BackgroundSocial prescribing enables health-care professionals to address non-medical causes of ill-health by harnessing the resources of the voluntary and community sectors in patient care. Although increasingly popular in the UK, evidence for the effectiveness of social prescribing is inconclusive and longer-term studies are needed. This study aimed to explore experiences of social prescribing among people with long-term conditions one to two years after their initial engagement with a social prescribing service.MethodsQualitative methods comprising semi-structured follow-up interviews were conducted with 24 users of a link worker social prescribing service who had participated in an earlier study. Participants were aged between 40 and 74 years and were living in a socioeconomically-deprived area of North East England.ResultsParticipants reported reduced social isolation and improvements in their condition management and health-related behaviours. However, many participants had experienced setbacks, requiring continued support to overcome problems due to multi-morbidity, family circumstances and social, economic or cultural factors. Findings indicated that, in this sample of people facing complex health and socioeconomic issues, longer-term intervention and support was required. Features of the link worker social prescribing intervention that were positively appraised by participants, included a highly personalised service to reflect individual goal setting priorities and a focus on gradual and holistic change dealing with issues beyond health. The important role of a strong and supportive relationship with an easily-accessible link worker in promoting sustained behaviour change highlights the importance of link worker continuity. A lack of suitable and accessible voluntary and community services for onward referral acted as a barrier to involvement for some participants.ConclusionsThis study highlights issues of interest to commissioners and providers of social prescribing. Engagement with social prescribing for up to two years was examined and continued involvement was identified for those with complex issues, suggesting that a long-term intervention is required. The availability of onward referral services is an important consideration for social prescribing in a time of constrained public spending. From a research perspective, the range of improvements and their episodic nature suggest that the evaluation of social prescribing interventions requires both quantitative and qualitative data collected longitudinally.

Highly collaborative forms of co-practice, inherently more complex at the service governance, macro-level, bring benefits. At the meso-level of the school and support team network there was greater capacity to individualize co-practice to the needs of the child. Capacity was increased at the micro-level of knowledge and skills to harness the overall resource distributed amongst members of the inter-professional team. The development of social capital, networks of trust across SLCN support teams, should be a priority at all levels-for practitioners, services, commissioners and schools.

Current debates around the concept of boundary crossing stress the importance of boundary objects in bringing people together to share understandings. We argue that the boundary object is of secondary importance, and that what is important for the transformational potential of interdisciplinary understanding is opportunities for 'boundary experiences'. We present three examples of interdisciplinary boundary experiences: the first describes a collaboration between an education academic and speech and language therapists; the second presents a research opportunity experienced by a group of education, architecture and sociology academics, alongside practising architects and educators; and the third reflects on the process of coproduction involving academics from education, medical education, cultural and heritage studies, sociology, music, and social computing. 2We argue that engaging in shared landscapes of practice, when accompanied by opportunities for dialogue and for developing relationships, creates meaningful moments of service, and thus has transformational potential. However, we believe that this necessitates a new way of thinking about research methodology. We advocate a co-production approach that is grounded in developing and maintaining relationships, and routinely provides opportunities for boundary experiences. This requires a more open and flexible approach to research design than is currently usually promoted within academic research infrastructures.

Introduction: Our aim was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ureteroscopy as a primary treatment for pregnant women with symptomatic ureteric stones who have failed conservative management. Materials and Methods: A systematic review of the literature from January 1990 to June 2011 was performed, including all English language articles. Outcome measures were clinical efficacy, in terms of stone clearance and need for additional procedures, and safety in terms of complications. Results: A total of 239 abstracts were screened and 15 studies were identified reporting on 116 procedures. The surgical methods of stone management employed were stone extraction with basket only (n = 55, 47%), laser fragmentation (n = 27, 23%; holmium, n = 20, pulse dye, n = 7), impact lithotripsy (n = 21, 18%), ureteroscopic lithotripsy (n = 6, 5%) and a combination of methods (n = 6, 5%). A post-operative stent was inserted in 64 of 116 procedures (55%). Complete stone clearance was seen in 100 of the 116 procedures (86%). There were 2 major complications (1 ureteral perforation and 1 case of premature uterine contraction) and 7 minor complications (5 urinary tract infections and 2 cases of post-operative pain). Conclusion: This review suggests that stone clearance using ureteroscopy is a relatively safe option in pregnancy with a high success rate.

No abstract

This article considers a school community initiating change in pedagogical practices to complement newbuild premises in the context of demands for school improvement, but constraints on autonomy. We investigate how school leaders planned the change towards enquiry-based learning in flexible spaces, and how teaching staff prepared for the coming change. We worked with teachers to explore current experiences of teaching and learning in self-contained classrooms where teachers mainly teach alone, and anticipations for the new building, where there will be large, shared spaces, facilitating movement and different groupings of students, encouraging student autonomy and teacher teamwork. Preparation for change was centred on an 'experimental week' of enquiry learning that took place in an existing large space (a school hall). Here we explore the experiences of the teachers involved, particularly their ideas about the potential for changing practices, considering these in light of the plans of the school leaders and of wider understandings of school change. We met the teachers before and after the experimental week, observed the week and conducted interviews mediated by photographs of the week. The tensions and stresses of attempting to make extensive changes to teaching practices were evident, together with suggestions that the school leaders were failing to appreciate the complexity of the change they were planning or to communicate the ideas about it that they had developed. The probable consequences for the school, given the uneven distribution of autonomy in UK schools, are briefly considered.

Wordcount: 6084 Co/productive practitioner relations for children with SLCN: an affect inflected agentic frame 2 This paper examines how school-based practitioners supporting children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) use particular social capital relations. Social capital theory together with selected 'Productive Pedagogies' items, are applied to re-frame and understand the co/production of support for such children. Empirical data from the 'Language for All' study, which investigates SLCN provision in schools in England, are analysed to understand support network social capital. Novel insights on the types and purposes of interprofessional connectedness within SLCN support networks, in particular how relational agency is inflected by affect, are offered.

A pilot feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of screening and brief alcohol intervention to prevent hazardous drinking in young people aged 14-15 years in a high school setting (SIPS JR-HIGH) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full PHR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/phr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Public Health Research journalReports are published in Public Health Research (PHR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the PHR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Public Health Research are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. PHR programmeThe Public Health Research (PHR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), evaluates public health interventions, providing new knowledge on the benefits, costs, acceptability and wider impacts of non-NHS interventions intended to improve the health of the public and reduce inequalities in health. The scope of the programme is multi-disciplinary and broad, covering a range of interventions that improve public health. The Public Health Research programme also complements the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme which has a growing portfolio evaluating NHS public health interventions.For more information about the PHR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/phr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the PHR programme as project number 10/3002/07. The contractual start date was in October 2011. The final report began editorial review in September 2013 and was accepted for publication in June 2014. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The PHR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the PHR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors,...