Evaluation of the integrated care and support pioneers programme in the context of new funding arrangements for integrated care in England (2015- 2020) PR-R10-1014-25001: Final report to Department of Health and Social Care, and National Institute for Health Research, Policy Research programme:Work Package 3: Engagement with pioneers, policy makers and national partner/user organisations to derive and spread learning

In this chapter of the final report, we set out the ways in which the Pioneer evaluation team sought to derive learning from the research, spread this in as close to real-time as possible, and in so doing to work in close partnership with the Pioneer sites, policy makers, user organisations and others with an interest in evidence-based learning about enabling better integrated care. This commitment to engagement and dissemination was central to the approach taken to our evaluation and specified from the outset in the proposal for the study. We describe the original plans for engagement and spread of learning and explain how these were enacted by reporting on the different activities undertaken in terms of content and insights gained. Furthermore, we set out the key priorities for learning from the Pioneer programme as reported by a sample of policy makers and practitioners when interviewed in 2021 as the new Integrated Care Systems and Boards were being developed. The chapter ends with a consideration of the strengths and limitations of the approach taken to engagement and learning, drawing conclusions about how best such partnership and dissemination can work as part of a large and lengthy evaluation study. <br/

Evaluation of the integrated care and support pioneers programme in the context of new funding arrangements for integrated care in England (2015- 2020) PR-R10-1014-25001: Final report to Department of Health and Social Care, and National Institute for Health Research, Policy Research programme:Work Package 3: Engagement with pioneers, policy makers and national partner/user organisations to derive and spread learning

In this chapter of the final report, we set out the ways in which the Pioneer evaluation team sought to derive learning from the research, spread this in as close to real-time as possible, and in so doing to work in close partnership with the Pioneer sites, policy makers, user organisations and others with an interest in evidence-based learning about enabling better integrated care. This commitment to engagement and dissemination was central to the approach taken to our evaluation and specified from the outset in the proposal for the study. We describe the original plans for engagement and spread of learning and explain how these were enacted by reporting on the different activities undertaken in terms of content and insights gained. Furthermore, we set out the key priorities for learning from the Pioneer programme as reported by a sample of policy makers and practitioners when interviewed in 2021 as the new Integrated Care Systems and Boards were being developed. The chapter ends with a consideration of the strengths and limitations of the approach taken to engagement and learning, drawing conclusions about how best such partnership and dissemination can work as part of a large and lengthy evaluation study. <br/

Supporting ALL victims of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation: guidance for health providers.

Smaller groups of victims of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation - such as male victims of intimate partner violence (IPV), victims of elder abuse, victims of abuse by carers, victims of parent abuse, victims of human trafficking, girls and boys below 18 years engaging in sex work, victims of sexual exploitation by gangs or groups and victims of honour based violence (such as forced marriages and female genital mutilation) - are often in contact with the health care system without being identified as such and frequently do not receive appropriate treatment. To address this problem, two things need to happen: 1) that ALL groups of victims of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation are explicitly listed in policies and protocols, and 2) that both the similarities as well as the differences between the groups with regard to identification, support and referral - described in this article - are explained, so that health providers are appropriately supported in this important function

Diageo's 'Stop Out of Control Drinking' Campaign in Ireland: An Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It has been argued that the alcohol industry uses corporate social responsibility activities to influence policy and undermine public health, and that every opportunity should be taken to scrutinise such activities. This study analyses a controversial Diageo-funded 'responsible drinking' campaign ("Stop out of Control Drinking", or SOOCD) in Ireland. The study aims to identify how the campaign and its advisory board members frame and define (i) alcohol-related harms, and their causes, and (ii) possible solutions. METHODS: Documentary analysis of SOOCD campaign material. This includes newspaper articles (n = 9), media interviews (n = 11), Facebook posts (n = 92), and Tweets (n = 340) produced by the campaign and by board members. All material was coded inductively, and a thematic analysis undertaken, with codes aggregated into sub-themes. RESULTS: The SOOCD campaign utilises vague or self-defined concepts of 'out of control' and 'moderate' drinking, tending to present alcohol problems as behavioural rather than health issues. These are also unquantified with respect to actual drinking levels. It emphasises alcohol-related antisocial behaviour among young people, particularly young women. In discussing solutions to alcohol-related problems, it focuses on public opinion rather than on scientific evidence, and on educational approaches and information provision, misrepresenting these as effective. "Moderate drinking" is presented as a behavioural issue ("negative drinking behaviours"), rather than as a health issue. CONCLUSIONS: The 'Stop Out of Control Drinking' campaign frames alcohol problems and solutions in ways unfavourable to public health, and closely reflects other Diageo Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activity, as well as alcohol and tobacco industry strategies more generally. This framing, and in particular the framing of alcohol harms as a behavioural issue, with the implication that consumption should be guided only by self-defined limits, may not have been recognised by all board members. It suggests a need for awareness-raising efforts among the public, third sector and policymakers about alcohol industry strategies

‘They treat us like machines’: migrant workers’ conceptual framework of labour exploitation for health research and policy

Background: The exploitation of migrant workers ranks high on global political agendas including the Sustainable Development Goals. Research on exploited workers, using assessment tools where exploitation is defined by professional experts, indicates serious health concerns and needs. Yet, migrant workers are rarely asked about their understanding of a phenomenon they may experience. Our study aimed to conceptualise ‘labour exploitation’ from the perspective of migrant workers employed in manual low-skilled jobs. Methods: Twenty-seven Latin Americans working in London (UK) participated in Group Concept Mapping; a participatory mixed-method where qualitative data are collected to define a concept’s content and then analysed using quantitative methods to generate a structured conceptual framework. Participants generated statements describing the concept content during brainstorming sessions, and structured them during sorting-rating exercises. Multi-Dimensional Scaling and Cluster Analysis were performed, generating a conceptual framework that clarified the dimensions, subdimensions and constituent statements of the concept of labour exploitation from migrant workers’ perspectives. Results: Three key dimensions were identified: ‘poor employment conditions and lack of protection’, covering contractual arrangements and employment relations; ‘disposability and abuse of power’ (or ‘dehumanisation’) covering mechanisms or means which make migrant workers feel disposable and abused; and ‘health and safety and psychosocial hazards’ encompassing issues from physical and psychosocial hazards to a lack of health and social protection. ‘Dehumanisation’ has not been included in mainstream tools assessing exploitation, despite its importance for study participants who also described harsh situations at work including sexual, physical and verbal abuse. Conclusion: Our study provides a conceptual framework of labour exploitation that gives voice to migrant workers and can be operationalised into a measure of migrant labour exploitation. It also calls for the dimension ‘dehumanisation’ and structural forms of coercion to be integrated into mainstream conceptualisations, and their workplace hazards to be urgently addressed

Evaluation of modernisation of adult critical care services in England: time series and cost effectiveness analysis

Objective To evaluate the impact and cost effectiveness of a programme to transform adult critical care throughout England initiated in late 2000

Integrated Care in England - what can we Learn from a Decade of National Pilot Programmes?

INTRODUCTION: For more than a decade the English NHS has pursued integrated care through three national pilot programmes. The independent evaluators of these programmes here identify several common themes that inform the development of integrated care. DESCRIPTION: The three pilot programmes shared the aim of better coordination between hospital and community-based health services and between health and social care. Each programme recruited local pilot sites that designed specific interventions to support inter-professional and inter-organisational collaboration.The pilots were highly heterogenous and results varied both within and between the three programmes. While staff were generally positive about their achievements, pilots had mixed success especially in reducing unplanned hospital admissions. Common facilitators to achieving pilots' objectives included effective senior leadership and shared values, simple interventions and additional funding. Barriers included short timescales, poor professional engagement, information and data sharing problems, and conflicts with changing national policy. DISCUSSION: There was little stable or shared understanding of what 'integrated care' meant resulting in different practices and priorities. An increasing focus on reducing unplanned hospital use among national sponsors created a mismatch in expectations between local and national actors. CONCLUSION: Pilots in all three national programmes made some headway against their objectives but were limited in their impact on unplanned hospital admissions

Area level impacts on emergency hospital admissions of the integrated care and support pioneer programme in England: difference-in-differences analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether any differential change in emergency admissions could be attributed to integrated care by comparing pioneer and non-pioneer populations from a pre-pioneer baseline period (April 2010 to March 2013) over two follow-up periods: to 2014/2015 and to 2015/2016. DESIGN: Difference-in-differences analysis of emergency hospital admissions from English Hospital Episode Statistics. SETTING: Local authorities in England classified as either pioneer or non-pioneer. PARTICIPANTS: Emergency admissions to all NHS hospitals in England with local authority determined by area of residence of the patient. INTERVENTION: Wave 1 of the integrated care and support pioneer programme announced in November 2013. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in hospital emergency admissions. RESULTS: The increase in the pioneer emergency admission rate from baseline to 2014/2015 was smaller at 1.93% and significantly different from that of the non-pioneers at 4.84% (p=0.0379). The increase in the pioneer emergency admission rate from baseline to 2015/2016 was again smaller than for the non-pioneers but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.1879). CONCLUSIONS: It is ambitious to expect unequivocal changes in a high level and indirect indicator of health and social care integration such as emergency hospital admissions to arise as a result of the changes in local health and social care provision across organisations brought about by the pioneers in their early years. We should treat any sign that the pioneers have had such an impact with caution. Nevertheless, there does seem to be an indication from the current analysis that there were some changes in hospital use associated with the first year of pioneer status that are worthy of further exploration

Comparison of the impact of two national health and social care integration programmes on emergency hospital admissions

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-10-28, accepted 2021-06-23, registration 2021-06-26, pub-electronic 2021-07-12, online 2021-07-12, collection 2021-12Publication status: PublishedFunder: Research for Social Care within Research for Patient Benefit (RfPB) Programme; Grant(s): NIHR201872Funder: National Institute for Health Research; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272; Grant(s): PR-R10-0514-25001, PR-R16-0516-22001Abstract: Background: Policy-makers expect that integration of health and social care will improve user and carer experience and reduce avoidable hospital use. We evaluate the impact on emergency hospital admissions of two large nationally-initiated service integration programmes in England: the Pioneer (November 2013 to March 2018) and Vanguard (January 2015 to March 2018) programmes. The latter had far greater financial and expert support from central agencies. Methods: Of the 206 Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in England, 51(25%) were involved in the Pioneer programme only, 22(11%) were involved in the Vanguard programme only and 13(6%) were involved in both programmes. We used quasi-experimental methods to compare monthly counts of emergency admissions between four groups of CCGs, before and after the introduction of the two programmes. Results: CCGs involved in the programmes had higher monthly hospital emergency admission rates than non-participants prior to their introduction [7.9 (95% CI:7.8–8.1) versus 7.5 (CI:7.4–7.6) per 1000 population]. From 2013 to 2018, there was a 12% (95% CI:9.5–13.6%) increase in emergency admissions in CCGs not involved in either programme while emergency admissions in CCGs in the Pioneer and Vanguard programmes increased by 6.4% (95% CI: 3.8–9.0%) and 8.8% (95% CI:4.5–13.1%), respectively. CCGs involved in both initiatives experienced a smaller increase of 3.5% (95% CI:-0.3–7.2%). The slowdown largely occurred in the final year of both programmes. Conclusions: Health and social care integration programmes can mitigate but not prevent rises in emergency admissions over the longer-term. Greater financial and expert support from national agencies and involvement in multiple integration initiatives can have cumulative effects