#EXCLUDE#
#EXCLUDE#
#EXCLUDE#
#EXCLUDE#

Find prevention records by subject or service provider/commissioner name

  • Key to icons

    • Journal Prevention service example
    • Book Book
    • Digital media Digital media
    • Journal Journal article
    • Free resource Free resource

All research records related prevention examples and research

Results 91 - 100 of 428

Physical activity interventions for treatment of social isolation, loneliness or low social support in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

SHVEDKO Anastasia, et al
2018

Objectives: This article reviews the effects of physical activity (PA) interventions on social isolation, loneliness or low social support in older adults. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Method: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, were screened up to February 2017. RCTs comparing PA versus non-PA interventions or control (sedentary) condition were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the 12 criteria Cochrane Review Book Group risk of bias. The outcome measures were: social isolation, loneliness, social support, social networks, and social functioning. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. Results: The search strategy identified 38 RCTs, with a total of 5288 participants, of which 26 had a low risk of bias and 12 had a high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed on 23 RCTs. A small significant positive effect favouring the experimental condition was found for social functioning with strongest effects obtained for PA interventions, diseased populations, group exercise setting, and delivery by a medical healthcare provider. No effect of PA was found for loneliness, social support, or social networks. Conclusion: This review shows, for social functioning, the specific aspects of PA interventions can successfully influence social health. PA did not appear to be effective for loneliness, social support and social networks.

The effectiveness of e-interventions on reducing social isolation in older persons: a systematic review of systematic reviews

CHIPPS Jennifer, JARVIS Mary Ann, RAMIALL Suvira
2017

As the older adult population group has been increasing in size, there has been evidence of growing social isolation and loneliness in their lives. The increased use of information communication technology and Internet-supported interventions has stimulated an interest in the benefits of e-Interventions for older people and specifically in having a role in increasing social networks and decreasing loneliness. A systematic review of e-Interventions to reduce loneliness in older people was conducted with the aim to synthesize high quality evidence on the effectiveness of e-Interventions to decrease social isolation/loneliness for older people living in community/residential care. A systematic search of 12 databases for reviews published between 2000–2017 was conducted using search term synonyms for older people, social isolation and interventions. Three independent researchers screened articles and two reviewers extracted data. The Revised-Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews was used to assess the quality of reviews. The final search identified 12 reviews, which included 22 unique primary research studies evaluating e-Interventions for social isolation or loneliness. The reviews were of moderate quality and the primary studies showed a lack of rigor. Loneliness was most frequently measured using the University California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale. Despite the limitations of the reviewed studies, there is inconsistent and weak evidence on using e-Interventions for loneliness in older people.

Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

BICKERDIKE Liz, et al
2017

Objectives: Social prescribing is a way of linking patients in primary care with sources of support within the community to help improve their health and well-being. Social prescribing programmes are being widely promoted and adopted in the UK National Health Service and this systematic review aims to assess the evidence for their effectiveness. Setting/data sources: Nine databases were searched from 2000 to January 2016 for studies conducted in the UK. Relevant reports and guidelines, websites and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies. All the searches were restricted to English language only. Participants: Systematic reviews and any published evaluation of programmes where patient referral was made from a primary care setting to a link worker or facilitator of social prescribing were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias for included studies was undertaken independently by two reviewers and a narrative synthesis was performed. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary outcomes of interest were any measures of health and well-being and/or usage of health services. Results: A total of 15 evaluations of social prescribing programmes were included. Most were small scale and limited by poor design and reporting. All were rated as a having a high risk of bias. Common design issues included a lack of comparative controls, short follow-up durations, a lack of standardised and validated measuring tools, missing data and a failure to consider potential confounding factors. Despite clear methodological shortcomings, most evaluations presented positive conclusions. Conclusions: Social prescribing is being widely advocated and implemented but current evidence fails to provide sufficient detail to judge either success or value for money. If social prescribing is to realise its potential, future evaluations must be comparative by design and consider when, by whom, for whom, how well and at what cost.

Demonstrating the health and social cost-benefits of lifestyle housing for older people

HOUSING LEARNING AND IMPROVEMENT NETWORK
2017

This report, commissioned by Keepmoat Regeneration/ENGIE, sets out the evidence for the benefits of developing specialist retirement housing for people aged over 55, including cost savings. It focuses on the benefits of age restricted retirement housing or sheltered accommodation, care villages and specialist extra care housing with services and care on-site. Part one lists key facts and figures on the health and social care cost-benefits of lifestyle housing for older people. Part two provides more detailed findings of the potential benefits including the areas of: social connectedness and reducing loneliness; life expectancy, keeping couples together and supporting informal carers, financial savings in adult social care and the NHS, and preventing the need for institutional care. References and links are listed at the end of the document.

Building bridges to a good life: a review of asset based, person centred approaches and people with learning disabilities in Scotland

McNEISH Di, SCOTT Sarah, WILLIAMS Jennie
2016

This review explores the potential to join up thinking on increased choice and control for people with learning disabilities and the principles of asset based working. Commissioned by the Scottish Commission for Learning Disability, it considers the efficacy of asset based approaches for people with learning disabilities, looks at evidence of the impact these approaches can have on people’s lives and also identifies examples of good practice in Scotland. The review draws on the results of a literature review; interviews with key informants involved in asset based working and learning disability services; and a mapping of projects using asset based principles with people with learning disabilities across Scotland. The results suggest that there are is reason why the focus of assets work cannot be broadened to include opportunities for people with learning disabilities. However it suggests that asset based approaches should be seen in the context of efforts to advance the personalisation and social integration agendas, and that if that they need to fit alongside services, support systems and initiatives. Examples included in the review illustrate how services can add to the assets of individuals and communities, provided they are willing and committed to relating to people and doing things differently. Factors identified that facilitate asset based approaches with people with learning disabilities, include: addressing wider inequalities and stigma; ensuring people with learning disabilities are active participants in place based community development; and tackling attitudinal barriers and established ways of doing things.

Due North: the report of the Inquiry on Health Equity for the North

INQUIRY PANEL ON HEALTH EQUITY FOR THE NORTH OF ENGLAND
2014

This inquiry report sets out a series of strategic and practical policy recommendations to address the social inequalities in health that exist both within the North of England, and between the North and the rest of England. The inquiry, commissioned by Public Health England, was led by an independent Review Panel of leading academics, policy makers and practitioners from the North of England. The report identifies the main causes of the of health inequalities within and between North and South to be differences in the: poverty, power and resources needed for health; exposure to health damaging environments, such as poorer living and working conditions and unemployment; chronic disease and disability; and differences in opportunities to enjoy positive health factors and protective conditions that help maintain health, such as good quality early years education; control over decisions that affect your life; social support and feeling part of the society. The report provides recommendations on what agencies and central government need to do to reduce these inequalities. They cover: tackling poverty and economic inequality; promoting healthy development in early childhood; sharing power over resources and increasing the influence that the public has on how resources are used to improve the determinants of health and developing the capacity of communities to participate in local decision-making; and strengthen the role of the health sector in promoting health equity.

Evaluation of Doncaster Social Prescribing Service: understanding outcomes and impact

DAYSON Chris, BENNETT Ellen
2016

An evaluation of the Doncaster Social Prescribing Service, providing an analysis of outcomes for service users and the costs and benefits of the service between August 2015 and July 2016. It uses interviews with staff and key stakeholders from across health and social care, and users of the service; self-evaluation questionnaires from 292 people using the Service; and quality of life surveys completed by 215 users of the Service. The Social Prescribing Service reached more than 1,000 people referred by their GP, Community Nurse or Pharmacist and enabled almost 600 local people to access support within the community during the evaluation period. The main reasons for referral were a long term health or mental health condition. Positive outcomes for clients included improvements in health related quality of life (HRQL), social connectedness, and financial well-being. However, there was little evidence to suggest a reduction in the use of secondary care and inpatient stays. In health terms, the evaluation estimates that for every £1 of the £180,000 funding spent, the Service produced more than £10 of benefits in terms of better health.

The Rotherham Social Prescribing Service for people with long-term conditions: a GP perspective

DAYSON Chris, MOSS Bronwen
2017

This thematic summary report explores the benefits and challenges of the Rotherham Social Prescribing from the perspective of GPs. It draws on qualitative interviews with 10 GPs and two Practice Managers and data extract from one GP surgery. It paints an overwhelmingly positive picture of the impact of Social Prescribing on GPs and patients, and highlights how the Service has quickly become a central component in a GPs options when treating the causes and consequences of long-term health conditions. Themes that emerged from GP interviews included: enabling GPs to take a holistic approach to health, developing GPs awareness of community-level support, reductions in GP workloads and reduction in medial prescribing. When GPs were asked how Social Prescribing benefitted patients, they referred to reductions in social isolation and loneliness; prevents family and carer breakdown; and providing person centred services. They also provided reflections on Rotherham Social Prescribing model, and what worked effectively.

The Rotherham Social Prescribing Service for People with long-term conditions: evaluation update

DAYSON Chris, DAMM Chris
2017

An updated assessment of the social and economic impact of the Rotherham Social Prescribing Service between September 2012 and March 2016. Originally commissioned as a two-year pilot in 2012 the service is now funded until 2018 through the Better Care Fund. Its two core features are: advisors providing a single gateway to voluntary and community sector (VCS) support for GPs and service users (advisors assess the support needs of patients and carers before referring on to appropriate VCS services) and a grant funding programme for VCS activities to meet the needs of service users. The evaluation reports that between September 2012 and March 2016 the Rotherham Social Prescribing Service supported more than 3,000 local people with long-term health conditions and their carers. It identifies reductions in service users’ use of secondary care, reduced admissions to Accident and Emergency, and improvements in the well-being of service users. Wider benefits seen in the VCS across Rotherham, include additional investment; developing and promoting social action and volunteering; and the development of a ‘micro-commissioning’ model. The evaluation also consistently demonstrated costs avoided by the NHS, with figures across the first four years of service equating to an estimated £647,000 of NHS costs avoided: an initial return on investment of 35 pence for each pound (£1) invested.

Developing an asset based approach within a learning community: using end of life care as an example

NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR PALLIATIVE CARE
2017

The aim of the report is to be a practical guide to help extend the asset based approach already existing in end of life care into a learning and development model. Part one forms a short summary of the findings of a project that looked at ways to build a more sustainable asset based approach to workforce development and provides detail on what an asset based approach can look like and what factors need to be in place, incorporating lessons learnt, case studies and tips from those who have already explored the approach. It also contains examples of innovative resources that can be used to support learning facilitators. Part two looks at the project brief from which the practical guide originated, the methodology and the underpinning literature. It provides additional case studies and further detail on the work of Dying Matters and Dementia Friends, both networks bringing together communities to support end of life care raising awareness activities, which also offer valuable opportunities for workforce learning and development.

Results 91 - 100 of 428

#EXCLUDE#
News

LAUGH research project

LAUGH research project New practice example about a research project to develop highly personalised, playful objects for people with advanced dementia

My Guide: new case example

My Guide: new case example My Guide is a sighted guiding service, started by The Guide Dogs for the Blind Association (Guide Dogs), in which trained volunteers assist blind and partially sighted adults to get out and about, thus helping to prevent social isolation.
View more: News
Ask about support on integration, STPs and transformation
ENQUIRE
Related SCIE content
Related NICE content
Related external content
Visit Social Care Online, the UK’s largest database of information and research on all aspects of social care and social work.
SEARCH NOW
Submit prevention service example
SUBMIT
What do you think about SCIE's work?
FEEDBACK
#EXCLUDE#
#EXCLUDE#
#EXCLUDE#