mindfulness-based stress reduction techniques in the support of practitioners and patients, and the stream-lining of the written self-management support material for patients. DISCUSSION: We have co-designed and optimised an augmented primary care intervention involving a whole-system approach to enhance quality of life in multimorbid patients living in the deprived areas. CARE Plus will next be tested in a phase 2 cluster randomised controlled trial.

The 'everyday work' of living with multimorbidity in socioeconomically deprived areas of Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Multimorbidity is common in patients living in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation and is associated with poor quality of life, but the reasons behind this are not clear. Exploring the 'everyday life work' of patients may reveal important barriers to self-management and wellbeing. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between the management of multimorbidity and 'everyday life work' in patients living in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation in Scotland, as part of a programme of work on multimorbidity and deprivation. DESIGN: Qualitative study: individual semi-structured interviews of 14 patients (8 women and 6 men) living in deprived areas with multimorbidity, exploring how they manage. Analysis was continuous and iterative. We report the findings in relation to everyday life work. RESULTS: The in-depth analysis revealed four key themes: (i) the symbolic significance of everyday life work to evidence the work of being 'normal'; (ii) the usefulness of everyday life work in managing symptoms; (iii) the impact that mental health problems had on everyday life work; and (iv) issues around accepting help for everyday life tasks. Overall, most struggled with the amount of work required to establish a sense of normalcy in their everyday lives, especially in those with mental-physical multimorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Everyday life work is an important component of self-management in patients with multimorbidity in deprived areas, and is commonly impaired, especially in those with mental health problems. Interventions to improve self-management support for patients living with multimorbidity may benefit from an understanding of the role of everyday life work. Journal of Comorbidity 2014;4:1-10.

Views of health professionals on the role of primary care in the follow-up of men with prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Follow-up care for prostate cancer has traditionally been led by secondary care in hospital out-patient clinics. As the number of men with prostate cancer increases and secondary care resources face pressure, alternative follow-up models are being sought. Current National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance recommends follow-up outside the hospital setting for patients who are stable 2 years following radical treatment and for those undergoing 'watchful waiting'. OBJECTIVE: To describe current practice in a sample of relevant health care professionals and to seek their views on the role of primary care in prostate cancer follow-up. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews with 38 UK health care professionals, from both secondary and primary care. Transcripts were analysed using the constant comparative method. RESULTS: There are marked variations in current follow-up practice around the country, with hospital-based follow-up ranging from 6 months to lifetime. The predominant, although not universal, view expressed was that there is both scope and support for primary care to play a greater role, particularly for men with stable disease. This was qualified by the need for supporting education, including guidance on interpretation of prostate-specific antigen values, introduction of robust follow-up systems in primary care, easy access back into secondary (hospital) care, a mechanism for ensuring follow-up data can still be collected for audit purposes and appropriate resourcing. CONCLUSIONS: If primary care is to play a significant role in providing high-quality follow-up care for men with prostate cancer, then steps need to be taken to address the barriers to increased primary care involvement identified by this study.

"I wish I'd told them": a qualitative study examining the unmet psychosexual needs of prostate cancer patients during follow-up after treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight into patients' experiences of follow-up care after treatment for prostate cancer and identify unmet psychosexual needs. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 35 patients aged 59-82 from three UK regions. Partners were included in 18 interviews. Data were analyzed using constant comparison. RESULTS: (1) Psychosexual problems gained importance over time, (2) men felt they were rarely invited to discuss psychosexual side effects within follow-up appointments and lack of rapport with health care professionals made it difficult to raise problems themselves, (3) problems were sometimes concealed or accepted and professionals' attempts to explore potential difficulties were resisted by some, and (4) older patients were too embarrassed to raise psychosexual concerns as they felt they would be considered 'too old' to be worried about the loss of sexual function. CONCLUSION: Men with prostate cancer, even the very elderly, have psychosexual issues for variable times after diagnosis. These are not currently always addressed at the appropriate time for the patient. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Assessments of psychosexual problems should take place throughout the follow-up period, and not only at the time of initial treatment. Further research examining greater willingness or reluctance to engage with psychosexual interventions may be particularly helpful in designing future interventions.

An 'endless struggle': a qualitative study of general practitioners' and practice nurses' experiences of managing multimorbidity in socio-economically deprived areas of Scotland.

OBJECTIVES: To understand general practitioners' (GPs) and practice nurses' (PNs) experiences of managing multimorbidity in deprived areas and elicit views on what might help. METHODS: Qualitative interviews with 19 GPs and PNs in four practices with a high percentage of patients living in the top 15% most deprived areas of Scotland. Data were analysed using constant comparison. RESULTS: Professionals' discussions of how they managed multimorbidity captured: (1) definitions of multimorbidity that included multiple social, psychological, and health problems associated with deprivation; (2) descriptions of the 'endless struggle' of patients trying to manage illnesses in the midst of chaotic lives with limited personal, social, and material resources; (3) accounts of the ongoing struggle of professionals trying to manage, with personal consequences for some; and (4) ideas on what might help, including 'whole person' approaches. DISCUSSION: Professionals' discussions of the difficulties that they face personally and attempt to help those most in need reflect both the continuing existence of the 'inverse care law' and the need for whole system changes to enhance the effectiveness of primary care for patients with multimorbidity in deprived areas.

Experiences of follow-up after treatment in patients with prostate cancer: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an understanding of experiences of follow-up in patients with prostate cancer, to seek explanations as to why men's needs might not be well met, and explore views on the possible role of primary care in follow-up. The experiences of these patients, and views on the delivery of follow-up care, have been relatively neglected compared to those diagnosed with other cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 35 patients were recruited from 20 practices across three regions in the UK. Maximum variation was sought by purposely sampling by age (59-82 years), treatment, length (0.75-14 years) and mode of follow-up. RESULTS: Patients' descriptions of the content and organization of follow-up showed the shortcomings of follow-up, which included system failings causing patients to be lost to follow-up, and unmet psychosexual needs. Patients were mainly positive about the prospect of follow-up taking place outside the hospital setting. However, some expressed concerns about current follow-up practices and suggested several improvements that need considering if primary care were to take a greater role. CONCLUSION: This study identified some general deficiencies with the current system of follow-up, and our data indicate that primary care could have a role in addressing some of these.

'It's caveman stuff, but that is to a certain extent how guys still operate': men's accounts of masculinity and help seeking.

It is often assumed that men are reluctant to seek medical care. However, despite growing interest in masculinity and men's health, few studies have focussed on men's experiences of consultation in relation to their constructions of masculinity. Those that have are largely based on men with diseases of the male body (testicular and prostate cancer) or those which have been stereotyped as male (coronary heart disease). This paper presents discussions and experiences of help seeking and its relation to, and implications for, the practice of masculinity amongst a diversity of men in Scotland, as articulated in focus group discussions. The discussions did indeed suggest a widespread endorsement of a 'hegemonic' view that men 'should' be reluctant to seek help, particularly amongst younger men. However, they also included instances which questioned or went against this apparent reluctance to seek help. These were themselves linked with masculinity: help seeking was more quickly embraced when it was perceived as a means to preserve or restore another, more valued, enactment of masculinity (e.g. working as a fire-fighter, or maintaining sexual performance or function). Few other studies have emphasised how men negotiate deviations from the hegemonic view of help-seeking.