No abstract

No abstract

Recent penal policy developments in many jurisdictions suggest an increasing role for voluntary organizations. Voluntary organizations have long worked alongside penal institutions, but the multifaceted ways their programmes affect (ex-)offenders remain insufficiently understood. This article addresses the implications of voluntary organizations' work with (ex-)offenders, using original empirical data. It adds nuance to netwidening theory, reframing the effects of voluntary organizations' work as inclusionary and exclusionary. Exclusionary effects sometimes have inclusionary aspects, and inclusionary effects are constrained by a controlling carceral net. We propose the novel concept of inclusionary control. This is not an alibi for punishment but enables rich analysis of the effects of voluntary organizations' work, and raises possibilities for change in penal practice.

Prison health, prisoner safety and imprisonment rates matter: intrinsically and for health and safety outside. Existing prison regulation apparatuses (e.g. OPCAT) are extensive and hold unrealized potential to shape imprisonment. However, criminologists have not yet engaged much with this potential. In this article, I reconceptualize prison regulation by exploring the work of a broad range of multisectoral regulators who operate across stakeholder groups. I illustrate that voluntary organizations and families bereaved by prison suicide act as regulators, although their substantive actions have been erased from official narratives. Mobilizing (threats of) litigation, these actors have responsibilized the state and brought qualitative changes across the prison estate.

In response to policy developments aiming to increase the involvement of penal voluntary

IntroductionA global health workforce crisis, coupled with ageing populations, wars and the rise of non-communicable diseases is prompting all countries to consider the optimal skill mix within their health workforce. The development of advanced clinical practice (ACP) roles for existing non-medical cadres is one potential strategy that is being pursued. In the UK, National Health Service (NHS) workforce transformation programmes are actively promoting the development of ACP roles across a wide range of non-medical professions. These efforts are currently hampered by a high level of variation in ACP role development, deployment, nomenclature, definition, governance and educational preparation across the professions and across different settings. This scoping review aims to support a more consistent approach to workforce development in the UK, by identifying and mapping the current evidence base underpinning multiprofessional advanced level practice in the UK from a workforce, clinical, service and patient perspective.Methods and analysisThis scoping review is registered with the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/tzpe5). The review will follow Joanna Briggs Institute guidance and involves a multidisciplinary and multiprofessional team, including a public representative. A wide range of electronic databases and grey literature sources will be searched from 2005 to the present. The review will include primary data from any relevant research, audit or evaluation studies. All review steps will involve two or more reviewers. Data extraction, charting and summary will be guided by a template derived from an established framework used internationally to evaluate ACP (the Participatory Evidence-Informed Patient-Centred Process-Plus framework).DisseminationThe review will produce important new information on existing activity, outcomes, implementation challenges and key areas for future research around ACP in the UK, which, in the context of global workforce transformations, will be of international, as well as local, significance. The findings will be disseminated through professional and NHS bodies, employer organisations, conferences and research papers.

No abstract

ObjectivesIn response to demographic and health system pressures, the development of non-medical advanced clinical practice (ACP) roles is a key component of National Health Service workforce transformation policy in the UK. This review was undertaken to establish a baseline of evidence on ACP roles and their outcomes, impacts and implementation challenges across the UK.DesignA scoping review was undertaken following JBI methodological guidance.Methods13 online databases (Medline, CINAHL, ASSIA, Embase, HMIC, AMED, Amber, OT seeker, PsycINFO, PEDro, SportDiscus, Osteopathic Research and PenNutrition) and grey literature sources were searched from 2005 to 2020. Data extraction, charting and summary was guided by the PEPPA-Plus framework. The review was undertaken by a multi-professional team that included an expert lay representative.Results191 papers met the inclusion criteria (any type of UK evidence, any sector/setting and any profession meeting the Health Education England definition of ACP). Most papers were small-scale descriptive studies, service evaluations or audits. The papers reported mainly on clinical aspects of the ACP role. Most papers related to nursing, pharmacy, physiotherapy and radiography roles and these were referred to by a plethora of different titles. ACP roles were reported to be achieving beneficial impacts across a range of clinical and health system outcomes. They were highly acceptable to patients and staff. No significant adverse events were reported. There was a lack of cost-effectiveness evidence. Implementation challenges included a lack of role clarity and an ambivalent role identity, lack of mentorship, lack of continuing professional development and an unclear career pathway.ConclusionThis review suggests a need for educational and role standardisation and a supported career pathway for advanced clinical practitioners (ACPs) in the UK. Future research should: (i) adopt more robust study designs, (ii) investigate the full scope of the ACP role and (iii) include a wider range of professions and sectors.