Urgent and emergency care (UEC) systems in England face unprecedented pressures, with record accident and emergency attendances, persistent breaches of ambulance response targets and poorer outcomes for time-sensitive conditions. National UEC recovery plans have introduced multiple innovations—such as same-day emergency care, virtual wards and specialty hubs—to manage these pressures and improve patient flow. Rural coastal areas are particularly vulnerable to excessive demand due to higher levels of deprivation, older populations with complex health needs, seasonal surges that generate unpredictable demand and challenges in attracting and retaining staff. Following the Chief Medical Officer’s 2021 Annual Report, funding research and developing bespoke solutions to manage UEC demand and address geographical disparities has been recognised as a national priority. The Elevate study responds to this priority by identifying and evaluating innovative models of UEC in rural coastal communities in England.

The Elevate study is a 30-month, mixed-methods evaluation that comprises three interlinked work packages: (1) National service mapping—outlining provision of innovative models of UEC in rural coastal areas of England. This will be developed through document review and interviews with regional and national service leaders. (2) Quantitative analysis—quasiexperimental and longitudinal approaches will use National Health Service (NHS) England’s Emergency Care Data Set and linked routine NHS datasets to evaluate the impact of UEC models on health and process outcomes. Standard and bespoke metrics will be developed and used to assess performance. (3) Qualitative case studies—up to 12 case studies of UEC models in rural coastal communities. Interviews with patients and staff and non-participant observation will explore how and why different UEC models influence patient experience, clinical outcomes, resource use and the workforce. Findings will be integrated using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify components of UEC models that are effective, scalable and sensitive to local context,

Ethical approval for qualitative components was granted by the North of Scotland Research Ethics Committee (25/NS/0099). Dissemination will include peer-reviewed publications, policy briefs, creative media and community engagement activities to ensure findings are communicated inclusively and effectively to policymakers, health and social care practitioners and the public.

Research Registry (researchregistry11126).

Lower gastrointestinal symptoms attributed to colorectal disease are common. Early diagnosis of serious colorectal disease such as colorectal cancer (CRC), precancerous growths (polyps) and inflammation is important to ensure the best possible outcomes for a patient. The current ‘gold standard’ diagnostic test is colonoscopy. Colonoscopy is an invasive procedure. Some people struggle to cope with it and require intravenous sedation and/or analgesia. It is also resource-intensive, needing to be performed in specialist endoscopy units by a trained team. Across the UK, the demand for colonoscopy is outstripping capacity and the diagnosis of colorectal disease is being delayed. A colon capsule endoscope (CCE) is an alternative colorectal diagnostic. It is a ‘camera in a pill’ that can be swallowed and which passes through the gastrointestinal tract, obtaining visual images on the colon. There is now established experience of CCE in the UK. CCE might provide a less invasive method to diagnose colorectal disease if found to be accurate and effective and provide a means by which to increase the National Health Service (NHS) diagnostic capacity.

The aim of this study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CCE when compared with colonoscopy in representative and clinically meaningful cohorts of patients. An evaluation of the experiences of CCE for the patient and clinical team and an assessment of cost effectiveness will be undertaken.

We will undertake three research workstreams (WS). In WS1, we shall perform a paired (back-to-back) study. Each participant will swallow the CCE and then later on the same day they will have a colonoscopy. The study has been designed in collaboration with our Patient Advisory Group and as closely mirrors standard care as is possible. 973 participants will be recruited from three representative clinical contexts; suspected CRC, suspected inflammatory bowel disease and postpolypectomy surveillance. Up to 30 sites across the UK will be involved to maximise inclusivity. Measures of diagnostic accuracy will be reported along with CCE completion rates, number of colonoscopy procedures potentially prevented and adverse events, such as capsule retention. A nested substudy of intraobserver and interobserver agreement will be performed. WS2 will develop models of cost-effectiveness and WS3 will evaluate the patient and clinician experience, with reference to acceptability and choice.

The study findings will provide the evidence base to inform future colorectal diagnostic services.

The study has approval from the North East—Tyne and Wear South research ethics committee (REC reference 24/NE/0178, IRAS 331349). The findings will be disseminated to the NHS, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, other clinical stakeholders and participants, patients and the public.

ISRCTN16126290.