Acceptability of reducing sedentariness using a mobile-phone application based on 'if then' plans for people with psychosis: A focus-group study conducted in North West England, UK

Acceptability of a proposed practice pharmacist-led review for opioid-treated patients with persistent pain: A qualitative study to inform intervention development

Introduction

Regular review of patients prescribed opioids for persistent non-cancer pain (PCNP) is recommended but not routinely undertaken. The PROMPPT (Proactive clinical Review of patients taking Opioid Medicines long-term for persistent Pain led by clinical Pharmacists in primary care Teams) research programme aims to develop and test a pharmacist-led pain review (PROMPPT) to reduce inappropriate opioid use for persistent pain in primary care. This study explored the acceptability of the proposed PROMPPT review to inform early intervention development.

Methods

Interviews (n = 15) and an online discussion forum (n = 31) with patients prescribed opioids for PCNP and interviews with pharmacists (n = 13), explored acceptability of a proposed PROMPPT review. A prototype PROMPPT review was then tested and refined through 3 iterative cycles of in-practice testing (IPT) (n = 3 practices, n = 3 practice pharmacists, n = 13 patients). Drawing on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA), a framework was generated (including a priori TFA constructs) allowing for deductive and inductive thematic analysis to identify aspects of prospective and experienced acceptability.

Results

Patients felt uncertain about practice pharmacists delivering the proposed PROMPPT review leading to development of content for the invitation letter for IPT (introducing the pharmacist and outlining the aim of the review). After IPT, patients felt that pharmacists were suited to the role as they were knowledgeable and qualified. Pharmacists felt that the proposed reviews would be challenging. Although challenges were experienced during delivery of PROMPPT reviews, pharmacists found that they became easier to deliver with time, practise and experience. Recommendations for optimisations after IPT included development of the training to include examples of challenging consultations.

Conclusions

Uptake of new healthcare interventions is influenced by perceptions of acceptability. Exploring prospective and experienced acceptability at multiple time points during early intervention development, led to mini-optimisations of the prototype PROMPPT review ahead of a non-randomised feasibility study.

Framework for understanding movement and physical activity in patients diagnosed with psychosis

BACKGROUND

Patients diagnosed with psychosis often spend less time than others engaged in exercise and more time sitting down, which likely contributes to poorer physical and mental health.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a comprehensive framework from the perspective of patients, carers, and staff for understanding what promotes movement and physical activity.

METHODS

A critical realist approach was taken to design the study. Interviews (n=23) and focus groups (n=12) were conducted with (1) outpatients aged 16 years or older diagnosed with psychosis, and under the care of a mental health team, (2) carers and (3) mental health staff working in the community. Purposive sampling was used to maximise variation in participant characteristics. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

FINDINGS

19 patients (9 women and 10 men, mean age=45·0 (SD=12·2) years, 15 White British, 2 Black African, 1 Pakistani and 1 other ethnic group), 14 carers (11 women and 3 men, mean age=59·9 (SD=12·7) years, 13 White British and 1 Asian) and 18 staff (14 women and 4 men, mean age=38·7 (SD=12·3) years, 15 White British, 1 White other, 1 Asian Bangladeshi and 1 other Asian) participated in the study. Five factors were found to promote movement and physical activity. Patients must be able to find a purpose to moving which is meaningful to them (Factor 1: Purpose). Patients need to have an expectation of the positive consequences of movement and physical activity, which can be influenced by others' expectations (Factor 2: Predictions). A patient's current physical (eg, pain) and emotional state (eg, distress about voices) needs to be addressed to allow movement and physical activity (Factor 3: Present state). Movement and physical activity can also be encouraged by the availability of effective and tailored support, provided by engaged and supported people (Factor 4: Provision). Finally, through the identification and interruption of vicious cycles (eg, between inactivity and mood states) more positive cycles can be put in place (Factor 5: Process).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The 5 P (Purpose, Predictions, Present state, Provision and Process Physical Activity Framework) for understanding movement and physical activity for people diagnosed with psychosis has the potential to inform future research and guide interventions. A checklist is provided for clinicians to help foster change in activity levels.