Working in social prescribing services: a qualitative study

Routes to social prescribing outside National Health Service (NHS) structures: a systematic map

Objectives

Social prescribing, linking to community-based interventions to support individuals' health and well-being, has become established across social medicine in the UK. Currently, most of the evidence and knowledge about how social prescribing pathways' function focuses on primary care, and we know less about how social prescribing operates outside of these structures. This review explored the evidence concerning non-health service delivered social prescribing with a view to developing guidance that would support social prescribing pathways that function outside of the health service framework.

Design

This paper reports a systematic mapping review of evidence concerning how community-based social prescribing pathways were delivered, exploring what these looked like, what needed to be in place for these to function, what outcomes were measured and how could non-health service pathways be supported to deliver these outcomes. The review searched database and grey sources and synthesised findings relating to how social prescribing pathways' function.

Setting

Community settings, outside of formal National Health Service (NHS) structures without statutory service input.

Participants

All participants that experienced pathways were included; no limits were applied.

Interventions

Non-NHS social prescribing pathways that included the core components of social prescribing.

Main outcome measures

Rich descriptions of functions of pathways.

Results

This mapping review included 17 studies. The synthesis indicated that NHS and non-NHS social prescribing pathways are intertwined and mutually reliant, such that it was neither sensible nor valuable to view them as separate.

Conclusions

Our review provides further evidence for social prescribing as a concept, variable across all components, rather than a single, coherent model. While there exists a 'core' health service pathway, we suggest that further work should be done with those delivering services to understand the roles and functions that contribute but may not presently be funded.

A meta-ethnography of the factors that shape link workers' experiences of social prescribing

BACKGROUND

Social prescribing is gaining traction internationally. It is an approach which seeks to address non-medical and health-related social needs through taking a holistic person-centred and community-based approach. This involves connecting people with and supporting them to access groups and organisations within their local communities. It is hoped that social prescribing might improve health inequities and reduce reliance on healthcare services. In the UK, social prescribing link workers have become core parts of primary care teams. Despite growing literature on the implementation of social prescribing, to date there has been no synthesis that develops a theoretical understanding of the factors that shape link workers' experiences of their role.

METHODS

We undertook a meta-ethnographic evidence synthesis of qualitative literature to develop a novel conceptual framework that explains how link workers experience their roles. We identified studies using a systematic search of key databases, Google alerts, and through scanning reference lists of included studies. We followed the eMERGe guidance when conducting and reporting this meta-ethnography.

RESULTS

Our synthesis included 21 studies and developed a "line of argument" or overarching conceptual framework which highlighted inherent and interacting tensions present at each of the levels that social prescribing operates. These tensions may arise from a mismatch between the policy logic of social prescribing and the material and structural reality, shaped by social, political, and economic forces, into which it is being implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

The tensions highlighted in our review shape link workers' experiences of their role. They may call into question the sustainability of social prescribing and the link worker role as currently implemented, as well as their ability to deliver desired outcomes such as reducing health inequities or healthcare service utilisation. Greater consideration should be given to how the link worker role is defined, deployed, and trained. Furthermore, thought should be given to ensuring that the infrastructure into which social prescribing is being implemented is sufficient to meet needs. Should social prescribing seek to improve outcomes for those experiencing social and economic disadvantage, it may be necessary for social prescribing models to allow for more intensive and longer-term modes of support.

Factors influencing social prescribing initiatives: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

AIMS

Social prescribing is a growing health policy agenda to improve the quality and effectiveness of health systems. However, systematically collected knowledge on factors influencing the effective implementation of SP is scarce. A systematic review was conducted to identify and categorize factors influencing social prescribing initiatives.

METHODS

A search of three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and ISI Web of Knowledge) was carried out to retrieve studies from inception to May 2022, supplemented by grey literature searching and snowballing of the relevant references. The inclusion criteria were original empirical research, qualitative data collection, and a description of factors affecting social prescribing initiatives. Study quality was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool. We categorized the results of individual studies using a narrative approach.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies were included for analysis. Along with patient-related factors (patient-centeredness, clinical complexity, perception, knowledge), three main settings of social prescribing initiatives (including healthcare providers, link workers, and voluntary and community sectors) are affected by (1) individual characteristics (knowledge, perception, skill mix); (2) interpersonal relations (collaboration, trust, feedback, supportive climate, follow-up, sustained connection, peer support within and across sectors); (3) organizational contingencies (resource adequacy, staffing, training, role description, continuity of support, caseload management, monitoring, affordability, accessibility, referral criteria, and tailored support); and (4) political context (national policy and guidance, stewardship, planning, cocreation, bureaucracy, economic condition, and the number of support organizations).

CONCLUSION

Many factors influencing social prescribing initiatives were identified. The results of this review can be applied by different stakeholders of social prescribing to guide development, implementation, description, and evaluation.

Impact of a social prescribing intervention in North East England on adults with type 2 diabetes: the SPRING_NE multimethod study

Background

Link worker social prescribing enables health-care professionals to address patients’ non-medical needs by linking patients into various services. Evidence for its effectiveness and how it is experienced by link workers and clients is lacking.

Objectives

To evaluate the impact and costs of a link worker social prescribing intervention on health and health-care costs and utilisation and to observe link worker delivery and patient engagement.

Data sources

Quality Outcomes Framework and Secondary Services Use data.

Design

Multimethods comprising (1) quasi-experimental evaluation of effects of social prescribing on health and health-care use, (2) cost-effectiveness analysis, (3) ethnographic methods to explore intervention delivery and receipt, and (4) a supplementary interview study examining intervention impact during the first UK COVID-19 lockdown (April–July 2020).

Study population and setting

Community-dwelling adults aged 40–74 years with type 2 diabetes and link workers in a socioeconomically deprived locality of North East England, UK.

Intervention

Link worker social prescribing to improve health and well-being-related outcomes among people with long-term conditions.

Participants

(1) Health outcomes study, approximately n = 8400 patients; EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L), study, n = 694 (baseline) and n = 474 (follow-up); (2) ethnography, n = 20 link workers and n = 19 clients; and COVID-19 interviews, n = 14 staff and n = 44 clients.

Main outcome measures

The main outcome measures were glycated haemoglobin level (HbA1c; primary outcome), body mass index, blood pressure, cholesterol level, smoking status, health-care costs and utilisation, and EQ-5D-5L score.

Results

Intention-to-treat analysis of approximately 8400 patients in 13 intervention and 11 control general practices demonstrated a statistically significant, although not clinically significant, difference in HbA1c level (–1.11 mmol/mol) and a non-statistically significant 1.5-percentage-point reduction in the probability of having high blood pressure, but no statistically significant effects on other outcomes. Health-care cost estimates ranged from £18.22 (individuals with one extra comorbidity) to –£50.35 (individuals with no extra comorbidity). A statistically non-significant shift from unplanned (non-elective and accident and emergency admissions) to planned care (elective and outpatient care) was observed. Subgroup analysis showed more benefit for individuals living in more deprived areas, for the ethnically white and those with fewer comorbidities. The mean cost of the intervention itself was £1345 per participant; the incremental mean health gain was 0.004 quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval –0.022 to 0.029 quality-adjusted life-years); and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £327,250 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Ethnographic data showed that successfully embedded, holistic social prescribing providing supported linking to navigate social determinants of health was challenging to deliver, but could offer opportunities for improving health and well-being. However, the intervention was heterogeneous and was shaped in unanticipated ways by the delivery context. Pressures to generate referrals and meet targets detracted from face-to-face contact and capacity to address setbacks among those with complex health and social problems.

Limitations

The limitations of the study include (1) a reduced sample size because of non-participation of seven general practices; (2) incompleteness and unreliability of some of the Quality and Outcomes Framework data; (3) unavailability of accurate data on intervention intensity and patient comorbidity; (4) reliance on an exploratory analysis with significant sensitivity analysis; and (5) limited perspectives from voluntary, community and social enterprise.

Conclusions

This social prescribing model resulted in a small improvement in glycaemic control. Outcome effects varied across different groups and the experience of social prescribing differed depending on client circumstances.

Future work

To examine how the NHS Primary Care Network social prescribing is being operationalised; its impact on health outcomes, service use and costs; and its tailoring to different contexts.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN13880272.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme, Community Groups and Health Promotion (grant no. 16/122/33) and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Social prescribing during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study of service providers' and clients' experiences

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 public health restrictions, such as social distancing and self-isolation, have been particularly challenging for vulnerable people with health conditions and/or complex social needs. Link worker social prescribing is widespread in the UK and elsewhere and is regarded as having the potential to provide support to vulnerable people during the pandemic. This qualitative study explores accounts of how an existing social prescribing service adapted to meet clients' needs in the first wave of the pandemic, and of how clients experienced these changes.

METHODS

Data were collected in a deprived urban area of North East England via remote interviews with clients (n = 44), link workers (n = 5) and service provider managerial staff (n = 8) from May-September 2020. Thematic data analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

The research found that service providers quickly adapted to remote intervention delivery aiming to serve existing clients and other vulnerable groups. Service providers experienced improved access to some existing clients via telephone in the first months of remote delivery and in some cases were able to engage clients who had previously not attended appointments at GP surgeries. However, link workers also experienced challenges in building rapport with clients, engaging clients with the aims of the intervention and providing a service to digitally excluded people. Limited link worker capacity meant clients experienced variable contact with link workers with only some experiencing consistent support that was highly valued for helping to manage their conditions and mental wellbeing. Limited access to linked services also adversely affected clients. Clients living in less affluent circumstances and/or with worse health were more likely to experience negative impacts on their long-term condition. Some found their health and progress with social prescribing was 'on hold' or 'going backwards', which sometimes negatively affected their health.

CONCLUSIONS

Social prescribing offered valued support to some during the pandemic, but remote support sometimes had limited impact for clients and findings highlight the vulnerability of social prescribing's success when linked services are disrupted. Findings also show the need for more to be done in the upscaling of social prescribing to provide support to digitally excluded populations.

Link workers, activities and target groups in social prescribing: a literature review

Purpose

Social prescribing is a model of integrated care, in which primary healthcare staff can link patients to the social care sector. However, social prescribing can occur in different forms. To better understand the concept of social prescribing, this literature review examines the role of the link workers, activities and target groups.

Design/methodology/approach

A literature review was conducted. Studies before May 2020 were considered. In total, 1,700 studies were identified using the databases Pubmed, PsycInfo, Cinahl, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. After eligibility checks, 16 studies were included in the final analysis.

Findings

A few studies warned of a deeper engagement of the link worker due to service dependency, but most studies encouraged an active and supportive role of the link worker. Participants engaged in social, physical and counseling activities. The majority of studies emphasized the importance of linking group activities with personal preferences and identity needs. The main target groups were composed of individuals with psychosocial needs, but some studies also included patients with physical or mental illnesses.

Originality/value

Social prescribing is widely advocated as an innovative model of integrated care. However, few studies have looked into the complex system of social prescribing. This study analyzes the linking processes, activities and target groups in extant social prescribing programs.

''It sounded a lot simpler on the job description'': A qualitative study exploring the role of social prescribing link workers and their training and support needs (2020)

Social prescribing is an increasingly popular approach to promoting health and well-being, by addressing the wider determinants of health such as physical inactivity, social isolation and financial insecurity. Social prescribing link workers (SPs) connect people to local, non-clinical services. As part of the NHS Long Term Plan, NHS England aims to recruit 1,000 SPs across England by 2021. Understanding the role of SPs, including challenging aspects of the role and the types of training and support needed by SPs is crucial to optimising the effectiveness of social prescribing. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with nine SPs from five NHS and voluntary sector organisations in London to explore the role of SPs and identify SP training and support needs. Interviews were analysed thematically and three key themes emerged for which SPs needed particular support: defining and promoting their role; supporting clients with complex needs and coping with the emotional demands of their role. SP perceptions of training and future training needs is presented as a fourth theme. Most SPs felt that the initial training received for their role did not prepare them for the most demanding aspects of their roles. The findings of this study support the assertion that the social prescribing link worker role is complex and challenging. SPs are required to have in-depth knowledge of local services, which is built over time and makes retention in the role of high importance. Steps have been taken to develop online resources to support SPs, however, there may be a need for more comprehensive training, especially in mental health. SPs benefit from access to peer or one-to-one support to help them manage the emotional demands of the role and could benefit from the formation of local networks, especially for SPs working in isolation.

Tensions and opportunities in social prescribing. Developing a framework to facilitate its implementation and evaluation in primary care: a realist review

Background

Social prescribing (SP) involves linking patients in primary care with services provided by the voluntary and community sector (VCS). Despite growing interest within NHS primary care, it remains unclear how and under what circumstances SP might contribute to good practice.

Aim

To define ‘good’ practice in SP by identifying context-specific enablers and tensions. To contribute to the development of an evidence-based framework for theorising and evaluating SP within primary care.

Design & setting

Realist review of secondary data from primary care-based SP schemes.

Method

Academic articles and grey literature were searched for qualitative and quantitative evidence following the Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses — Evolving Standards (RAMESES). Common SP practices were characterised in three settings (general practice, link workers, and community sector) using archetypes that ranged from best to worst practice.

Results

A total of 140 studies were included for analysis. Resources were identified influencing the type and potential impact of SP practices and four dimensions were outlined in which opportunities for good practice arise: 1) individual characteristics (stakeholder’s buy-in, vocation, and knowledge); 2) interpersonal relations (trustful, bidirectional, informed, supportive, and transparent and convenient interactions within and across sectors); 3) organisational contingencies (the availability of a predisposed practice culture, leadership, training opportunities, supervision, information governance, resource adequacy, accessibility, and continuity of care within organisations); and 4) policy structures (bottom-up and coherent policymaking, stable funding, and suitable monitoring strategies). Findings were synthesised in a multilevel, dynamic, and usable SP framework.

Conclusion

The realist review and resulting framework revealed that SP is not inherently advantageous. Specific individual, interpersonal, organisational, and policy resources are needed to ensure SP best practice in primary care.