Impact of Universal Credit in North East England: a qualitative study of claimants and support staff

COVID-19 inequalities in England: a mathematical modelling study of transmission risk and clinical vulnerability by socioeconomic status

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in major inequalities in infection and disease burden between areas of varying socioeconomic deprivation in many countries, including England. Areas of higher deprivation tend to have a different population structure-generally younger-which can increase viral transmission due to higher contact rates in school-going children and working-age adults. Higher deprivation is also associated with a higher presence of chronic comorbidities, which were convincingly demonstrated to be risk factors for severe COVID-19 disease. These two major factors need to be combined to better understand and quantify their relative importance in the observed COVID-19 inequalities.

METHODS

We used UK Census data on health status and demography stratified by decile of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), which is a measure of socioeconomic deprivation. We calculated epidemiological impact using an age-stratified COVID-19 transmission model, which incorporated different contact patterns and clinical health profiles by decile. To separate the contribution of each factor, we considered a scenario where the clinical health profile of all deciles was at the level of the least deprived. We also considered the effectiveness of school closures and vaccination of over 65-year-olds in each decile.

RESULTS

In the modelled epidemics in urban areas, the most deprived decile experienced 9% more infections, 13% more clinical cases, and a 97% larger peak clinical size than the least deprived; we found similar inequalities in rural areas. Twenty-one per cent of clinical cases and 16% of deaths in England observed under the model assumptions would not occur if all deciles experienced the clinical health profile of the least deprived decile. We found that more deaths were prevented in more affluent areas during school closures and vaccination rollouts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that both clinical and demographic factors synergise to generate health inequalities in COVID-19, that improving the clinical health profile of populations would increase health equity, and that some interventions can increase health inequalities.

Investigating health and social outcomes of the Big Local community empowerment initiative in England: a mixed method evaluation

Background

Most research on community empowerment provides evidence on engaging communities for health promotion purposes rather than attempts to create empowering conditions. This study addresses this gap.

Intervention

Big Local started in 2010 with £271M from the National Lottery. Ending in 2026, it gives 150 relatively disadvantaged communities in England control over £1M to improve their neighbourhoods.

Objective

To investigate health and social outcomes, at the population level and among engaged residents, of the community engagement approach adopted in a place-based empowerment initiative.

Study design, data sources and outcome variables

This study reports on the third wave of a longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation. Work package 1 used a difference-in-differences design to investigate the impact of Big Local on population outcomes in all 150 Big Local areas compared to matched comparator areas using secondary data. The primary outcome was anxiety; secondary outcomes included a population mental health measure and crime in the neighbourhood. Work package 2 assessed active engagement in Big Local using cross-sectional data and nested cohort data from a biannual survey of Big Local partnership members. The primary outcome was mental well-being and the secondary outcome was self-rated health. Work package 3 conducted qualitative research in 14 Big Local neighbourhoods and nationally to understand pathways to impact. Work package 4 undertook a cost-benefit analysis using the life satisfaction approach to value the benefits of Big Local, which used the work package 1 estimate of Big Local impact on life satisfaction.

Results

At a population level, the impacts on 'reporting high anxiety' (-0.8 percentage points, 95% confidence interval -2.4 to 0.7) and secondary outcomes were not statistically significant, except burglary (-0.054 change in z-score, 95% confidence interval -0.100 to -0.009). There was some effect on reduced anxiety after 2017. Areas progressing fastest had a statistically significant reduction in population mental health measure (-0.053 change in z-score, 95% confidence interval -0.103 to -0.002). Mixed results were found among engaged residents, including a significant increase in mental well-being in Big Local residents in the nested cohort in 2018, but not by 2020; this is likely to be COVID-19. More highly educated residents, and males, were more likely to report a significant improvement in mental well-being. Qualitative accounts of positive impacts on mental well-being are often related to improved social connectivity and physical/material environments. Qualitative data revealed increasing capabilities for residents' collective control. Some negative impacts were reported, with local factors sometimes undermining residents' ability to exercise collective control. Finally, on the most conservative estimate, the cost-benefit calculations generate a net benefit estimate of £64M.

Main limitations

COVID-19 impacted fieldwork and interpretation of survey data. There was a short 4-year follow-up (2016/20), no comparators in work package 2 and a lack of power to look at variations across areas.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest the need for investment to support community organisations to emerge from and work with communities. Residents should lead the prioritisation of issues and design of solutions but not necessarily lead action; rather, agencies should work as equal partners with communities to deliver change.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research Programme (16/09/13) and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 11, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Financial adversity and subsequent health and wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: A qualitative interview study

Aims

There are concerns that the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, including employment inactivity and job loss, will have consequences for the UK population's health and wellbeing. However, there is limited qualitative research into how financial adversity contributes to poor health outcomes in this context. This study aimed to explore forms of financial adversity experienced during the pandemic and their subsequent impacts for health and wellbeing.

Methods

Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 20 people who experienced a form of financial adversity during the pandemic and six service providers employed in social welfare support services. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results

Two main sources of financial adversity were identified: reductions in household incomes and increased living costs which engendered emotional and physical burdens. Coping strategies included increased financial borrowing, support from informal and formal networks and cutting back on energy use, food and non-essential items.

Conclusion

Our study highlighted exposure to multiple financial adversities because of the pandemic and how these experiences led to poor mental and physical health. The findings underline the importance of measures attending to the immediate needs of individuals, including accessible, co-located financial and psychological services, as well as broader measures that seek to reduce social and economic inequalities.

Experiences of conditional and unconditional cash transfers intended for improving health outcomes and health service use: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

It is well known that poverty is associated with ill health and that ill health can result in direct and indirect costs that can perpetuate poverty. Social protection, which includes policies and programmes intended to prevent and reduce poverty in times of ill health, could be one way to break this vicious cycle. Social protection, particularly cash transfers, also has the potential to promote healthier behaviours, including healthcare seeking. Although social protection, particularly conditional and unconditional cash transfers, has been widely studied, it is not well known how recipients experience social protection interventions, and what unintended effects such interventions can cause.   OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to explore how conditional and unconditional cash transfer social protection interventions with a health outcome are experienced and perceived by their recipients.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched Epistemonikos, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Social Services Abstracts, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, AnthroSource and EconLit from the start of the database to 5 June 2020. We combined this with reference checking, citation searching, grey literature and contact with authors to identify additional studies. We reran all strategies in July 2022, and the new studies are awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included primary studies, using qualitative methods or mixed-methods studies with qualitative research reporting on recipients' experiences of cash transfer interventions where health outcomes were evaluated. Recipients could be adult patients of healthcare services, the general adult population as recipients of cash targeted at themselves or directed at children. Studies could be evaluated on any mental or physical health condition or cash transfer mechanism. Studies could come from any country and be in any language. Two authors independently selected studies.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used a multi-step purposive sampling framework for selecting studies, starting with geographical representation, followed by health condition, and richness of data. Key data were extracted by the authors into Excel. Methodological limitations were assessed independently using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) criteria by two authors. Data were synthesised using meta-ethnography, and confidence in findings was assessed using the Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual) approach.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 127 studies in the review and sampled 41 of these studies for our analysis. Thirty-two further studies were found after the updated search on 5 July 2022 and are awaiting classification. The sampled studies were from 24 different countries: 17 studies were from the African region, seven were from the region of the Americas, seven were from the European region, six were from the South-East Asian region, three from the Western Pacific region and one study was multiregional, covering both the African and the Eastern Mediterranean regions. These studies primarily explored the views and experiences of cash transfer recipients with different health conditions, such as infectious diseases, disabilities and long-term illnesses, sexual and reproductive health, and maternal and child health. Our GRADE-CERQual assessment indicated we had mainly moderate- and high-confidence findings. We found that recipients perceived the cash transfers as necessary and helpful for immediate needs and, in some cases, helpful for longer-term benefits. However, across conditional and unconditional programmes, recipients often felt that the amount given was too little in relation to their total needs. They also felt that the cash alone was not enough to change their behaviour and, to change behaviour, additional types of support would be required. The cash transfer was reported to have important effects on empowerment, autonomy and agency, but also in some settings, recipients experienced pressure from family or programme staff on cash usage. The cash transfer was reported to improve social cohesion and reduce intrahousehold tension. However, in settings where some received the cash and others did not, the lack of an equal approach caused tension, suspicion and conflict. Recipients also reported stigma in terms of cash transfer programme assessment processes and eligibility, as well as inappropriate eligibility processes. Across settings, recipients experienced barriers in accessing the cash transfer programme, and some refused or were hesitant to receive the cash. Some recipients found cash transfer programmes more acceptable when they agreed with the programme's goals and processes.   AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the impact of the sociocultural context on the functioning and interaction between the individual, family and cash transfer programmes. Even where the goals of a cash transfer programme are explicitly health-related, the outcomes may be far broader than health alone and may include, for example, reduced stigma, empowerment and increased agency of the individual. When measuring programme outcomes, therefore, these broader impacts could be considered for understanding the health and well-being benefits of cash transfers.

Exploring the health and sociodemographic characteristics of people seeking advice with claiming universal credit: a cross-sectional analysis of UK citizens advice data, 2017-2021

BACKGROUND

The UK Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) administers Universal Credit (UC) - the main UK benefit for people in- and out-of-work. UC is being rolled out nationally from 2013 to 2024. Citizens Advice (CA) is an independent charity that provides advice and support to people making a claim for UC. The aim of this study is to understand who is seeking advice from CA when making a UC claim and how the types of people seeking advice are changing as the rollout of UC continues.

METHODS

Co-developed with Citizens Advice Newcastle and Citizens Advice Northumberland we performed longitudinal analysis of national data from Citizens Advice for England and Wales on the health (mental health and limiting long term conditions) and socio-demographic of 1,003,411 observations for people seeking advice with claiming UC over four financial years (2017/18 to 2020/21). We summarised population characteristics and estimated the differences between the four financial years using population-weighted t-tests. Findings were discussed with three people with lived experience of seeking advice to claim UC to help frame our interpretation and policy recommendations.

RESULTS

When comparing 2017/18 to 2018/19, there was a significantly higher proportion of people with limiting long term conditions seeking advice with claiming UC than those without (+ 2.40%, 95%CI: 1.31-3.50%). However, as the rollout continued between 2018/29 and 2019/20 (-6.75%, 95%CI: -9.62%--3.88%) and between 2019/20 and 2020/21 (-2.09%, 95%CI: -2.54%--1.64%), there were significantly higher proportions of those without a limiting long term condition seeking advice than with. When comparing 2018/19 to 2019/20 and 2019/20 to 2020/21, there was a significant increase in the proportion of self-employed compared to unemployed people seeking advice with claiming UC (5.64%, 95%CI: 3.79-7.49%) and (2.26%, 95%CI: 1.29-3.23%) respectively.

CONCLUSION

As the rollout for UC continues, it is important to understand how changes in eligibility for UC may impact on those who need help with applying for UC. Ensuring that the advice process and application process is responsive to a range of people with different needs can help to reduce the likelihood that the process of claiming UC will exacerbate health inequalities.

Experiences and perceptions of nutritional health and wellbeing amongst food insecure women in Europe: A qualitative meta-ethnography

Since the 2008 global financial crisis, there has been a rise in the number of people experiencing food insecurity. Particularly vulnerable are mothers with young children, pregnant women, and lone parents (the majority of whom are women). This systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative studies focused on women's experiences of food insecurity and how it affects their nutritional health and wellbeing. Six electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL and ASSIA), were searched from January 1, 2008-July 10, 2021, and supplemented by searches of grey literature databases, relevant websites, examination of reference lists and citation searches. We adhered to PRISMA and eMERGe guidelines to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnographic reporting. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. We identified 11,589 unique records; we included 23 publications reporting data from 22 unique studies involving 647 women. Data were synthesised according to Noblit & Hare's seven phases of meta-ethnography. We identified two key themes - accessing sufficient food and embodying food insecurity - comprising seven sub-themes. Our meta-ethnography provides a progressive 'storyline' of women's experiences of food insecurity. This includes the ways in which women attempt to access sufficient food, are unable to meet their nutritional needs, and the ways in which this is embedded into their everyday lives and embodied in unhealthful physical, social, and mental nutritional health and wellbeing impacts. Our review emphasises that food insecurity directly and tangibly impacts women's nutritional health and wellbeing. It concludes that there needs to be greater recognition of the psychosocial impact of food insecurity on vulnerable women in addition to its impact on their nutritional health and wellbeing.

"I think people have been in survival mode": a qualitative study of community connectivity in a neighbourhood of North East England before and during COVID-19

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to examine whether and how community-centred approaches facilitate community connectivity by exploring changes that matter to communities.

DESIGN

Qualitative study comprising ethnographic methods, participant observation and interviews.Setting Economically deprived neighbourhood of North East England.

PARTICIPANTS

Interviews with community members (n=14) and staff and stakeholders (n=14) involved in a National Lottery Community-funded initiative and 567 hours of participatory observation were undertaken between September 2019 and July 2020. Data were thematically analysed using a community-centred public health framework.

RESULTS

Communities experiencing disadvantage approached the pandemic adversely affected by stigma, austerity and reductions in public sector funding. Community members' priorities centred on the environment, housing, activities for children and young people, crime, community safety and area reputation. Multiagency efforts to promote connectivity, led by voluntary and community sector organisations, were prerequisites in community-centred approaches to public health. Stakeholders reported that these approaches can help alleviate some of the health, social and financial burdens facing communities that are marginalised. Findings suggest community-centred responses were facilitated by trusting relationships, visionary leadership and lived experience of adversity among staff. Issues which appeared to hamper progress included interorganisational power dynamics and attempts to impose solutions. The strength of stakeholders' connections to the area and to people living there contributed to laying the foundations for local responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Relational, values-informed work with communities provided a platform to mobilise recovery assets.

CONCLUSIONS

Whole-system approaches, codesigned with communities most affected, can help address the long-term consequences of COVID-19 and its negative effects on health and social inequalities. Further comparative implementation research is needed to examine the partnerships, values and principles that drive success and inclusion.

A cure for everything and nothing? Local partnerships for improving health in England

Collaboration between local agencies is no replacement for national policy and investment, argue Hugh Alderwick, Andrew Hutchings, and Nicholas Mays

Evaluation of the mental health impacts of Universal Credit: protocol for a mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

The UK social security system is being transformed by the implementation of Universal Credit (UC), which combines six existing benefits and tax credits into a single payment for low-income households. Despite extensive reports of hardship associated with the introduction of UC, no previous studies have comprehensively evaluated its impact on mental health. Because payments are targeted at low-income households, impacts on mental health will have important consequences for health inequalities.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a mixed methods study. Work package (WP) 1 will compare health outcomes for new recipients of UC with outcomes for legacy benefit recipients in two large population surveys, using the phased rollout of UC as a natural experiment. We will also analyse the relationship between the proportion of UC claimants in small areas and a composite measure of mental health. WP2 will use data collected by Citizen's Advice to explore the sociodemographic and health characteristics of people who seek advice when claiming UC and identify features of the claim process that prompt advice-seeking. WP3 will conduct longitudinal in-depth interviews with up to 80 UC claimants in England and Scotland to explore reasons for claiming and experiences of the claim process. Up to 30 staff supporting claimants will also be interviewed. WP4 will use a dynamic microsimulation model to simulate the long-term health impacts of different implementation scenarios. WP5 will undertake cost-consequence analysis of the potential costs and outcomes of introducing UC and cost-benefit analyses of mitigating actions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We obtained ethical approval for the primary data gathering from the University of Glasgow, College of Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, application number 400200244. We will use our networks to actively disseminate findings to UC claimants, the public, practitioners and policy-makers, using a range of methods and formats.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study is registered with the Research Registry: researchregistry6697.

A review of the effectiveness and experiences of welfare advice services co-located in health settings: A critical narrative systematic review

We conducted a narrative systematic review to assess the health, social and financial impacts of co-located welfare services in the UK and to explore the effectiveness of and facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of these services, in order to guide future policy and practice. We searched Medline, EMBASE and other literature sources, from January 2010 to November 2020, for literature examining the impact of co-located welfare services in the UK on any outcome. The review identified 14 studies employing a range of study designs, including: one non-randomised controlled trial; one pilot randomised controlled trial; one before-and-after-study; three qualitative studies; and eight case studies. A theory of change model, developed a priori, was used as an analytical framework against which to map the evidence on how the services work, why and for whom. All studies demonstrated improved financial security for participants, generating an average of £27 of social, economic and environmental return per £1 invested. Some studies reported improved mental health for individuals accessing services. Several studies attributed subjective improvements in physical health to the service addressing key social determinants of health. Benefits to the health service were also demonstrated through reduced workload for healthcare professionals. Key components of a successful service included co-production during service development and ongoing enhanced multi-disciplinary collaboration. Overall, this review demonstrates improved financial security for participants and for the first time models the wider health and welfare benefits for participants and for health service from these services. However, given the generally poor scientific quality of the studies, care must be taken in drawing firm conclusions. There remains a need for more high quality research, using experimental methods and larger sample sizes, to further build upon this evidence base and to measure the strength of the proposed theoretical pathways in this area.

Burden and benefits-related suicides: “misperception” or state crafted reality?

Purpose

This article aims to focus on deaths by suicide in relation to UK welfare reform as a case study to question one of suicidology’s most dominant theories – the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide (Joiner, 2005) and its influential ideas on “perceived burdensomeness” – as well as wider ideologies on suicide and mental health reflected in this approach.

Design/methodology/approach

This article draws on evidence from disabled people’s campaigning groups (primary sources) and research literature (secondary sources), which shows the negative psychological impact of burden discourse and how this shows up in people’s accounts of feeling suicidal, in suicide notes and in family accounts of those who have died by suicide. It uses this evidence to problematise the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide (Joiner, 2005), specifically its ideas about “burden” as an individual misperception, and the assumption that suicide is always the outcome of mental health problems.

Findings

The findings highlight the systemic, intersectional and cumulative production of suicidality by governmental “welfare reform” in the UK, through positioning welfare claimants as “burdens” on society. They show that by locating the problem of burdensomeness in individual “misperceptions”, the Interpersonal Theory allows the government’s role in crafting stigmatisation and conditions of suicidality to be overlooked and to be reproduced.

Originality/value

The article raises urgent ethical questions about the application of approaches, such as the Interpersonal Theory of Suicide, to benefits-related suicides and calls for approaches to benefits-related harm and suicide to be rooted in social and disability justice.

Perspective Commentary: The Implementation of Welfare Policies Are Not Held to the Same Ethical Standards as Research: Raising Intergenerational Health Inequality Concerns

Over the last 12 years the United Kingdom (UK) has seen the introduction of an austerity programme-a fiscal policy-with the primary goal to reduce the government's budget deficit and the role of the welfare system. Between 2010 and 2015 there was an estimated reduction of £14.5 billion in spending, attributable to decreasing the value of benefits and restricting entitlement to benefit claimants. By 2020, there had been an estimated unprecedented £27 billion less spent on welfare compared with spending in 2010. Whilst fiscally-successful at reducing spending, some implemented welfare policies have had direct consequences for people's health, increasing inequalities which have been heavily criticized. Moreover, there is growing concern that this has an intergenerational effect. In this paper, we describe the ethical principles in human research, how these have been considered in public health policy, and the existing evidence of the direct and intergenerational health and welfare consequences of some recent, nationally-implemented welfare policies. We argue that ethical principles, specifically the ethical principle of safety that is applied in all research, should be applied to all public welfare policies to stop the rising inequalities in health we are seeing across generations. We highlight that initial changes implemented to welfare policies as a response to COVID-19 demonstrate that there can be a political and societal perceived value in going further to support individuals and their families during times of adversity, and consider the ethical implications of this.

Understanding the life experiences of people with multiple complex needs: peer research in a health needs assessment

BACKGROUND

Multiple complex needs (MCN) describe a population experiencing a combination of homelessness, substance use, offending and/or mental ill-health. Using peer researchers, this study aimed to explore the perspectives of individuals with lived experience of MCN with regards to (i) issues leading to MCN and (ii) key intervention opportunities.

METHODS

As part of a health needs assessment in Gateshead (North East England), trained peer researchers interviewed 27 adults (aged ≥18 years) with experience of MCN, identified using purposive sampling methods. Peer researchers designed a topic guide for interviews which were audio recorded and thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Interviewees reported adverse childhood experiences leading to MCN including abuse, bereavement, parental imprisonment, family break-up and inadequate support. Mental ill-health, substance use, poverty, early experiences of unstable housing and acute homelessness were identified as major precedents for adulthood experiences of MCN. Between 16 and 20 years, access to housing, social and mental health support was perceived as having the potential to prevent circumstances worsening. Individuals perceived removing barriers to mental health, housing and welfare and financial supports could help.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the perceived role austerity, adverse childhood events and current service provision have in current and future experiences of MCN. Individuals expressed a need for future interventions and support to be judgement free and provided by workers who are educated about MCN and related adversity. Involving peer researchers and individuals with experience of MCN in future research and service provision could ensure appropriate measures and supports are put in place.

Transforming health systems to reduce health inequalities

Never before in history have we had the data to track such a rapid increase in inequalities. With changes imminent in healthcare and public health organisational landscape in England and health inequalities high on the policy agenda, we have an opportunity to redouble efforts to reduce inequalities. In this article, we argue that health inequalities need re-framing to encompass the breadth of disadvantage and difference between healthcare and health outcome inequalities. Second, there needs to be a focus on long-term organisational change to ensure equity is considered in all decisions. Third, actions need to prioritise the fundamental redistribution of resources, funding, workforce, services and power. Reducing inequalities can involve unpopular and difficult decisions. Physicians have a particular role in society and can support evidenced-based change across practice and the system at large. If we do not act now, then when?

How are inequalities generated in the management and consequences of gastrointestinal infections in the UK? An ethnographic study

Gastrointestinal infections are an important global public health issue. In the UK, one in four people experience a gastrointestinal infection each year and epidemiological research highlights inequalities in the burden of disease. Specifically, poorer children are at greater risk of infection and the consequences of illness, such as symptom severity and time off work/school, are greater for less privileged groups of all ages. Gastrointestinal infections are, however, largely ‘hidden’ within the home and little is known about the lived experience and practices surrounding these illnesses, how they vary across contrasting socioeconomic contexts, or how inequalities in the disease burden across socioeconomic groups might come about. This paper presents data from an ethnographic study which illuminate how socioeconomic inequalities in the physical and material management and consequences of gastrointestinal infections are generated in families with young children. The study shows how the ‘work’ needed to manage gastrointestinal infections is more laborious for people living in more ‘disadvantaged’ conditions, exacerbated by: more overcrowded homes with fewer washing and toilet facilities; inflexible employment; low household incomes; and higher likelihood of co-morbidities which can be made worse by having a gastrointestinal infection. Our findings call into question the current approach to prevention of gastrointestinal infections which tend to focus almost exclusively on individual behaviours, which are not adapted to reflect differences in socioeconomic context. Public health agencies should also consider how wider social, economic and policy contexts shape inequalities in the management and consequences of illness. Our findings are also pertinent to the COVID-19 pandemic response in the UK. They highlight how research and policy approaches to acute infectious diseases need to take into consideration the differing lived experiences of contrasting households if they wish to address (and avoid exacerbating) inequalities in the future.

•

First ethnographic study to examine UK socioeconomic inequalities in GI infections.

•

GI infections create a huge amount of labour for all families with young children.

•

Co-morbidities, poorer living conditions and low income increase GI infection labour.

•

Low paid, insecure, inflexible work exacerbates material consequences of infection.

•

GI infection policy should look beyond behavioural advice to address inequalities.

Health-justice partnerships: innovation in service delivery to support mental health

Purpose

This paper aims to introduce the concept of “health-justice partnership” (HJP), the provision of legal assistance for social welfare issues in health-care settings. It discusses the role of these partnerships in supporting health and care for people with mental health issues.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors describe an example of an HJP; discuss the rationale and evidence for this approach in relation to mental health; and reflect on implementation challenges and future directions in the UK. The authors draw on both health and legal literature to frame the discussion.

Findings

Social welfare legal needs have negative impacts on mental well-being and are more likely to occur among people with mental health conditions. Integrating legal assistance with healthcare services can improve access to support for those with unmet need. High-quality research has demonstrated positive impacts for mental health and well-being as a result of HJP interventions. Both further research and wider strategies are required to support implementation of HJPs in practice.

Originality/value

Legal assistance is rarely positioned as a health intervention, yet it is an effective tool to address social welfare issues that are harmful to mental health and to which people experiencing mental health are at greater risk. This paper highlights the importance of the HJP movement as an approach for supporting people with mental health issues.

Holiday Hunger and Parental Stress: Evidence from North East England

Summer is a stressful time of year for many parents as they struggle to meet household expenses and feed children. The aim of the present study is to determine if there is an association between summertime food insecurity (i.e., holiday hunger) and parental stress among a sample of UK parents with school age children living in North East England. A cross-sectional sample of (n = 252) parents are analyzed using holiday hunger as the independent variable and a subjective measure of stress that treats summer as a ‘stressful event’ as the dependent variable. Of the parents in the sample, 64.8% reported at least some level of holiday hunger. We find parents facing any holiday hunger scored substantively higher on the overall 75-point Impact of Event Scale (mean difference = 30.4, 95% confidence interval ((CI) 24.2–36.6), the 35-point intrusion subscale (13.7, 95% CI 10.8–16.5), and the 40-point avoidance subscale (16.7, 95% CI 13.3–20.2). These findings are replicated in a regression analysis. In addition, we find that holiday hunger partially mediates the association between economic hardship (i.e., unemployment and poverty) and parental stress. We conclude by suggesting that government policies addressing economic hardship are not only likely to reduce holiday hunger, but also improve mental wellbeing.

Effects on mental health of a UK welfare reform, Universal Credit: a longitudinal controlled study

BACKGROUND

Universal Credit, a welfare benefit reform in the UK, began to replace six existing benefit schemes in April, 2013, starting with the income-based Job Seekers Allowance. We aimed to determine the effects on mental health of the introduction of Universal Credit.

METHODS

In this longitudinal controlled study, we linked 197 111 observations from 52 187 individuals of working age (16-64 years) in England, Wales, and Scotland who participated in the Understanding Society UK Longitudinal Household Panel Study between 2009 and 2018 with administrative data on the month when Universal Credit was introduced into the area in which each respondent lived. We included participants who had data on employment status, local authority area of residence, psychological distress, and confounding variables. We excluded individuals from Northern Ireland and people out of work with a disability. We used difference-in-differences analysis of this nationally representative, longitudinal, household survey and separated respondents into two groups: unemployed people who were eligible for Universal Credit (intervention group) and people who were not unemployed and therefore would not have generally been eligible for Universal Credit (comparison group). Using the phased roll-out of Universal Credit, we compared the change in psychological distress (self-reported via General Health Questionnaire-12) between the intervention group and the comparison group over time as the reform was introduced in the area in which each respondent lived. We defined clinically significant psychological distress as a score of greater than 3 on the General Health Questionnaire-12. We tested whether there were differential effects across subgroups (age, sex, and education).

FINDINGS

The prevalence of psychological distress increased in the intervention group by 6·57 percentage points (95% CI 1·69-11·42) after the introduction of Universal Credit relative to the comparison group, after accounting for potential confounders. We estimate that between April 29, 2013, and Dec 31, 2018, an additional 63 674 (95% CI 10 042-117 307) unemployed people will have experienced levels of psychological distress that are clinically significant due to the introduction of Universal Credit; 21 760 of these individuals might reach the diagnostic threshold for depression.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings suggest that the introduction of Universal Credit led to an increase in psychological distress, a measure of mental health difficulties, among those affected by the policy. Future changes to government welfare systems should be evaluated not only on a fiscal basis but on their potential to affect health and wellbeing.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust, UK National Institute for Health Research, and Medical Research Council.