Barriers to healthcare and their relationship to well-being and social support for autistic adults during COVID-19.

AIM: The present study aimed to investigate barriers to healthcare and their relationships to social and emotional well-being and intersectional inequalities for autistic adults during COVID-19 restrictions in the UK. BACKGROUND: Autistic adults experience severe health inequalities and report more barriers to accessing health services compared to other both disabled and non-disabled populations. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted many areas of society that may have increased vulnerability of autistic people to social and health inequalities, including delivery of healthcare from in-person to remote methods. METHOD: One hundred twenty-eight autistic adults who lived in the UK took part in an online survey. Measures included the Barriers to Healthcare Checklist (Short Form) and PROMIS outcome measure bank to assess emotional well-being and social support. Participants rated their agreement with items, retrospectively considering three different points of the trajectory of COVID-19 restrictions: before COVID-19, during the first lockdown in spring 2020, and in the month prior to taking the survey during autumn 2020. They completed a follow-up survey six months later to continue to assess change as restrictions in the UK were eased. FINDINGS: The average number of barriers to healthcare showed no significant change between all four time points. However, the nature of barriers to healthcare changed at the point of lockdown and persisted beyond the easing of COVID-19 restrictions. Barriers to healthcare were associated with some social and emotional well-being variables and demographic groups including gender, education and presence of additional disabilities. The findings may help to identify areas to target to improve access to both remote and in-person health systems for autistic people as modes of delivery continue to change over time.

Tailoring cultural offers to meet the needs of older people during uncertain times: a rapid realist review.

BACKGROUND: Non-medical issues (e.g. loneliness, financial concerns, housing problems) can shape how people feel physically and psychologically. This has been emphasised during the Covid-19 pandemic, especially for older people. Social prescribing is proposed as a means of addressing non-medical issues, which can include drawing on support offered by the cultural sector. METHOD: A rapid realist review was conducted to explore how the cultural sector (in particular public/curated gardens, libraries and museums), as part of social prescribing, can support the holistic well-being of older people under conditions imposed by the pandemic. An initial programme theory was developed from our existing knowledge and discussions with cultural sector staff. It informed searches on databases and within the grey literature for relevant documents, which were screened against the review's inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from these documents to develop context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs). We used the CMOCs to refine our initial programme theory. RESULTS: Data were extracted from 42 documents. CMOCs developed from these documents highlighted the importance of tailoring-shaping support available through the cultural sector to the needs and expectations of older people-through messaging, matching, monitoring and partnerships. Tailoring can help to secure benefits that older people may derive from engaging with a cultural offer-being distracted (absorbed in an activity) or psychologically held, making connections or transforming through self-growth. We explored the idea of tailoring in more detail by considering it in relation to Social Exchange Theory. CONCLUSIONS: Tailoring cultural offers to the variety of conditions and circumstances encountered in later life, and to changes in social circumstances (e.g. a global pandemic), is central to social prescribing for older people involving the cultural sector. Adaptations should be directed towards achieving key benefits for older people who have reported feeling lonely, anxious and unwell during the pandemic and recovery from it.

Social prescribing for older people and the role of the cultural sector during the COVID-19 pandemic: What are link workers' views and experiences?

Older people's well-being can be bolstered by engaging with cultural activities and venues. They may be encouraged to try cultural offers by a link worker as part of social prescribing. However, the cultural sector, like all parts of life, was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic; this has had implications for cultural offers available to link workers. A study was conducted to explore the views and experiences of link workers in using the cultural sector within social prescribing, particularly for older people (aged 60+) during the pandemic. An online questionnaire was distributed to and completed by link workers in the UK. Data were analysed mainly using descriptive statistics. Open text responses were clustered into similar ideas to create key concepts. Useable responses were received from 148 link workers. They highlighted a general lack of interaction between link workers and the cultural sector about how the latter could support social prescribing. Results suggested that personal familiarity with cultural offers might prompt link workers to refer to them. Some respondents proposed that cultural offers were regarded as elitist, which deterred them from referring there. However, there was a general acknowledgement that the cultural sector could contribute to social prescribing. Link workers need to regard the cultural sector as accessible, appropriate, adequate, affordable and available before referring older people to cultural offers as part of social prescribing. Link workers may benefit from becoming more familiar with cultural sector staff and offers, including online resources, so they can then propose them to patients with confidence.

Impact of COVID-19 on social prescribing across an Integrated Care System: A Researcher in Residence study.

Emerging evidence suggests that connecting people to non-medical activities in the community (social prescribing) may relieve pressure on services by promoting autonomy and resilience, thereby improving well-being and self-management of health. This way of working has a long history in the voluntary and community sector but has only recently been widely funded by the National Health Service (NHS) in England and implemented in Primary Care Networks (PCNs). The COVID-19 global pandemic coincided with this new service. There is wide variation in how social prescribing is implemented and scant evidence comparing different delivery models. As embedded researchers within an Integrated Care System in the Southwest of England, we examined the impact of COVID on the implementation of social prescribing in different employing organisations during the period March 2020 to April 2021. Data were collected from observations and field notes recorded during virtual interactions with over 80 social prescribing practitioners and an online survey of 52 social prescribing practitioners and middle managers. We conceptualise social prescribing as a pathway comprising access, engagement and activities, facilitated by workforce and community assets and strategic partnerships. We found that these elements were all impacted by the pandemic, but to different degrees according to the way the service was contracted, whether referrals (access) and approach (engagement) were universal ('open') or targeted ('boundaried') and the extent to which practitioners' roles were protected or shifted towards immediate COVID-specific work. Social prescribers contracted in PCNs were more likely to operate an 'open' model, although boundaries were developing over time. We suggest the presence of an explicit, agreed delivery model (whether 'open' or 'boundaried') might create a more coherent approach less likely to result in practitioner role drift, whilst allowing flexibility to adjust to the pandemic and enhancing practitioner satisfaction and well-being. The potential consequences of different models are examined.