Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence
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
Journal ArticleDOI
Contextual Factors and Programme Theories Associated with Implementing Blue Prescription Programmes: A Systematic Realist Review
J. C. Alejandre,Sebastien F. M. Chastin,Katherine N. Irvine,Michail Georgiou,Preeti Khanna,Zoë Tieges,Niamh Smith,Yong-Yee Chong,Frances Claire C Onagan,Lesley Price,Sharon Pfleger,Rachel Helliwell,Judith A. Singleton,Sam Curran,Allan Estandarte,Emily Sophia Smith,Karin Helwig +16 more
TL;DR: A systematic realist review by searching PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Scopus, MEDLINE, and CINAHL for articles published in English between January 2000 and June 2022 about health and social care professionals providing referral to or prescription of blue space activities (e.g., swimming, fishing, surfing, etc.) with health-related outcomes as discussed by the authors .
Journal ArticleDOI
Social prescribing from the patient's perspective: A literature review
TL;DR: The study revealed that SP services in the UK enabled patients to feel comfort in many cases, but general practitioners, link workers, and patients should be collaborative with each other, and their interrelationships should not be hierarchical.
Dissertation
Cultural activities in mental health care : ordinary participation to be in and of the Community
Journal ArticleDOI
Social Determinants of Mental and Behavioral Health
TL;DR: This paper found that many of the life experiences that worsen mental health and exacerbate serious mental illness are associated with social policies and cultural norms that are changeable and cannot be easily modified by modifying genetic predisposition.
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