An asset-based community development approach to reducing alcohol harm: Exploring barriers and facilitators to community mobilisation at initial implementation stage

An 'alcohol health champions' intervention to reduce alcohol harm in local communities: a mixed-methods evaluation of a natural experiment

Background

Globally alcohol consumption is a leading risk factor for premature death and disability and is associated with crime, social and economic consequences. Local communities may be able to play a role in addressing alcohol-related issues in their area.

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-benefit of an asset-based community development approach to reducing alcohol-related harm and understand the context and factors that enable or hinder its implementation.

Design

A mixed-methods evaluation. Area-level quasi-experimental trial analysed using four different evaluation methods (a stepped-wedge design where each area was a control until it entered the intervention, comparison to matched local/national controls and comparison to synthetic controls), alongside process and economic evaluations.

Setting

Ten local authorities in Greater Manchester, England.

Participants

The outcomes evaluation was analysed at an area level. Ninety-three lay persons representing nineareas completed questionnaires, with 12 follow-up interviews in five areas; 20 stakeholders representing ten areas were interviewed at baseline, with 17 follow-up interviews in eight areas and 26 members of the public from two areas attended focus groups.

Interventions

Professionals in a co-ordinator role recruited and supported lay volunteers who were trained to become alcohol health champions. The champion's role was to provide informal, brief alcohol advice to the local population and take action to strengthen restrictions on alcohol availability.

Main outcome measures

Numbers of alcohol-related hospital admissions, accident and emergency attendances, ambulance call-outs, street-level crime and antisocial behaviour in the intervention areas (area size: 1600-5500 residents). Set-up and running costs were collected alongside process evaluation data exploring barriers and facilitators.

Data sources

Routinely collected quantitative data on outcome measures aggregated at the intervention area and matched control and synthetic control areas. Data from policy documents, licensing registers, meeting notes, invoices, time/cost diaries, training registers, questionnaires, interviews, reflective diaries and focus groups.

Results

The intervention rolled out in nine out of ten areas, seven of which ran for a full 12 months. Areas with better-established infrastructure at baseline were able to train more champions. In total, 123 alcohol health champions were trained (95 lay volunteers and 28 professionals): lay volunteers self-reported positive impact. Champions engaged in brief advice conversations more readily than taking action on alcohol availability. There were no consistent differences in the health and crime area-level indicators between intervention areas and controls, as confirmed by using three different analysis methods for evaluating natural experiments. The intervention was not found to be cost-beneficial.

Limitations

Although the sequential roll-out order of the intervention was randomised, the selection of the intervention areas was not. Self-reported impact may have been subject to social desirability bias due to the project's high profile.

Conclusions

There was no measurable impact on health and crime outcomes. Possible explanations include too few volunteers trained, volunteers being unwilling to get involved in licensing decisions, or that the intervention has no direct impact on the selected outcomes.

Future work

Future similar interventions should use a coproduced community outcomes framework. Other natural experiment evaluations should use methodological triangulation to strengthen inferences about effectiveness.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN81942890.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme (NIHR award ref: 15/129/03) and is published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 12, No. 9. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

How can asset-based approaches reduce inequalities? Exploring processes of change in England and Spain

Initiatives to promote health and reduce inequalities in place-based communities have increasingly adopted asset-based approaches (ABAs). However, the processes through which such initiatives might reduce inequalities are not well understood, and evidence of their impact on health is still limited. This study aimed to understand how ABAs can impact practices, relationships and the redistribution of resources to reduce health inequalities in and between less advantaged neighbourhoods. Qualitative research was conducted in two settings (England and Spain) where similar asset-based initiatives, aimed at training community members to become health promoters, were being implemented. Data were collected using theory of change workshops, 120 hours of observations and semi-structured interviews with 44 stakeholders (trained community members, voluntary and community sector organizations' workers and health professionals). A thematic analysis informed by systems thinking was carried out. Three main processes of change were identified: first, 'enabling asset-based thinking' defined as supporting people to adopt a view that values their own resources and people's skills and expertise. Second, 'developing asset-based capacities', described as developing personal skills, knowledge, self-confidence and relationships underpinned by asset-based thinking. Finally, 'changing decision-making and wider health determinants through ABAs' referred to achieving changes in neighbourhoods through mobilizing the asset-based capacities developed. These processes were associated with changes at an individual level, with potential to contribute to reducing inequalities through supporting individual empowerment and social capital. However, contextual factors were found key to enable or hinder changes in the neighbourhoods and acted as barriers to processes of collective empowerment, thus limiting ABAs' impact on health inequalities.

Does a local Alcohol Health Champion programme have a measurable impact on health and crime outcomes? A natural experiment evaluation of Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) based on triangulation of methods

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Drinking alcohol may cause harm to an individual's health and social relationships, while a drinking culture may harm societies as it may increase crime rates and make an area feel less safe. Local councils in Greater Manchester, UK, developed the Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) intervention, in which volunteers were trained to give alcohol-related advice to the public and taught how to influence policies to restrict when, where and how alcohol is sold. As part of a larger study, the aim of the current project is to measure the impact of CICA on health and crime outcomes at the lower super output (LSOA) geographical aggregation.

DESIGN

Quantitative evaluation using four time series analytic methods (stepped-wedge design, and comparisons to local controls, national controls and synthetic controls) with findings triangulated across these methods. A cost-benefit analysis was carried out alongside the effectiveness analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The general public in Greater Manchester, UK, between 2010 and 2020.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome of interest was alcohol-related hospital admissions. Secondary outcomes were accident and emergency (A&E) attendances, ambulance callouts, recorded crimes and anti-social behaviour incidents.

FINDINGS

Triangulation of the results did not indicate any consistent effect on area-level alcohol-related hospital admissions, A&E attendances, ambulance callouts, reported crimes or anti-social behaviour associated with the implementation of CICA. The primary stepped-wedge analysis indicated an increase in alcohol-related hospital admissions following the implementation of CICA of 13.4% (95% confidence interval -3.3%, +30.1%), which was consistent with analyses based on other methods with point estimates ranging from +3.4% to 16.4%.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence of a measurable impact of the Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) programme on area-level health and crime outcomes in Greater Manchester, UK, within 3 years of the programme start. The increase in alcohol-related hospital admissions was likely the result of other temporal trends rather than the CICA programme. Possible explanations include insufficient follow-up time, too few volunteers trained, volunteers being unwilling to get involved in licensing decisions or that the intervention has no direct impact on the selected outcomes.

'A priori' external contextual factors and relationships with process indicators: a mixed methods study of the pre-implementation phase of 'Communities in Charge of Alcohol'

BACKGROUND

It is widely recognised that complex public health interventions roll out in distinct phases, within which external contextual factors influence implementation. Less is known about relationships with external contextual factors identified a priori in the pre-implementation phase. We investigated which external contextual factors, prior to the implementation of a community-centred approach to reducing alcohol harm called 'Communities in Charge of Alcohol' (CICA), were related to one of the process indicators: numbers of Alcohol Health Champions (AHCs) trained.

METHODS

A mixed methods design was used in the pre-implementation phase of CICA. We studied ten geographic communities experiencing both high levels of deprivation and alcohol-related harm in the North West of England. Qualitative secondary data were extracted from pre-implementation meeting notes, recorded two to three months before roll-out. Items were coded into 12 content categories using content analysis. To create a baseline 'infrastructure score', the number of external contextual factors documented was counted per area to a maximum score of 12. Descriptive data were collected from training registers detailing training numbers in the first 12 months. The relationship between the baseline infrastructure score, external contextual factors, and the number of AHCs trained was assessed using non-parametric univariable statistics.

RESULTS

There was a positive correlation between baseline infrastructure score and total numbers of AHCs trained (Rs = 0.77, p = 0.01). Four external contextual factors were associated with significantly higher numbers of lay people recruited and trained: having a health care provider to coordinate the intervention (p = 0.02); a pool of other volunteers to recruit from (p = 0.02); a contract in place with a commissioned service (p = 0.02), and; formal volunteer arrangements (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that there were four key components that significantly influenced establishing an Alcohol Health Champion programme in areas experiencing both high levels of deprivation and alcohol-related harm. There is added value of capturing external contextual factors a priori and then testing relationships with process indicators to inform the effective roll-out of complex interventions. Future research could explore a wider range of process indicators and outcomes, incorporating methods to rate individual factors to derive a mean score.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN81942890, date of registration 12/09/2017.

A mixed methods analysis evaluating an alcohol health champion community intervention: How do newly trained champions perceive and understand their training and role?

Globally, alcohol harm is recognised as one of the greatest population risks and reducing alcohol harm is a key priority for the UK Government. The Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) programme took an asset-based approach in training community members across nine areas to become alcohol health champions (AHCs); trained in how to have informal conversations about alcohol and get involved with alcohol licensing. This paper reports on the experiences of AHCs taking part in the training through the analysis of: questionnaires completed pre- and post-training (n = 93) and semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of five AHCs who had started their role. Questionnaires explored: characteristics of AHCs, perceived importance of community action around alcohol and health, and confidence in undertaking their role. Following training AHCs felt more confident to talk about alcohol harms, give brief advice and get involved in licensing decisions. Interviews explored: AHCs' experiences of the training, barriers and facilitators to the adoption of their role, and how they made sense of their role. Four overarching themes were identified through thematic analysis taking a framework approach: (a) perceptions of AHC training; (b) applying knowledge and skills in the AHC role; (c) barriers and facilitators to undertaking the AHC role; and (d) sustaining the AHC role. Findings highlight the challenges in establishing AHC roles can be overcome by combining the motivation of volunteers with environmental assets in a community setting: the most important personal asset being the confidence to have conversations with people about a sensitive topic, such as alcohol.

How can communities influence alcohol licensing at a local level? Licensing officers' perspectives of the barriers and facilitators to sustaining engagement in a volunteer-led alcohol harm reduction approach

Despite the World Health Organization's assertion that communities need to become involved in reducing alcohol harm, evidence of community engagement in alcohol licensing decision-making in England remains limited. The evaluation of the Communities in Charge of Alcohol (CICA) programme offers policymakers, Licensing authorities and public health practitioners, evidence regarding a specific volunteer-led, place-based approach, designed to enable community engagement in licensing with the aim of reducing localised alcohol harm. This study explored factors affecting the sustainable involvement of volunteers in alcohol licensing decision-making from six licensing officers' perspectives, through semi-structured interviews. Routinely collected crime, disorder, and hospital admissions data were reviewed for further context as proxy indicators for alcohol-related harm. Licensing officers perceived sustainable engagement to be impacted by: (i) the extent of alignment with statutory requirements and local political support; (ii) the ability of licensing officers to operationalise CICA and support local assets, and; (iii) the opportunity for, and ability of, volunteers to raise licensing issues. The perspectives of licensing officers indicate complexities inherent in seeking to empower residents to engage in licensing decision-making at a community level. These relate to statutory and political factors, funding, social norms regarding engagement in licensing decision-making, and the need for networks between critical actors including responsible authorities and communities. The evidence indicates that after increasing community capacity to influence alcohol availability decision-making at a local level, communities continue to struggle to influence statutory processes to affect alcohol availability where they live and work. More understanding of how to enable effective community engagement is required.