PURPOSE To assess the effect of a primary care-based community-links practitioner (CLP) intervention on patients' quality of life and well-being. METHODS Quasi-experimental cluster-randomized controlled trial in socioeconomically deprived areas of Glasgow, Scotland. Adult patients (aged 18 years or older) referred to CLPs in 7 intervention practices were compared with a random sample of adult patients from 8 comparison practices at baseline and 9 months. Primary outcome: health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, a standardized measure of self-reported health-related quality of life that assesses 5 dimensions at 5 levels of severity). Secondary outcomes: well-being (Investigating Choice Experiments for the Preferences of Older People Capability Measure for Adults [ICECAP-A]), depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Depression [HADS-D]), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Anxiety [HADS-A]), and self-reported exercise. Multilevel, multiregression analyses adjusted for baseline differences. Patients were not blinded to the intervention, but outcome analysis was masked. RESULTS Data were collected on 288 and 214 (74.3%) patients in the intervention practices at baseline and follow-up, respectively, and on 612 and 561 (92%) patients in the comparison practices. Intention-to-treat analysis found no differences between the 2 groups for any outcome. In subgroup analyses, patients who saw the CLP on 3 or more occasions (45% of those referred) had significant improvements in EQ-5D-5L, HADS-D, HADS-A, and exercise levels. There was a high positive correlation between CLP consultation rates and patient uptake of suggested community resources. CONCLUSIONS We were unable to prove the effectiveness of referral to CLPs based in primary care in deprived areas for improving patient outcomes. Future efforts to boost uptake and engagement could improve overall outcomes, although the apparent improvements in those who regularly saw the CLPs may be due to reverse causality. Further research is needed before wide-scale deployment of this approach.

Objectives The Links Worker Programme is a primary care-based social prescribing initiative in Glasgow, Scotland, targeting patients with complex needs in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation. The programme aims to improve wellbeing by connecting patients to appropriate community resources. This study explored the utility of Self-Determination Theory in understanding the reported impacts of the intervention. Methods Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 12 patients (34–64 years, six female) referred to Community Links Practitioners using Self-Determination Theory as a framework. Impact was assessed from participants’ description of their personal circumstances before and after interaction with the Community Links Practitioner. Results Four patients described no overall change in daily life, two described slight improvement and six described moderate or major improvement. Improvers described satisfaction of the three psychological needs identified in Self-Determination Theory: relatedness, competence and autonomy. This often related to greater participation in community activities and sense of competence in social interaction. Patients who benefitted most described a change towards more intrinsic regulation of behaviour following the intervention. Conclusions Understanding the impact of this social prescribing initiative was facilitated by analysis using Self-Determination Theory. Self-Determination Theory may therefore be a useful theoretical framework for the development and evaluation of new interventions in this setting.

BackgroundSocial prescribing is a collaborative approach to improve inter-sectoral working between primary health care and community organisations. The Links Worker Programme (LWP) is a social prescribing initiative in areas of high deprivation in Glasgow, Scotland, that is designed to mitigate the negative impacts of the social determinants of health.AimTo investigate issues relevant to implementing a social prescribing programme to improve inter-sectoral working to achieve public health goals.Design and settingQualitative interview study with community organisation representatives and community links practitioners (CLPs) in LWP areas.MethodAudiorecordings of semi-structured interviews with 30 community organisation representatives and six CLPs were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically.ResultsParticipants identified some benefits of collaborative working, particularly the CLPs’ ability to act as a case manager for patients, and their position in GP practices, which operated as a bridge between organisations. However, benefits were seen to flow from new relationships between individuals in community organisations and CLPs, rather than more generally with the practice as a whole. Challenges to the LWP were related to capacity and funding for community organisations in the context of austerity. The capacity of CLPs was also an issue given that their role involved time-consuming, intensive case management.ConclusionAlthough the LWP appears to be a fruitful approach to collaborative case management, integration initiatives such as social prescribing cannot be seen as ‘magic bullets’. In the context of economic austerity, such approaches may not achieve their potential unless funding is available for community organisations to continue to provide services and make and maintain their links with primary care.

Background: Social prescribing involving primary care-based ‘link workers’ is a key UK health policy which aims to reduce health inequalities. However, the process of implementation of the link worker approach has received little attention despite this being central to desired impact and outcomes. Aim: Our objective was to explore the implementation process of such an approach in practice. Design and Setting: Qualitative process evaluation of the ‘Deep End’ Links Worker Programme (LWP) over a two-year period, in seven general practices in deprived areas of Glasgow. Methods: We used thematic analysis to identify the extent of LWP integration in each practice and key factors associated with implementation. Analysis was informed by Normalisation Process Theory. Results: Only three of the seven practices fully integrated the LWP into routine practice within two years, based on NPT constructs of coherence, cognitive participation, and collective action. Compared to ‘Partially Integrated Practices’, ‘Fully Integrated Practices’ had better shared understanding of the programme among staff, higher staff engagement with LWP, and were implementing all aspects of LWP at patient, practice and community levels of intervention. Successful implementation was associated with GP buy-in, collaborative leadership, good team dynamics, link worker support, and the absence of competing innovations. Conclusions: Even in a well-resourced government funded programme, the majority of practices involved had not fully integrated the LWP within the first two years. Implementing social prescribing and link workers within primary care at scale is unlikely to be a ‘quick fix’ for mitigating health inequalities in deprived areas.

Background‘Social prescribing’ can be used to link patients with complex needs to local (non-medical) community resources. The ‘Deep End’ Links Worker Programme is being tested in general practices serving deprived populations in Glasgow, Scotland.ObjectivesTo assess the implementation and impact of the intervention at patient and practice levels.MethodsStudy design: Quasi-experimental outcome evaluation with embedded theory-driven process evaluation in 15 practices randomized to receive the intervention or not. Complex intervention: Comprising a practice development fund, a practice-based community links practitioner (CLP), and management support. It aims to link patients to local community organizations and enhance practices’ social prescribing capacity. Study population: For intervention practices, staff and adult patients involved in referral to a CLP, and a sample of community organization staff. For comparison practices, all staff and a random sample of adult patients. Sample size: 286 intervention and 484 comparator patients. Outcomes: Primary patient outcome is health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L). Secondary patient outcomes include capacity, depression/anxiety, self-esteem, and healthcare utilization. Practice outcome measures include team climate, job satisfaction, morale, and burnout. Outcomes measured at baseline and 9 months. Processes: Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the programme and possible mechanisms through which outcomes are achieved. Analysis plan: For outcome, intention-to-treat analysis with differences between groups tested using mixed-effects regression models. For process, case-study approach with thematic analysis.DiscussionThis evaluation will provide new evidence about the implementation and impact of social prescribing by general practices serving patients with complex needs living in areas of high deprivation.