Background Grandiose delusions are arguably the most neglected psychotic experience in research. Objectives We aimed to discover from patients: whether grandiose delusions have harmful consequences; the psychological mechanisms that maintain them; and what help patients may want from clinical services. Design A qualitative interview design was used to explore patients’ experiences of grandiose delusions. Method Fifteen patients with past or present experiences of grandiose delusions who were attending psychiatric services were interviewed. Thematic analysis and grounded theory were used to analyse the data. Results Participants reported physical, sexual, social, occupational, and emotional harms from grandiose delusions. All patients described the grandiose belief as highly meaningful: it provided a sense of purpose, belonging, or self‐identity, or it made sense of unusual or difficult events. The meaning from the belief was not synonymous with extreme superiority or arrogance. The meaning obtained appeared to be a key driver of the persistence of the beliefs. Other maintenance factors were subjectively anomalous experiences (e.g., voices), symptoms of mania, fantasy elaboration, reasoning biases, and immersive behaviours. Participants described insufficient opportunities to talk about their grandiose beliefs and related experiences and were generally positive about the possibility of a psychological therapy. Conclusions We conclude that grandiosity is a psychologically rich experience, with a number of maintenance factors that may be amenable to a targeted psychological intervention. Importantly, the term ‘grandiose delusion’ is an imprecise description of the experience; we suggest ‘delusions of exceptionality’ may be a credible alternative. Practitioner points Harm from grandiose delusions can occur across multiple domains (including physical, sexual, social, occupational, and emotional) and practitioners should assess accordingly. However, grandiose delusions are experienced by patients as highly meaningful: they provide a sense of purpose, belonging, or self‐identity, or make sense of unusual or difficult events. Possible psychological maintenance mechanisms that could be a target for intervention include the meaning of the belief, anomalous experiences, mania, fantasy elaboration, reasoning biases, and immersive behaviours. Patients are keen to have the opportunity to access talking therapies for this experience. Taking extra time to talk at times of distress, ‘going the extra mile’, and listening carefully can help to facilitate trust.

Home treatment was popular but hard to deliver in deprived surroundings and placed a strain on carers. Interventions to enhance community treatments in deprived areas are needed, along with remedial interventions to improve therapeutic relationships in hospital settings.

ObjectivesThe main objectives of the study were to explore the experiences of primary care professionals providing care to recent migrants in a superdiverse city and to elicit barriers and facilitators to meeting migrants' care needs. This paper focuses on a strong emergent theme: participants' descriptions and understandings of creating a fit between patients and practices.DesignAn exploratory, qualitative study based on the thematic analysis of semistructured interviews.Setting and participantsA purposive sample of 10 practices. We interviewed 6 general practitioners, 5 nurses and 6 administrative staff; those based at the same practice opted to be interviewed together. 10 interviewees were from an ethnic minority background; some discussed their own experiences of migration.ResultsCreating a fit between patients and practice was complex and could be problematic. Some participants defined this in a positive way (reaching out, creating rapport) while others also focused on ways in which patients did not fit in, for example, different expectations or lack of medical records. A small but vocal minority put the responsibility to fit in on to migrant patients. Some participants believed that practice staff and patients sharing a language could contribute to achieving a fit but others outlined the disadvantages of over-reliance on language concordance. A clearly articulated, team-based strategy to create bridges between practice and patients was often seen as preferable.ConclusionsAlthough participants agreed that a fit between patients and practice was desirable, some aimed to adapt to the needs of recently arrived migrants, while others thought that it was the responsibility of migrants to adapt to practice needs; a few viewed migrant patients as a burden to the system. Practices wishing to improve fit might consider developing strategies such as introducing link workers and other ‘bridging’ people; however, they could also aim to foster a general stance of openness to diversity.

The findings have implications for the design and delivery of primary care and community services which support the prevention and management of NCDs in an increasingly diverse population.

BackgroundCurrently there is great interest in antibiotic prescribing practices in the UK, but little is known about the experiences of the increasing numbers of recent migrants (those present in the UK for >1 year but <5 years) registered at GP practices. Qualitative research has suggested that reasons for not prescribing antibiotics may not be clearly communicated to migrants.AimThis study aimed to explore the factors that shape migrants’ experiences of and attitudes to antibiotics, and to suggest ways to improve effective communication around their use.Design and settingA qualitative study on recent migrants’ health beliefs, values, and experiences in a community setting in primary care.MethodTwenty-three recent migrants were interviewed in their preferred language by trained community researchers. The research team conducted a thematic analysis, focusing on health beliefs, engaging with health services, transnational medicine, and concepts of fairness. Experiences around antibiotics were a strong emerging theme.ResultsThree reasons were identified for antibiotics seeking: first, holding an ‘infectious model’ of illness implying that antibiotics are required quickly to avoid illness becoming worse or spreading to others; second, reasoning that other medications will be less effective for people ‘used to’ antibiotics’; and third, perceiving antibiotic prescription as a sign of being taken seriously. Some participants obtained antibiotics from their country of origin or migrant networks in the UK; others changed their mind and accepted alternatives.ConclusionPrimary care professionals should aim to understand migrants’ perspectives to improve communication with patients. Further research is needed to identify different strategies needed to respond to the varying understandings of antibiotics held by migrants.