Primary care micro-teams: a protocol for an international systematic review to describe and examine the opportunities and challenges of implementation for patients and healthcare professionals

Introduction: There has been a recent trend towards creating larger primary care practices with the assumption that interdisciplinary teams can deliver improved and more cost-effective services to patients with better accessibility. Micro-teams have been proposed to mitigate some of the potential challenges with practice expansion, including continuity of care. We aim to review the available literature to improve understanding of how micro-teams are described and the opportunities which primary care micro-teams can provide for practice staff and patients and limitations to their introduction and implementation. Our review asks: how is micro-team implementation described? What are the experiences of healthcare professionals and patients concerning micro-teams in primary care? What are the reported implications of micro-teams for patient care? // Methods and analysis: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and Scopus will be searched for studies in English. Grey literature will be sourced from Google Scholar, government websites, CCG websites, general practice directives and strategies with advice from stakeholders. Included studies will give evidence regarding the implementation of micro-teams. Data will be synthesised using framework analysis. We will use iterative stakeholder and public and patient participation to embed the perspectives of those whom micro-teams could impact. Included studies will be quality assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The quality assessment will not be used to exclude any evidence but rather to develop a narrative discussion evaluating included literature. // Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval will not be necessary for this systematic review as there will only be a secondary analysis of data already available in scientific databases and the grey literature. This protocol has been submitted for registration to be made available on a review database (PROSPERO). Findings will be disseminated widely through peer-reviewed publication and in various media, for example, conferences, congresses or symposia

Do Web-based Mental Health Literacy Interventions Improve the Mental Health Literacy of Adult Consumers? Results From a Systematic Review

Background: Low levels of mental health literacy (MHL) have been identified as an important contributor to the mental health treatment gap. Interventions to improve MHL have used traditional media (eg, community talks, print media) and new platforms (eg, the Internet). Evaluations of interventions using conventional media show improvements in MHL improve community recognition of mental illness as well as knowledge, attitude, and intended behaviors toward people having mental illness. However, the potential of new media, such as the Internet, to enhance MHL has yet to be systematically evaluated. Objective: Study aims were twofold: (1) To systematically appraise the efficacy of Web-based interventions in improving MHL. (2) To establish if increases in MHL translated into improvement in individual health seeking and health outcomes as well as reductions in stigma toward people with mental illness. Methods: We conducted a systematic search and appraisal of all original research published between 2000 and 2015 that evaluated Web-based interventions to improve MHL. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were used to report findings. Results: Fourteen studies were included: 10 randomized controlled trials and 4 quasi-experimental studies. Seven studies were conducted in Australia. A variety of Web-based interventions were identified ranging from linear, static websites to highly interactive interventions such as social media games. Some Web-based interventions were specifically designed for people living with mental illness whereas others were applicable to the general population. Interventions were more likely to be successful if they included “active ingredients” such as a structured program, were tailored to specific populations, delivered evidenced-based content, and promoted interactivity and experiential learning.Conclusions: Web-based interventions targeting MHL are more likely to be successful if they include active ingredients. Improvements in MHL see concomitant improvements in health outcomes, especially for individuals with mild to moderate depression. The most promising interventions suited to this cohort appear to be MoodGYM and BluePages, 2 interventions from Australia. However, the relationship between MHL and formal and informal help seeking is less clear; self-stigma appears to be an important mediator with results showing that despite improvements in MHL and community attitudes to mental illness, individuals with mental illness still seek help at relatively low rates. Overall, the Internet is a viable method to improve MHL. Future studies could explore how new technology interfaces (eg, mobile phones vs computers) can help improve MHL, mental health outcomes, and reduce stigma

School closures during COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews

Objectives: To assess the benefits and drawbacks of school closures and in-school mitigations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Overview of systematic reviews (SRs). Search methods: We searched six databases and additional resources on 29 July 2022: MEDLINE, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, COVID-END inventory of evidence synthesis, and Epistemonikos. Eligibility criteria: We selected SRs written in English that answered at least one of four specific questions concerning the efficacy and drawbacks of school closures. Their primary studies were conducted in primary and secondary schools, including pupils aged 5–18. Interventions included school closures or mitigations (such as mask usage) introduced in schools. Data collection and analysis: We used AMSTAR 2 to assess confidence in the included SRs, and GRADE was used to assess certainty of evidence. We performed a narrative synthesis of the results, prioritising higher-quality SRs, those which performed GRADE assessments and those with more unique primary studies. We also assessed the overlap between primary studies included in the SRs. Main outcome measures: Our framework for summarising outcome data was guided by the following questions: (1) What is the impact of school closures on COVID-19 transmission, morbidity or mortality in the community? (2) What is the impact of COVID-19 school closures on mental health (eg, anxiety), physical health (eg, obesity, domestic violence, sleep) and learning/achievement of primary and secondary pupils? (3) What is the impact of mitigations in schools on COVID-19 transmission, morbidity or mortality in the community? and (4) What is the impact of COVID-19 mitigations in schools on mental health, physical health and learning/achievement of primary and secondary pupils? Results: We identified 578 reports, 26 of which were included. One SR was of high confidence, 0 moderate, 10 low and 15 critically low confidence. We identified 132 unique primary studies on the effects of school closures on transmission/morbidity/mortality, 123 on learning, 164 on mental health, 22 on physical health, 16 on sleep, 7 on domestic violence and 69 on effects of in-school mitigations on transmission/morbidity/mortality. Both school closures and in-school mitigations were associated with reduced COVID-19 transmission, morbidity and mortality in the community. School closures were also associated with reduced learning, increased anxiety and increased obesity in pupils. We found no SRs that assessed potential drawbacks of in-school mitigations on pupils. The certainty of evidence according to GRADE was mostly very low. Conclusions: School closures during COVID-19 had both positive and negative impacts. We found a large number of SRs and primary studies. However, confidence in the SRs was mostly low to very low, and the certainty of evidence was also mostly very low. We found no SRs assessing the potential drawbacks of in-school mitigations on children, which could be addressed moving forward. This overview provides evidence that could inform policy makers on school closures during future potential waves of COVID-19

Understanding the roles and work of paramedics in primary care: a national cross-sectional survey

Objectives: This research aimed to fill a current knowledge gap, namely the current scope of clinical role of paramedics in primary care, in relation to specific constructs such a level of education and clinical experience. Setting: The survey was distributed to paramedics in primary care across the UK through the College of Paramedics. Participants: A total of 341 surveys were returned (male=215). 90% of responses were from paramedics in England, 1.7% from paramedics in Northern Ireland, 4.6% from paramedics in Scotland and 2.9% from paramedics in Wales. This represents approximately 33% of the primary care paramedic workforce in England and Wales. Estimates for percentages in Northern Ireland and Scotland are unavailable due to the lack of workforce datasets capturing paramedics in primary care. Results: Considerable variation was found in job titles, level of education and provision of clinical supervision of paramedics in primary care. Differing levels of practice were noted, despite guidance documents that attempt to standardise the role. Statistical analysis of quantitative data highlighted that relationships exist between paramedic clinical exposure in primary care, level of education, and ability of independently prescribe medicines and the extent to which clinical presentations are seen and examinations performed. However, free-text responses indicated that challenges in relation to access to further education and clinical supervision to support clinical development resulted in frustration for paramedics who work in this setting. Conclusions: As well as offering an insight into the demographics of the primary care paramedic work force, there is indication of the clinical scope of role undertaken in this setting. Based on our findings, we recommend changes to education and support, governance and legislation to ensure paramedics employed in primary care can work to achieve the full extent of their professional capability

Understanding the impact of delegated home visiting services accessed via general practice by community-dwelling patients: a realist review protocol

Introduction In western countries, early visiting services (EVS) have been proposed as a recent intervention to reduce both general practitioner workload and hospital admissions among housebound individuals experiencing a healthcare need within the community. EVS involves the delegation of the patient home visits to other staff groups such as paramedics or nursing staff. However, the principles of organising this care are unknown and it remains unclear how different contexts, such as patient conditions and the processes of organising EVS influence care outcomes. A review has been designed to understand how EVS are enacted and, specifically, who benefits, why, how and when in order to provide further insight into the design and delivery of EVS. Methods and analysis The purpose of this review is to produce findings that provide explanations of how and why EVS contexts influence their associated outcomes. Evidence on EVS will be consolidated through realist review—a theory-driven approach to evidence synthesis. A realist approach is needed as EVS is a complex intervention. What EVS achieve is likely to vary for different individuals and contexts. We expect to synthesise a range of relevant data such as qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method research in the following stages: devising an initial programme theory, searching evidence, selecting appropriate documents, extracting data, synthesising and refining the programme theory.</p