Neoadjuvant therapy has become a standard treatment for patients with stage II/III HER2 positive and triple negative breast cancer, and in well-selected patients with locally advanced and borderline resectable high risk, luminal B breast cancer. Side effects of neoadjuvant therapy, such as fatigue, cardiotoxicity, neurotoxicity, anxiety, insomnia, vasomotor symptoms, gastrointestinal disturbance as well as a raft of immune-related adverse events, may impact treatment tolerance, long-term outcomes, and quality of life. Providing early supportive care prior to surgery (typically termed ‘prehabilitation’) may mitigate these side effects and improve quality of life.

During our codesign of the intervention, consumers and healthcare professionals expressed desire for a programme that ‘packaged’ care, was easy to access, and was embedded in their care pathway. We hypothesise that a multimodal supportive care programme including exercise and complementary therapies, underpinned by behavioural change theory will improve self-efficacy, quality of life, readiness for surgery and any additional treatment for women with breast cancer. We seek to explore cardiometabolic, residual cancer burden and surgical outcomes, along with chemotherapy completion (relative dose intensity). This article describes the protocol for a feasibility study of a multimodal prehabilitation programme.

This is a prospective, mixed-method, feasibility study of a multi-modal programme in a hospital setting for 20–30 women with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Primary outcomes are recruitment rate, retention rate, adherence and acceptability. Secondary outcomes include patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), surgical outcomes, length of stay, satisfaction with surgery, chemotherapy completion rates, changes in metabolic markers and adverse events. Interviews and focus groups to understand the experience with prehabilitation and different factors that may affect feasibility of the intervention . The output of this study will be a codesigned, evidence-informed intervention assessed for feasibility and acceptability by women with breast cancer and the healthcare professionals that care for them.

The study received ethics approval from the St Vincents Hospital HREC (HREC/2021/ETH12198). Trial results will be communicated to participants, healthcare professionals, and the public via publication and conferences.

ACTRN12622000584730.

To explore how healthcare practitioners (HCPs) made decisions about the implementation of digital health technologies (DHTs) in their clinical practice before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A multimethods study, comprising semistructured interviews conducted prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, supplemented with an online survey that was conducted during the pandemic with a different sample, to ensure the qualitative findings remained relevant within the rapidly changing healthcare context. Participants were recruited through HCP networks, snowballing and social media. Data were analysed thematically.

Phone interviews and online survey.

HCPs represented a range of professions from primary and secondary care across England, with varied socioeconomic deprivation.

24 HCPs were interviewed, and 16 HCPs responded to the survey. In the interviews, HCPs described three levels where decisions were made, which determined who would have access to what DHTs: health organisation, HCP and patient levels. These decisions resulted in the unequal implementation of DHTs across health services, created barriers for HCPs using DHTs in their practice and influenced HCPs’ decisions on which patients to supply DHTs with. In the survey, HCPs described being provided support to overcome some of the barriers at the organisation and HCP level during the pandemic. However, they cited similar concerns to pre-pandemic about barriers patients faced using DHTs (eg, digital literacy). In the absence of centralised guidance on how to manage these barriers, health services made their own decisions about how to adapt their services for those who struggled with DHTs.

Decision-making at the health organisation, HCP and patient levels influences inequalities in access to DHTs for HCPs and patients. The mobilisation of centralised information and resources during the pandemic can be viewed as good practice for reducing barriers to use of DHTs for HCPs. However, attention must also be paid to reducing barriers to accessing DHTs for patients.

Mental health inpatient facilities are increasingly focusing on creating therapeutic, person-centred care environments. However, research shows that this focus may have unintended consequences for healthcare staff. Designs that do not pay attention to staff needs may risk contributing to stress, burnout, job dissatisfaction and mental exhaustion in the work environment. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise current research on the design factors of adult mental health inpatient facilities that impact healthcare staff.

A mixed method systematic review was conducted to search for empirical, peer-reviewed studies using the databases CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science from their inception up to 5 September 2023. The Joanna Briggs Institute’s critical appraisal checklists were used to assess the methodological quality of the eligible studies. Data were extracted and grouped based on the facility design factors.

In our review, we included 29 peer-reviewed empirical studies that identified crucial design factors impacting healthcare staff in adult mental health inpatient facilities. Key factors included layouts providing optimal visibility, designated work and respite areas, and centrally located nursing stations. Notably, mixed perceptions regarding the benefits and challenges of open and glass-enclosed nursing stations suggest areas requiring further research. Facilities in geographically remote locations also emerged as a factor influencing staff dynamics. Additionally, although only supported by a limited number of studies, the significance of artwork, sensory rooms for respite, appropriate furniture and equipment, and access to alarms was acknowledged as contributory factors.

Through the synthesis of existing research, this review identified that the design of mental health facilities significantly impacts staff well-being, satisfaction, performance and perception of safety. Concluding that, in order to create a well-designed therapeutic environment, it is essential to account for both service users and staff user needs.

CRD42022368155.

Women with complex health needs are more at risk of having children’s social care involvement with their newborns than other mothers. Around the time of pregnancy, there are opportunities for health services to support women with these needs and mitigate the risk of mother–baby separation. Yet little is known about healthcare professionals’ experiences of providing this support.

We administered an online survey to perinatal healthcare professionals across England (n=70 responders), including midwives, obstetricians, perinatal psychologists/psychiatrists and health visitors. We asked about their experiences of providing care for pregnant women with chronic physical conditions, mental health needs, intellectual/developmental disabilities and substance use disorders, who might be at risk of children’s social care involvement. We conducted a framework analysis.

We constructed five themes from participant data. These include (1) inaccessible healthcare for women with complex needs, (2) the challenges and importance of restoring trust, (3) services focusing on individuals, not families, (4) the necessity and caution around multidisciplinary support and (5) underfunded services inhibiting good practice.

Women who are at risk of children’s social care involvement will likely experience perinatal healthcare inequities. Our findings suggest that current perinatal healthcare provision for this population is inadequate and national guidelines need updated to inform support.

To assess the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an informal caregiver training programme to support the recovery of people following hip fracture surgery.

Two-arm, multicentre, pragmatic, open, feasibility RCT with embedded qualitative study.

National Health Service (NHS) providers in five English hospitals.

Community-dwelling adults, aged 60 years and over, who undergo hip fracture surgery and their informal caregivers.

Usual care: usual NHS care. Experimental: usual NHS care plus a caregiver–patient dyad training programme (HIP HELPER). This programme comprised three, 1 hour, one-to-one training sessions for a patient and caregiver, delivered by a nurse, physiotherapist or occupational therapist in the hospital setting predischarge. After discharge, patients and caregivers were supported through three telephone coaching sessions.

Central randomisation was computer generated (1:1), stratified by hospital and level of patient cognitive impairment. There was no blinding.

Data collected at baseline and 4 months post randomisation included: screening logs, intervention logs, fidelity checklists, acceptability data and clinical outcomes. Interviews were conducted with a subset of participants and health professionals.

102 participants were enrolled (51 patients; 51 caregivers). Thirty-nine per cent (515/1311) of patients screened were eligible. Eleven per cent (56/515) of eligible patients consented to be randomised. Forty-eight per cent (12/25) of the intervention group reached compliance to their allocated intervention. There was no evidence of treatment contamination. Qualitative data demonstrated the trial and HIP HELPER programme was acceptable.

The HIP HELPER programme was acceptable to patient–caregiver dyads and health professionals. The COVID-19 pandemic impacting on site’s ability to deliver the research. Modifications are necessary to the design for a viable definitive RCT.

ISRCTN13270387.

Treatment for multidrug-resistant/rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/RR-TB) is increasingly transitioning from hospital-centred to community-based care. A national policy for decentralised programmatic MDR/RR-TB care was adopted in South Africa in 2011. We explored variations in the implementation of care models in response to this change in policy, and the implications of these variations for people affected by MDR/RR-TB.

A mixed methods study was done of patient movements between healthcare facilities, reconstructed from laboratory records. Facility visits and staff interviews were used to determine reasons for movements.

People identified with MDR/RR-TB from 13 high-burden districts within South Africa.

Geospatial movement patterns were used to identify organisational models. Reasons for patient movement and implications of different organisational models for people affected by MDR/RR-TB and the health system were determined.

Among 191 participants, six dominant geospatial movement patterns were identified, which varied in average hospital stay (0–281 days), average patient distance travelled (12–198 km) and number of health facilities involved in care (1–5 facilities). More centralised models were associated with longer delays to treatment initiation and lengthy hospitalisation. Decentralised models facilitated family-centred care and were associated with reduced time to treatment and hospitalisation duration. Responsiveness to the needs of people affected by MDR/RR-TB and health system constraints was achieved through implementation of flexible models, or the implementation of multiple models in a district.

Understanding how models for organising care have evolved may assist policy implementers to tailor implementation to promote particular patterns of care organisation or encourage flexibility, based on patient needs and local health system resources. Our approach can contribute towards the development of a health systems typology for understanding how policy-driven models of service delivery are implemented in the context of variable resources.