A study to explore the usefulness of a mobile health application to support people with mild cognitive and/or communication impairment due to dementia and their carers.

Background: Mobile apps for health (mHealth) have the potential to support people living with dementia. However, dementia is a complex and progressive condition that imposes specific constraints on the introduction/use of mhealth. Few studies have explored mHealth adoption and use within the complexity of everyday domestic settings. This study used an existing App co-designed with people living with mild cognitive and communication impairment (PWMCCI) due to learning disabilities and examined the usefulness for PWMICCI due to dementia and their carers. Methods: A qualitative study of people with dementia and their carers. Data were collected in a phased approach to identify the potential need for, as well as the usability and utility of the app. Analysis employed the Domestication of Technology Model (DTM) to explore, in a novel way mHealth, in this user group(s). Results: Most participants did not adopt the mHealth during the study period but some (n = 2) did routinely as it fulfilled a unique, unmet need. The use of DTM highlighted the complexities of dementia, pressure on carers and duplication of effort created barriers to app adoption and use in the long term. Conclusions: The ability of mHealth to support PWMCCI due to dementia and/or their carers may have potential. Users were motivated to try the technology but for any potential to be fully realised, the interplay between complexity of the condition including its progressive nature, demand on carers and nature of the technology needs to be more fully understood. Such issues place unique constraints around the size and window of opportunities for mHealth in this user group.

Challenges and adaptations to public involvement with marginalised groups during the COVID-19 pandemic: commentary with illustrative case studies in the context of patient safety research.

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is integral to research on patient safety in the NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GMPSTRC), and is central to our patient safety research within our theme focusing on people in marginalised groups. Due to the impact of COVID-19, researchers had to adapt how they do PPI. For marginalised groups, remote working and digital adaptations (the key adaptations made in accessing and utilising health services in the United Kingdom during COVID-19) can potentially lead to further marginalisation of people already marginalised and provide new barriers to others. This editorial showcases three case examples of PPI with marginalised groups during COVID-19, these are with: (1) adults with vision impairments, (2) adults and carers with lived experience of self-harm and/ or suicide and (3) adults with lived experience of homelessness. In these case examples, we focus on challenges relating to key aspects of PPI during the pandemic. First, setting up a PPI advisory group and secondly maintaining relationships and effective PPI with a pre-existing advisory group. We contrast these examples using more traditional ways of 'doing PPI' i.e. involving public contributors in various stages of the research cycle, with a more fully 'co-produced' approach to research when developing a new patient safety intervention. Important considerations for PPI with marginalised groups during COVID-19 include: how to avoid exacerbating the digital divide when using video conferencing for PPI, the need for enhanced awareness around flexibility and resources, and the value of working closely with specialist charities to enable adaptations that are sensitive to the changed circumstances and needs of PPI contributors.

The National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational research Centre (GMPSTRC) carries out research to improve patient safety. We work in partnership with patients and members of the public to plan, manage, design, and carry out the research. This is labelled as patient and public involvement. A key area of GMPSTRC research focuses on people who may be marginalised from healthcare and potentially suffer increased patient safety risks relative to the general population. COVID-19 impacted on research in multiple ways, notably how researchers work with members of the public. Remote working via the use of internet enabled technology has now become more commonplace, although this raises concerns about digital exclusion and how to address barriers when face-to-face PPI is not possible. This article showcases three examples of how researchers and public contributors with lived experience have adapted to working together during the COVID-19 pandemic. These case examples are: (1) setting up a public involvement group for developing an intervention to reduce medication errors for adults with vision impairments; (2) working with a pre-existing group of public contributors who are adults and carers with lived experience of self-harm and/or suicide; and (3) working with a charity called Groundswell who train and support researchers with lived experience of homelessness. Challenges during COVID-19 have been making video conferencing meetings accessible to members who have a range of different needs, and addressing the digital divide by allowing members flexibility in how they contribute to research. The article provides examples of how these challenges were addressed.

Resistance or appropriation?: Uptake of exercise after a nurse-led intervention to promote self-management for osteoarthritis.

The philosophical underpinning of trials of complex interventions is critiqued for not taking into account causal mechanisms that influence potential outcomes. In this article, we draw from in-depth interviews (with practice nurses and patients) and observations of practice meetings and consultations to investigate the outcomes of a complex intervention to promote self-management (in particular exercise) for osteoarthritis in primary care settings. We argue that nurses interpreted the intervention as underpinned by the need to educate rather than work with patients, and, drawing from Habermasian theory, we argue that expert medicalised knowledge (system) clashed with lay 'lifeworld' prerogatives in an uneven communicative arena (the consultation). In turn, the advice and instructions given to patients were not always commensurate with their 'lifeworld'. Consequently, patients struggled to embed exercise routines into their daily lives for reasons of unsuitable locality, sense-making that 'home' was an inappropriate place to exercise and using embodied knowledge to test the efficacy of exercise on pain. We conclude by arguing that using Habermasian theory helped to understand reasons why the trial failed to increase exercise levels. Our findings suggest that communication styles influence the outcomes of self-management interventions, reinforce the utility of theoretically informed qualitative research embedded within trials to improve conduct and outcomes and indicate incorporating perspectives from human geography can enhance Habermas-informed research and theorising.

Co-designing an Adaption of a Mobile App to Enhance Communication, Safety, and Well-being Among People Living at Home With Early-Stage Dementia: Protocol for an Exploratory Multiple Case Study.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing interest in using mobile apps to support communication, safety, and well-being. Evidence directly from people with dementia regarding the usability, usefulness, and relevance of mobile apps is limited. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the protocol of a study that will evaluate an app designed for supporting communication, safety, and well-being among people living with dementia. The study aims to understand if the app can enhance safety through improved communication among users. METHODS: The study will use participatory qualitative methods over 3 cycles of evaluation with co-designers (service users, their families, and care practitioners). The study will be developed in partnership with a specialist home care service in England. Purposive case selection will be performed to ensure that the cases exemplify differences in experiences. The app will be evaluated in a walk-through workshop by people living with early-stage dementia and then trialed at home by up to 12 families in a try-out cycle. An amended version will be evaluated in a final walk-through workshop during cycle 3. Data will be collected from at least 4 data sources during the try-out phase and analyzed thematically. An explanatory multiple case study design will be used to synthesize and present the evidence from the three cycles, drawing on the Normalization Process Theory to support the interpretation of the findings. RESULTS: The study is ready to be implemented, but it was paused to protect vulnerable individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. The findings will be particularly relevant for understanding how to support vulnerable people living in the community during social distancing and the period following the pandemic as well as for providing insight into the challenges of social isolation that arise from living with dementia. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluating a mobile app for enhancing communication, safety, and well-being among people living with dementia contributes to the key ambitions enshrined in policy and practice-championing the use of digital technology and supporting people with dementia to live safely in their own homes. The study will involve co-designers living with dementia, so that the voices of service users can be used to highlight the benefits and challenges of assistive technology and shape the future development of apps that enhance safety by improving communication. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/19543.

Co-designing new tools for collecting, analysing and presenting patient experience data in NHS services: working in partnership with patients and carers.

BACKGROUND: The way we collect and use patient experience data is vital to optimise the quality and safety of health services. Yet, some patients and carers do not give feedback because of the limited ways data is collected, analysed and presented. In this study, we worked together with researchers, staff, patient and carer participants, and patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) contributors, to co-design new tools for the collection and use of patient experience data in multiple health settings. This paper outlines how the range of PPIE and research activities enabled the co-design of new tools to collect patient experience data. METHODS: Eight public contributors represented a range of relevant patient and carer experiences in specialist services with varied levels of PPIE experience, and eleven members of Patient and Participation Groups (PPGs) from two general practices formed our PPIE group at the start of the study. Slide sets were used to trigger co-design discussions with staff, patient and carer research participants, and PPIE contributors. Feedback from PPIE contributors alongside verbatim quotes from staff, patient and carer research participants is presented in relation to the themes from the research data. RESULTS: PPIE insights from four themes: capturing experience data; adopting digital or non-digital tools; ensuring privacy and confidentiality; and co-design of a suite of new tools with guidance, informed joint decisions on the shaping of the tools and how these were implemented. Our PPIE contributors took different roles during co-design and testing of the new tools, which supported co-production of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Our experiences of developing multiple components of PPIE work for this complex study demonstrates the importance of tailoring PPIE to suit different settings, and to maximise individual strengths and capacity. Our study shows the value of bringing diverse experiences together, putting patients and carers at the heart of improving NHS services, and a shared approach to managing involvement in co-design, with the effects shown through the research process, outcomes and the partnership. We reflect on how we worked together to create a supportive environment when unforeseen challenges emerged (such as, sudden bereavement).

The way we collect and use patient experience data is important because of concern that patients and carers may be excluded by the limited ways it is currently done in NHS services. In this study, we worked in partnership with researchers, staff, patient and carer participants, and patient and public involvement and engagement contributors, to co-design new tools for the collection, analysis and presentation of patient experience data. We focused on services for people with musculoskeletal conditions and services for people with severe mental health conditions. Our PPIE group, formed at the start of the study, represented a range of relevant and diverse health experiences from patients and carers of specialist services, and primary care. The aim of this paper is to share our experiences from working in partnership with our PPIE contributors on the co-design work of the study. Illustrations of how the PPIE activities added crucial insights in the shaping of the tools are given alongside the research data from patients, carers and staff participants. We experienced some challenges during the project. We discuss how we managed to work together to create a supportive environment when unforeseen challenges emerged (such as, sudden bereavement). Our experiences of developing multiple components of PPIE work for this study demonstrates the importance of tailoring PPIE to suit different settings, and to complement people's strengths and capacity. It also shows the value of bringing diverse experiences together enabling a shared approach to co-design. Researchers and PPIE contributors wrote this paper jointly.

Exploring engagement with digital screens for collecting patient feedback in clinical waiting rooms: The role of touch and place.

Health service settings are increasingly installing digital devices to enable people to engage digitally with multiple processes, including automated 'check-in', as well as collecting feedback on experiences of care. In addition, policy is increasingly driving digital agendas to promote patient engagement with online services, management of health records and routine monitoring. While this tendency towards widespread digital diffusion has been viewed as a means of enabling greater empowerment of patients and improved responsiveness of services to 'patient voice', social scientists have provided critical insights on the use of digital technologies in practice. However, there remains limited understanding of the mechanisms and contexts for digital engagement. In particular, there is a need for further research on the sensory and spatial aspects of engagement that are integral to everyday use (or non-use) of technology in practice. This article reports new insights from detailed qualitative case studies utilising in-depth interviews with patients, carers and staff, in addition to ethnographic observations of different digital modalities and their usage in specific health care contexts. A sociomaterial approach and concepts of affective atmosphere and technogeography are drawn upon to analyse the role of touch and place in the collection of digital feedback in multiple waiting room settings for people with physical and mental health long-term conditions. The findings highlight how barriers to engagement varied by context such as particular concerns about privacy for those with mental health problems and physical and sensory barriers for those with physical impairments. The findings demonstrate how digital inequalities can play out in practice and have implications for the design and development of digital innovations and tackling inequalities that may be associated with implementation of new digital technologies in healthcare.

Implementing a digital patient feedback system: an analysis using normalisation process theory.

BACKGROUND: Patient feedback in the English NHS is now widespread and digital methods are increasingly used. Adoption of digital methods depends on socio-technical and contextual factors, alongside human agency and lived experience. Moreover, the introduction of these methods may be perceived as disruptive of organisational and clinical routines. The focus of this paper is on the implementation of a particular digital feedback intervention that was co-designed with health professionals and patients (the DEPEND study). METHODS: The digital feedback intervention was conceptualised as a complex intervention and thus the study focused on the contexts within which it operated, and how the different participants made sense of the intervention and engaged with it (or not). Four health care sites were studied: an acute setting, a mental health setting, and two general practices. Qualitative data was collected through interviews and focus groups with professionals, patients and carers. In total 51 staff, 24 patients and 8 carers were included. Forty-two observations of the use of the digital feedback system were carried out in the four settings. Data analysis was based on modified grounded theory and Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) formed the conceptual framework. RESULTS: Digital feedback made sense to health care staff as it was seen as attractive, fast to complete and easier to analyse. Patients had a range of views depending on their familiarity with the digital world. Patients mentioned barriers such as kiosk not being visible, privacy, lack of digital know-how, technical hitches with the touchscreen. Collective action in maintaining participation again differed between sites because of workload pressure, perceptions of roles and responsibilities; and in the mental health site major organisational change was taking place. For mental health service users, their relationship with staff and their own health status determined their digital use. CONCLUSION: The potential of digital feedback was recognised but implementation should take local contexts, different patient groups and organisational leadership into account. Patient involvement in change and adaptation of the intervention was important in enhancing the embedding of digital methods in routine feedback. NPT allowed for a in-depth understanding of actions and interactions of both staff and patients.

Patient safety in marginalised groups: a narrative scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Marginalised groups ('populations outside of mainstream society') experience severe health inequities, as well as increased risk of experiencing patient safety incidents. To date however no review exists to identify, map and analyse the literature in this area in order to understand 1) which marginalised groups have been studied in terms of patient safety research, 2) what the particular patient safety issues are for such groups and 3) what contributes to or is associated with these safety issues arising. METHODS: Scoping review. Systematic searches were performed across six electronic databases in September 2019. The time frame for searches of the respective databases was from the year 2000 until present day. RESULTS: The searches yielded 3346 articles, and 67 articles were included. Patient safety issues were identified for fourteen different marginalised patient groups across all studies, with 69% (n = 46) of the studies focused on four patient groups: ethnic minority groups, frail elderly populations, care home residents and low socio-economic status. Twelve separate patient safety issues were classified. Just over half of the studies focused on three issues represented in the patient safety literature, and in order of frequency were: medication safety, adverse outcomes and near misses. In total, 157 individual contributing or associated factors were identified and mapped to one of seven different factor types from the Framework of Contributory Factors Influencing Clinical Practice within the London Protocol. Patient safety issues were mostly multifactorial in origin including patient factors, health provider factors and health care system factors. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights that marginalised patient groups are vulnerable to experiencing a variety patient safety issues and points to a number of gaps. The findings indicate the need for further research to understand the intersectional nature of marginalisation and the multi-dimensional nature of patient safety issues, for groups that have been under-researched, including those with mental health problems, communication and cognitive impairments. Such understanding provides a basis for working collaboratively to co-design training, services and/or interventions designed to remove or at the very least minimise these increased risks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable for a scoping review.

Living with multimorbidity? The lived experience of multiple chronic conditions in later life.

Multimorbidity is defined biomedically as the co-existence of two or more long-term conditions in an individual. Globally, the number of people living with multiple conditions is increasing, posing stark challenges both to the clinical management of patients and the organisation of health systems. Qualitative literature has begun to address how concurrency affects the self-management of chronic conditions, and the concept of illness prioritisation predominates. In this article, we adopt a phenomenological lens to show how older people with multiple conditions experience illness. This UK study was qualitative and longitudinal in design. Sampling was purposive and drew upon an existing cohort study. In total, 15 older people living with multiple conditions took part in 27 in-depth interviews. The practical stages of analysis were guided by Constructivist Grounded Theory. We argue that the concept of multimorbidity as biomedically imagined has limited relevance to lived experience, while concurrency may also be erroneous. In response, we outline a lived experience of multiple chronic conditions in later life, which highlights differences between clinical and lay assumptions and makes the latter visible.

A collaborative approach to facilitate professionals to support the breathless patient.

OBJECTIVES: Breathlessness is a major problem for people in their last weeks of life. Breathlessness is considered to be multidimensional with physical, psychological, emotional, social and spiritual factors all playing a part. It has been recognised that specific training to health professionals is beneficial in order to improve the care for patients with breathlessness.Breathlessness courses have tended to focus on senior nurses. A new flexible and collaborative training course was designed to include a wider range of nurses and other health professionals in hospital, hospice, primary care and community settings. The aim of the 'Practical Skills to Support the Breathless Patient' programme was to make patients and carers feel better supported in their breathlessness, for health professionals to develop confidence and skills in using proven interventions, and to adopt a flexible educational design that could be adapted to different contexts. METHODS: The course is learner-centred and teaching methods encourage interaction and participation via a mix of lectures and discussions with practical skills-focused, experiential workshops in smaller groups. Case study work was included to integrate learning with participants' practice environment. Evaluation is built in during the course, so adaptations can be made throughout to respond to changing learner needs. RESULTS: Participants reported increased confidence in terms of knowledge and applying this within everyday practice. The theory-practice dynamic worked well within each participant' specific work context in particular through the case study approach. CONCLUSIONS: The course developed a number of innovative approaches, such as multi-disciplinary learning groups, regular feedback loops, reflexive learning about putting theory into practice and long-term follow-up. Combining these elements increases professionals' confidence and sustains new clinical practice.

The ethnographer as health service leader: An insider's view of organisational change.

PURPOSE: The conceptual presentation of a detailed case study of structural reorganisation in the English NHS illustrates what factors lead to productive or unproductive organisational change. FINDINGS: This autoethnography of a NHS Trust chair provides an account of two reorganisations over an 8-year period. The paper is based on diaries that allow for the presentation of examples that highlight different processes and outcomes. The various actors in the two reorganisations gave complex and multilayered meanings to structural changes and their impact. Two theoretical frameworks helped to analyse the dynamics of productive and unproductive changes. CONCLUSION: It is argued that structural change rarely delivers and that working through people and paying due attention to their motivations and moral imperatives will more likely produce benefits to organisations, staff, and patients.

Cost-effectiveness of a model consultation to support self-management in patients with osteoarthritis.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a model OA consultation for OA to support self-management compared with usual care. Methods: An incremental cost-utility analysis using patient responses to the three-level EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire was undertaken from a UK National Health Service perspective alongside a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial. Uncertainty was explored through the use of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results: Differences in health outcomes between the model OA consultation and usual care arms were not statistically significant. On average, visits to the orthopaedic surgeon were lower in the model OA consultation arm by -0.28 (95% CI: -0.55, -0.06). The cost-utility analysis indicated that the model OA consultation was associated with a non-significant incremental cost of £-13.11 (95% CI: -81.09 to 54.85) and an incremental quality adjusted life year (QALY) of -0.003 (95% CI: -0.03 to 0.02), with a 44% chance of being cost-effective at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY gained. The percentage of participants who took time off and the associated productivity cost were lower in the model OA consultation arm. Conclusion: Implementing National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines using a model OA consultation in primary care does not appear to lead to increased costs, but health outcomes remain very similar to usual care. Even though the intervention seems to reduce the demand for orthopaedic surgery, overall it is unlikely to be cost-effective.

Temporally divergent significant meanings, biographical disruption and self-management for chronic joint pain.

Self-management is recommended by policy and clinical guidelines as a way to contend with the growing incidence of osteoarthritis-related joint pain in an ageing population. Sociologists assert that self-management is as much about lay strategies for dealing with the biographically disruptive qualities of chronic illness as opposed to solely complying with medical regimens. The original concept of biographical disruption coined by Bury is not uncontested. Chronic joint pain has been characterised as featuring 'co-existing meanings' of significance and consequence. The former conferring no biographical disruption due to osteoarthritis being associated with 'normal ageing' and the latter causing biographical disruption due to the corporeal limitations joint pain imparts, which, in turn, can influence whether, why and how self-management is undertaken. This article reports findings from repeat interviews and a diary study completed by 22 participants with chronic knee pain. We explore the co-existing but temporally divergent 'meanings as significance' associated with knee pain. Participants describe the onset and current experience of the pain in terms of biographical normality (retrospective or contemporaneous meanings). Future meanings as significance are mediated by cultural beliefs about ageing and current physical consequences of the condition, and also have a distinct character of their own. Knee pain is associated with the possibility of disability and harbours a distinct risk; potential disruption to everyday social relationships, notably relating to care and dependency. In turn, future meanings of significance influence the preventative self-management strategies that people utilise. We argue for a more cogent theoretical understanding of temporal dimensions of biographical disruption, biographical work and subsequent self-management by utilising and extending the thought of Bury, and Corbin and Strauss. Doing so helps to understand patient self-management strategies and facilitates self-management support in clinical settings for osteoarthritis and potentially other chronic conditions.

Achieving change in primary care--causes of the evidence to practice gap: systematic reviews of reviews.

BACKGROUND: This study is to identify, summarise and synthesise literature on the causes of the evidence to practice gap for complex interventions in primary care. DESIGN: This study is a systematic review of reviews. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO were searched, from inception to December 2013. Eligible reviews addressed causes of the evidence to practice gap in primary care in developed countries. Data from included reviews were extracted and synthesised using guidelines for meta-synthesis. RESULTS: Seventy reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria and encompassed a wide range of topics, e.g. guideline implementation, integration of new roles, technology implementation, public health and preventative medicine. None of the included papers used the term "cause" or stated an intention to investigate causes at all. A descriptive approach was often used, and the included papers expressed "causes" in terms of "barriers and facilitators" to implementation. We developed a four-level framework covering external context, organisation, professionals and intervention. External contextual factors included policies, incentivisation structures, dominant paradigms, stakeholders' buy-in, infrastructure and advances in technology. Organisation-related factors included culture, available resources, integration with existing processes, relationships, skill mix and staff involvement. At the level of individual professionals, professional role, underlying philosophy of care and competencies were important. Characteristics of the intervention that impacted on implementation included evidence of benefit, ease of use and adaptability to local circumstances. We postulate that the "fit" between the intervention and the context is critical in determining the success of implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive review of reviews summarises current knowledge on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of diverse complex interventions in primary care. To maximise the uptake of complex interventions in primary care, health care professionals and commissioning organisations should consider the range of contextual factors, remaining aware of the dynamic nature of context. Future studies should place an emphasis on describing context and articulating the relationships between the factors identified here. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42014009410.

Patient and public involvement in primary care research - an example of ensuring its sustainability.

BACKGROUND: The international literature on patient and public involvement (PPI) in research covers a wide range of issues, including active lay involvement throughout the research cycle; roles that patients/public can play; assessing impact of PPI and recommendations for good PPI practice. One area of investigation that is less developed is the sustainability and impact of PPI beyond involvement in time-limited research projects. METHODS: This paper focuses on the issues of sustainability, the importance of institutional leadership and the creation of a robust infrastructure in order to achieve long-term and wide-ranging PPI in research strategy and programmes. RESULTS: We use the case of a Primary Care Research Centre to provide a historical account of the evolution of PPI in the Centre and identified a number of key conceptual issues regarding infrastructure, resource allocation, working methods, roles and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: The paper concludes about the more general applicability of the Centre's model for the long-term sustainability of PPI in research.

Achieving change in primary care--effectiveness of strategies for improving implementation of complex interventions: systematic review of reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To identify, summarise and synthesise available literature on the effectiveness of implementation strategies for optimising implementation of complex interventions in primary care. DESIGN: Systematic review of reviews. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and PsychINFO were searched, from first publication until December 2013; the bibliographies of relevant articles were screened for additional reports. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Eligible reviews had to (1) examine effectiveness of single or multifaceted implementation strategies, (2) measure health professional practice or process outcomes and (3) include studies from predominantly primary care in developed countries. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text articles of potentially eligible reviews for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Extracted data were synthesised using a narrative approach. RESULTS: 91 reviews were included. The most commonly evaluated strategies were those targeted at the level of individual professionals, rather than those targeting organisations or context. These strategies (eg, audit and feedback, educational meetings, educational outreach, reminders) on their own demonstrated a small to modest improvement (2-9%) in professional practice or behaviour with considerable variability in the observed effects. The effects of multifaceted strategies targeted at professionals were mixed and not necessarily more effective than single strategies alone. There was relatively little review evidence on implementation strategies at the levels of organisation and wider context. Evidence on cost-effectiveness was limited and data on costs of different strategies were scarce and/or of low quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is a substantial literature on implementation strategies aimed at changing professional practices or behaviour. It remains unclear which implementation strategies are more likely to be effective than others and under what conditions. Future research should focus on identifying and assessing the effectiveness of strategies targeted at the wider context and organisational levels and examining the costs and cost-effectiveness of implementation strategies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42014009410.

Research "push", long term-change, and general practice.

PURPOSE: Intervention evaluations have not always accounted for long-term implementation of interventions. The purpose of this paper is to explore implementation of a primary care intervention during the lifespan of the trial and beyond. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Eight general practices participated in the trial (four control and four intervention). In-depth interviews (with nine GPs and four practices nurses who delivered the intervention) and observation methods were employed. Thematic analysis was utilized and Normalization Process Theory (NPT) constructs were compared with emergent themes. FINDINGS: Macro-level policy imperatives shaped practice priorities which resulted in the "whole system" new intervention not being perceived to be sustainable. Continued routinization of the intervention into usual care beyond the lifespan of the funded study was dependent on individualized monitoring and taking forward tacit knowledge. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: The authors discuss the implications of these findings for sociological theories of implementation and understanding outcomes of research led complex interventions. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The study describes the complex interplay between macro processes and individual situated practices and contributes to understanding if, how, and why interventions are sustained beyond initial "research push". The value of the study lies in describing the conditions and potential consequences of long-term implementation, which might be translated to other contexts.

Risk and self-managing chronic joint pain: looking beyond individual lifestyles and behaviour.

Self-managing chronic musculoskeletal pain is predominantly framed within a discourse of modifying behaviour, or lifestyle risk factors such as diet, weight loss and exercise by policymakers, researcher and clinicians. Little research has been conducted which explores how 'risk' is understood or encountered by those with joint pain and how it may relate to self-management. Drawing from serial interviews and a diary study with 22 participants, the findings demonstrate that people with chronic pain engage in a process of assessing and adapting to hazardous or pain conferring situations in relation to daily activities. 'Risks' are embedded within a dialectic between corporeal experience and the design features of everyday social environments. Self-management, in this context, is not necessarily solely related to following clinical advice, rather it includes dealing with 'risks' of pain, hazards relating to bodily limitations and the environment, and ensuring the ability to continue with valued activities. Findings contribute to sociological understandings of self-management and risk while demonstrating the limits of viewing self-management as an individualised endeavour of changing behaviour.

Introducing Evidence Through Research "Push": Using Theory and Qualitative Methods.

A multitude of factors can influence the uptake and implementation of complex interventions in health care. A plethora of theories and frameworks recognize the need to establish relationships, understand organizational dynamics, address context and contingency, and engage key decision makers. Less attention is paid to how theories that emphasize relational contexts can actually be deployed to guide the implementation of an intervention. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the potential role of qualitative research aligned with theory to inform complex interventions. We detail a study underpinned by theory and qualitative research that (a) ensured key actors made sense of the complex intervention at the earliest stage of adoption and (b) aided initial engagement with the intervention. We conclude that using theoretical approaches aligned with qualitative research can provide insights into the context and dynamics of health care settings that in turn can be used to aid intervention implementation.

Acceptability of a 'guidebook' for the management of Osteoarthritis: a qualitative study of patient and clinician's perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Written information can be of benefit to both practitioners and patients and the provision of quality information is emphasised as a core intervention by United Kingdom National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) OA guidelines. Researchers, patients and HCPs developed an 'OA guidebook' to provide; a) a balanced source of information for patients; b) a resource to aid practitioners when discussing self-management. This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability and usefulness of the OA guidebook as part of complex intervention to deliver NICE OA guidelines in General Practice. METHODS: The intervention comprises a series of consultations with GPs and practice nurses in which supported self-management is offered to patients. Eight practices in the West Midlands and North West of England were recruited to take part: four control practices and four intervention practices. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with patients (n = 29), GPs (n = 9) and practice nurses (n = 4) from the intervention practices to explore experiences of the intervention and use of the guidebook. Data were analysed using thematic analysis and constant comparison of data within and across interviews. RESULTS: GPs thought the guidebook helped provide patients with information about OA aetiology, prognosis and self-management. Thus, it backed up key messages they provided patients during consultations. GPs also found the guidebook helped them 'close off' consultations. Nurses also thought the guidebook helped them describe OA disease processes in consultations. Patients valued the explanations of disease onset, process and prognosis. The use of 'real' people and 'real life' situations contained within the guidebook made self-management strategies seem more tangible. A sense of inclusion and comfort was obtained from knowing other people encountered similar problems and feelings. CONCLUSION: An OA specific written information guidebook was deemed acceptable and useful to practitioners and patients alike as part of the MOSAICS study. Findings reinforce the utility of this model of patient information as a resource to support patients living with chronic illnesses. An OA guidebook featuring a mixture of lay and professional information developed by professionals and lay people is useful and could effectively be used more widely in usual care.