Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
A systematic review of social prescribing programmes being widely promoted and adopted in the UK National Health Service found current evidence fails to provide sufficient detail to judge either success or value for money.Abstract:
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 so we conducted a systematic review 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 We included a total of 15 evaluations of social prescribing programmes. 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. Trial registration number PROSPERO Registration: CRD42015023501.read more
Citations
More filters
Dissertation
Loneliness in later life : older people's experiences and responses to loneliness
TL;DR: The authors in this paper explored how community dwelling older people who self-identify as lonely describe their experiences of loneliness, their views on involving others, including community resources, and how they respond to loneliness themselves.
Journal ArticleDOI
Social prescribing: right idea, wrong name?
TL;DR: DTB reviews consider the quantity and quality of published data on efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness, as well as practical aspects of the treatment that are likely to be important to patients.
Journal ArticleDOI
How social prescribing can benefit patients and prescribers
TL;DR: The evidence behind social prescribing, the benefits and drawbacks, and how it is gaining a higher profile in the NHS are investigated are investigated.
Journal ArticleDOI
Social isolation, residential stability, and opioid use disorder among older Medicare beneficiaries: Metropolitan and non-metropolitan county comparison
TL;DR: In this article , the authors investigated whether social isolation is associated with OUD prevalence among older Medicare beneficiaries, and examined whether and how residential stability moderates the association between social isolation and OUD in US counties, and determined if there are any differences in these associations between metropolitan and non-metropolitan counties.
Journal ArticleDOI
Interventions to Reduce the Environmental Impact of Medicines: A UK perspective✰
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examine the ways in which healthcare professionals can intervene to reduce pharmaceutical pollution and show that pharmaceuticals have wide-ranging environmental impacts, including a damaging effect on wildlife and contribute to antimicrobial resistance.
References
More filters
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration
Journal ArticleDOI
Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance
TL;DR: The Medical Research Council's evaluation framework (2000) brought welcome clarity to the task and now the council has updated its guidance.
Journal ArticleDOI
SQUIRE 2.0 (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence): revised publication guidelines from a detailed consensus process
Greg Ogrinc,Greg Ogrinc,Greg Ogrinc,Louise Davies,Louise Davies,Louise Davies,Daisy Goodman,Daisy Goodman,Paul B. Batalden,Paul B. Batalden,Frank Davidoff,David Stevens +11 more
TL;DR: The development of SQUIRE 2.0 is described, intended for reporting the range of methods used to improve healthcare, recognising that they can be complex and multidimensional.
Journal ArticleDOI
Effectiveness of physical activity promotion based in primary care: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
TL;DR: Promotion of physical activity to sedentary adults recruited in primary care significantly increases physical activity levels at 12 months, as measured by self report, and there is insufficient evidence to recommend exercise referral schemes over advice or counselling interventions.
Related Papers (5)
Non-clinical community interventions: a systematised review of social prescribing schemes
Social prescribing in general practice: adding meaning to medicine
Janet Brandling,William House +1 more