How accessible and acceptable are current GP referral mechanisms for IAPT for low-income patients? Lay and primary care perspectives

Background: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) constitutes a key element of England’s national mental health strategy. Accessing IAPT usually requires patients to self-refer on the advice of their GP. Little is known about how GPs perceive and communicate IAPT services with patients from low-income communities, nor how the notion of self-referral is understood and responded to by such patients. Aims: This paper examines how IAPT referrals are made by GPs and how these referrals are perceived and acted on by patients from low-income backgrounds Method: Findings are drawn from in-depth interviews with low-income patients experiencing mental distress (n = 80); interviews with GPs (n = 10); secondary analysis of video-recorded GP-patient consultations for mental health (n = 26). Results: GPs generally supported self-referral, perceiving it an important initial step towards patient recovery. Most patients however, perceived self-referral as an obstacle to accessing IAPT, and felt their mental health needs were being undermined. The way that IAPT was discussed and the pathway for referral appears to affect uptake of these services. Conclusions: A number of factors deter low-income patients from self-referring for IAPT. Understanding these issues is necessary in enabling the development of more effective referral and support mechanisms within primary care

Use of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) in Practice: Interactions between patients and physicians

We analyze the use of nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), an instrument that is widely used in diagnosing and determining the severity of depression. Using conversation analysis, we show how the doctor deploys the PHQ-9 in response to the patient's doubts about whether she is depressed. Rather than relaying the PHQ-9 verbatim, the doctor deviates from the wording so that the response options are selectively offered to upgrade the severity of the patient's symptoms. This works in favor of a positive diagnosis and is used to justify a treatment recommendation that the patient previously resisted. This contrasted with the rest of the data set, where diagnosis was either not delivered (as patients are presenting with ongoing problems) or delivered without using the PHQ-9. When clinician-administered, the PHQ-9 can be influenced by how response items are presented. This can lead to either downgrading or upgrading the severity of depression

Adapting QOF to focus on wellbeing and health

This is the final version of the article. Available from BMJ Publishing Group via the DOI in this record

Integrating the voluntary sector in personalised care: mixed methods study of the outcomes from wellbeing co-ordination for adults with complex needs

PurposeThis integrated care study seeks to highlight how voluntary sector “wellbeing co-ordinators” co-located in a horizontally and vertically integrated, multidisciplinary community hub within one locality of an Integrated Care Organisation contribute to complex, person-centred, co-ordinated care.Design/methodology/approachThis is a naturalistic, mixed method and mixed data study. It is complementing a before-and-after study with a sub-group analysis of people receiving input from the wider hub (including Wellbeing Co-ordination and Enhanced Intermediate Care), qualitative case studies, interviews, and observations co-produced with embedded researchers-in-residence.FindingsThe cross-case analysis uses trajectories and outcome patterns across six client groups to illustrate the bio-psycho-social complexity of each group across the life course, corresponding with the range of inputs offered by the hub.Research limitations/implicationsTo consider the effectiveness and mechanisms of complex system-wide interventions operating at horizontal and vertical interfaces and researching this applying co-produced, embedded, naturalistic and mixed methods approaches.Practical implicationsHow a bio-psycho-social approach by a wellbeing co-ordinator can contribute to improved person reported outcomes from a range of preventive, rehabilitation, palliative care and bereavement services in the community.Social implicationsTo combine knowledge about individuals held in the community to align the respective inputs, and expectations about outcomes while considering networked pathways based on functional status, above diagnostic pathways, and along a life-continuum.Originality/valueThe hub as a whole seems to (1) Enhance engagement through relationship, trust and activation, (2) Exchanging knowledge to co-create a shared bio-psycho-social understanding of each individual’s situation and goals, (3) Personalising care planning by utilising the range of available resources to ensure needs are met, and (4) Enhancing co-ordination and ongoing care through multi-disciplinary working between practitioners, across teams and sectors.</jats:sec

Admission Decision-Making in Hospital Emergency Departments: the Role of the Accompanying Person

In resource-stretched emergency departments, people accompanying patients play key roles in patients' care. This article presents analysis of the ways health professionals and accompanying persons talked about admission decisions and caring roles. The authors used ethnographic case study design involving participant observation and semi-structured interviews with 13 patients, 17 accompanying persons and 26 healthcare professionals in four National Health Service hospitals in south-west England. Focused analysis of interactional data revealed that professionals’ standardization of the patient-carer relationship contrasted with accompanying persons' varied connections with patients. Accompanying persons could directly or obliquely express willingness, ambivalence and resistance to supporting patients’ care. The drive to avoid admissions can lead health professionals to deploy conversational skills to enlist accompanying persons for discharge care without exploring the meanings of their particular relations with patients. Taking a relationship-centered approach could improve attention to accompanying persons as co-producers of healthcare and participants in decision-making

Women offenders: Promoting a holistic approach and continuity of care across criminal justice and health interventions

Analysis of data in this article focuses on the self-reported situations of 21 female respondents who were part of a large-scale study of offenders’ health needs. The findings show an extensive range of physical and psychological problems, often intertwined with substance misuse and other issues, including offending behaviour. Four components of an existing model of ‘continuity of care’ are reviewed to explore the difficulties, but also the potential, for collaborative and co-ordinated interventions with regard to working with women offenders. Concern is expressed about the changes and fragmentation in provision for women brought about by the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda in England and Wales. It is advocated here that policy and practice should be developed across health and criminal justice agencies to provide holistic and integrated approaches which could support women offenders in their attempts to stabilize their lives and to find pathways out of crime. </jats:p

From Programme Theory to Logic Models for Multispecialty Community Providers: A Realist Evidence Synthesis

Background: The NHS policy of constructing multispecialty community providers (MCPs) rests on a complex set of assumptions about how health systems can replace hospital use with enhanced primary care for people with complex, chronic or multiple health problems, while contributing savings to health-care budgets. Objectives: To use policy-makers’ assumptions to elicit an initial programme theory (IPT) of how MCPs can achieve their outcomes and to compare this with published secondary evidence and revise the programme theory accordingly. Design: Realist synthesis with a three-stage method: (1) for policy documents, elicit the IPT underlying the MCP policy, (2) review and synthesise secondary evidence relevant to those assumptions and (3) compare the programme theory with the secondary evidence and, when necessary, reformulate the programme theory in a more evidence-based way. Data sources: Systematic searches and data extraction using (1) the Health Management Information Consortium (HMIC) database for policy statements and (2) topically appropriate databases, including MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA). A total of 1319 titles and abstracts were reviewed in two rounds and 116 were selected for full-text data extraction. We extracted data using a formal data extraction tool and synthesised them using a framework reflecting the main policy assumptions. Results: The IPT of MCPs contained 28 interconnected context–mechanism–outcome relationships. Few policy statements specified what contexts the policy mechanisms required. We found strong evidence supporting the IPT assumptions concerning organisational culture, interorganisational network management, multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), the uses and effects of health information technology (HIT) in MCP-like settings, planned referral networks, care planning for individual patients and the diversion of patients from inpatient to primary care. The evidence was weaker, or mixed (supporting some of the constituent assumptions but not others), concerning voluntary sector involvement, the effects of preventative care on hospital admissions and patient experience, planned referral networks and demand management systems. The evidence about the effects of referral reductions on costs was equivocal. We found no studies confirming that the development of preventative care would reduce demands on inpatient services. The IPT had overlooked certain mechanisms relevant to MCPs, mostly concerning MDTs and the uses of HITs. Limitations: The studies reviewed were limited to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries and, because of the large amount of published material, the period 2014–16, assuming that later studies, especially systematic reviews, already include important earlier findings. No empirical studies of MCPs yet existed. Conclusions: Multidisciplinary teams are a central mechanism by which MCPs (and equivalent networks and organisations) work, provided that the teams include the relevant professions (hence, organisations) and, for care planning, individual patients. Further primary research would be required to test elements of the revised logic model, in particular about (1) how MDTs and enhanced general practice compare and interact, or can be combined, in managing referral networks and (2) under what circumstances diverting patients from in-patient to primary care reduces NHS costs and improves the quality of patient experience