Dataset Information

Green Social Prescribing in Practice: A Case Study of Walsall, UK.

ABSTRACT: This paper presents a case study of Green Social Prescribing (GSP) in Walsall, a medium-sized urban area located in the West Midlands, UK. GSP is a means of enabling health professionals to refer people to a range of local non-clinical nature-based activities, e.g., community gardening and conservation volunteering. As a new practice to address multiple challenges in health and sustainability, GSP has been promoted by the UK government and the NHS in the past few years. There is as yet limited evidence and knowledge about how this approach is implemented at a local level. This paper addresses this gap of knowledge, by exploring how GSP is implemented in Walsall as a case study. Based on extensive engagement and research activities with the local partners to collect data, this paper reveals the local contexts of GSP, the referral pathways, and people's lived experience, discussing the challenges, barriers, and opportunities in delivering GSP at the local level. This study suggests that a more collaborative and genuine place-based approach is essential, and alongside GSP, investment into infrastructure is needed to move the health paradigm further from 'prevention' to 'promotion' so that more people can benefit from what nature can offer.

SUBMITTER: Sun Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10487442 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Green Social Prescribing in Practice: A Case Study of Walsall, UK.

Sun Qian Q Loveday Mary M Nwe Saw S Morris Nike N Boxall Emily E

International journal of environmental research and public health 20230904 17

This paper presents a case study of Green Social Prescribing (GSP) in Walsall, a medium-sized urban area located in the West Midlands, UK. GSP is a means of enabling health professionals to refer people to a range of local non-clinical nature-based activities, e.g., community gardening and conservation volunteering. As a new practice to address multiple challenges in health and sustainability, GSP has been promoted by the UK government and the NHS in the past few years. There is as yet limited e ...[more]

PMID: 37681848

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study questionWhat is the prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom, and what is the variation between practices?MethodsA cross sectional study included all adult patients potentially at risk of a prescribing or monitoring error defined by a combination of diagnoses and prescriptions in 526 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) up to 1 April 2013. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of potentially hazardous prescriptions of anticoagulants, anti-platelets, NSAIDs, β blockers, glitazones, metformin, digoxin, antipsychotics, combined hormonal contraceptives, and oestrogens and monitoring by blood test less frequently than recommended for patients with repeated prescriptions of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and loop diuretics, amiodarone, methotrexate, lithium, or warfarin.Study answer and limitations49 927 of 949 552 patients at risk triggered at least one prescribing indicator (5.26%, 95% confidence interval 5.21% to 5.30%) and 21 501 of 182 721 (11.8%, 11.6% to 11.9%) triggered at least one monitoring indicator. The prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing ranged from almost zero to 10.2%, and for inadequate monitoring ranged from 10.4% to 41.9%. Older patients and those prescribed multiple repeat medications had significantly higher risks of triggering a prescribing indicator whereas younger patients with fewer repeat prescriptions had significantly higher risk of triggering a monitoring indicator. There was high variation between practices for some indicators. Though prescribing safety indicators describe prescribing patterns that can increase the risk of harm to the patient and should generally be avoided, there will always be exceptions where the indicator is clinically justified. Furthermore there is the possibility that some information is not captured by CPRD for some practices-for example, INR results in patients receiving warfarin.What this study addsThe high prevalence for certain indicators emphasises existing prescribing risks and the need for their appropriate consideration within primary care, particularly for older patients and those taking multiple medications. The high variation between practices indicates potential for improvement through targeted practice level intervention.Funding, competing interests, data sharingNational Institute for Health Research through the Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (grant No GMPSTRC-2012-1). Data from CPRD cannot be shared because of licensing restrictions.

Project description:ObjectivesDespite widespread availability of evidence-based guidelines to inform rational use of medicines, considerable unwarranted variation exists in prescribing. A greater understanding of key determinants of contemporary prescribing in UK general practice could inform strategies to promote evidence-based prescribing. This study explored (1) current influences on prescribing in general practice and (2) the possibility that general practice-based pharmacists (PBPs) may contribute to greater engagement with evidence-based prescribing.DesignSemistructured, telephone interviews and a focus group were conducted, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was undertaken.ParticipantsGeneral practice prescribers: general practitioners (GPs), PBPs, nurses.Key informants: individuals within the National Health Service (NHS) with responsibility for influencing, monitoring and measuring general practice prescribing.SettingGeneral practices and NHS organisations in England.ResultsInterviews with 17 prescribers (GPs (n=6), PBPs (n=6), nurses (n=5)) and 6 key informants, and one focus group with five key informants were undertaken between November 2018 and April 2019. Determinants operating at individual, practice and societal levels impacted prescribing and guideline use. Prescribers' professional backgrounds, for example, nursing, pharmacy, patient populations and patient pressure were perceived as substantial influences, as well as media portrayal and public perceptions of medicines.Prescribers identified practice-level determinants of prescribing, including practice culture and shared beliefs. Key informants tended to emphasise higher-level influences, including NHS policies, availability of support and advice from secondary care and generic challenges associated with medicines use, for example, multimorbidity.Participants expressed mixed views about the potential of PBPs to promote evidence-based prescribing in general practice.ConclusionPrescribing in UK general practice is influenced by multiple intersecting factors. Strategies to promote evidence-based prescribing should target modifiable influences at practice and individual levels. Customising strategies for medical and non-medical prescribers may maximise their effectiveness.

Project description:The last decade has seen a surge of interest and investment in green social prescribing, however, both healthcare and social enterprise has been impacted by the COVID-19 crisis, along with restricted access to public green spaces. This study examines the challenges and opportunities of delivering green social prescribing during and in the aftermath of COVID-19, in the light of goals of green social prescribing to improve mental health outcomes and reduce health inequalities. Thirty-five one-to-one interviews were conducted between March 2020 and January 2022. Interviewees included Link Workers and other social prescribers, general practitioners (GPs), managers, researchers, and volunteers working in urban and rural Scotland and North East England. Interview transcripts were analyzed in stages, with an inductive approach to coding supported by NVivo. Findings revealed a complex social prescribing landscape, with schemes funded, structured, and delivered diversely. Stakeholders were in general agreement about the benefits of nature-based interventions, and GPs and volunteers pointed out numerous benefits to participating in schemes such as parkrun. Link Workers were more circumspect about suggesting outdoor activities, pointing out both psychological and practical obstacles, including health anxieties, mobility issues, and transport deficits. Exacerbated by the pandemic, there was a way to go before older and/multi-morbidity clients (their largest cohort) would feel comfortable and safe to socialize in open air spaces. Our findings support the premise that time spent in open green spaces can alleviate some of the negative mental health effects compounded by the pandemic. However, the creation of healthy environments is complex with population health intrinsically related to socioeconomic conditions. Social disadvantage, chronic ill health and health crises all limit easy access to green and blue spaces, while those in the most socially economically deprived areas receive the lowest quality of healthcare. Such health inequities need to be borne in mind in the planning of schemes and claims around the potential of future nature-based interventions to reduce health inequalities.

Project description:BackgroundAnticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) has, historically, been under-used in older people. The aim of this study was to investigate prescribing of oral anticoagulants (OACs) for people aged ≥ 75 years in the UK before and after direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) became available.MethodsA cohort of patients aged ≥ 75 years with a diagnosis of AF was derived from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) between January 1, 2003, and December 27, 2017. Patients were grouped as no OAC, incident OAC (OAC newly prescribed) or prevalent OAC (entered study on OAC). Incidence and point prevalence of OAC prescribing were calculated yearly. The risk of being prescribed an OAC if a co-morbidity was present was calculated; the risk difference (RD) was reported. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to explore persistence with anticoagulation. A Cox regression was used to model persistence with warfarin and DOACs over time.ResultsThe cohort comprised 165,596 patients (66,859 no OAC; 47,916 incident OAC; 50,821 prevalent OAC). Incidence of OAC prescribing increased from 111 per 1000 person-years in 2003 to 587 per 1000 person-years in 2017. Older patients (≥ 90 years) were 40% less likely to receive an OAC (RD -0.40, 95% CI -0.41 to -0.39) than younger individuals (75-84 years). The likelihood of being prescribed an OAC was lower with a history of dementia (RD -0.34, 95% CI -0.35 to -0.33), falls (RD -0.17, 95% CI -0.18 to -0.16), major bleeds (RD -0.17, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.15) and fractures (RD -0.13, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.12). Persistence with warfarin was higher than DOACs in the first year (0-1 year: HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.17-1.33), but this trend reversed by the third year of therapy (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89).ConclusionsOAC prescribing for older people with AF has increased; however, substantial disparities persist with age and co-morbidities. Whilst OACs should not be withheld solely due to the risk of falls, these results do not reflect this national guidance. Furthermore, the under-prescribing of OACs for patients with dementia or advancing age may be due to decisions around risk-benefit management.Trial registrationEUPAS29923 . First registered on: 27/06/2019.

Dataset Information

Green Social Prescribing in Practice: A Case Study of Walsall, UK.

Publications

Green Social Prescribing in Practice: A Case Study of Walsall, UK.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets