BackgroundTelehealth is an emerging field of clinical practice but current UK health policy has not taken account of the perceptions of frontline healthcare professionals expected to implement it. AimTo investigate telehealth care for people with long-term conditions from the perspective of the front-line health professional. Design and settingA qualitative study in three sites within the UK (Kent, Cornwall, and the London Borough of Newham) and embedded in the Whole Systems Demonstrator evaluation, a large cluster randomised controlled trial of telehealth and telecare for patients with long-term and complex conditions. MethodSemi-structured qualitative interviews with 32 front-line health professionals (13 community matrons, 10 telehealth monitoring nurses and 9 GPs) involved in the delivery of telehealth. Data were analysed using a modified grounded theory approach. ResultsMixed views were expressed by front-line professionals, which seem to reflect their levels of engagement. It was broadly welcomed by nursing staff as long as it supplemented rather than substituted their role in traditional patient care. GPs held mixed views; some gave a cautious welcome but most saw telehealth as increasing their work burden and potentially undermining their professional autonomy. ConclusionHealth care professionals will need to develop a shared understanding of patient self-management through telehealth. This may require a renegotiation of their roles and responsibilities. Key wordsprimary care; qualitative; telehealth, Whole System Demonstrator.

ObjectivesTo understand views of pharmacy advisers about smoker recruitment and retention in the National Health Service community pharmacy stop smoking programme.DesignThematic framework analysis of semistructured, in-depth interviews applying the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B behaviour change model. We aimed to identify aspects of adviser behaviour that might be modified to increase numbers joining and completing the programme.Participants25 stop smoking advisers (13 pharmacists and 12 support staff).Setting29 community pharmacies in 3 inner east London boroughs.ResultsAdvisers had preconceived ideas about smokers likely to join or drop out and made judgements about smokers' readiness to quit. Actively recruiting smokers was accorded low priority due in part to perceived insufficient remuneration to the pharmacy and anticipated challenging interactions with smokers. Suggestions to improve smoker recruitment and retention included developing a more holistic and supportive approach using patient-centred communication. Training counter assistants were seen to be important as was flexibility to extend the programme duration to fit better with smokers’ needs.ConclusionsCessation advisers feel they lack the interpersonal skills necessary to engage well with smokers and help them to quit. Addressing advisers' behaviours about active engagement and follow-up of clients, together with regular skills training including staff not formally trained as cessation advisers, could potentially boost numbers recruited and retained in the stop smoking programme. Adjustments to the pharmacy remuneration structure to incentivise recruitment and to allow personalisation of the programme for individual smokers should also be considered.

BackgroundThe sequence of events in a behaviour change trial involves interactions between research participants and the trial process. Taking part in such a study has the potential to influence the behaviour of the participant, and if it does, this can engender bias in trial outcomes. Since participants’ experience has received scant attention, the aim of this study is thus to generate hypotheses about which aspects of the conduct of behaviour change trials might matter most to participants, and thus have potential to alter subsequent behaviours and bias trial outcomesMethodsTwenty participants were opportunistically screened for a health compromising behaviour (unhealthy diet, lack of exercise, smoking or alcohol consumption) and recruited if eligible. Semi structured face to face interviews were conducted, after going through the usual processes involved in trial recruitment, baseline assessment and randomisation. Participants were given information on the contents of an intervention or control condition in a behaviour change trial, which was not actually implemented. Three months later they returned to reflect on these experiences and whether they had any effect on their behaviour during the intervening period. Data from the latter interview were analysed thematically using a modified grounded theory approach.ResultsThe early processes of trial participation raised awareness of unhealthy behaviours, although most reported having had only fleeting intentions to change their behaviour as a result of taking part in this study, in the absence of interventions. However, careful examination of the accounts revealed evidence of subtle research participation effects, which varied according to the health behaviour, and its perceived social acceptability. Participants’ relationships with the research study were viewed as somewhat important in stimulating thinking about whether and how to make lifestyle changes.ConclusionThese participants described no dramatic impacts attributable to taking part in this study. This study demonstrates the likely value of well conducted qualitative studies of subtle research participation effects, which may be particularly important to explore for alcohol. Separating unintended influences in trial participation from the effects of behaviour change interventions being evaluated therein is necessary for valid estimates of intervention effects.