1
|
Wright L, Bennett S, Meredith P, Doig E. Planning for Change: Co-Designing Implementation Strategies to Improve the Use of Sensory Approaches in an Acute Psychiatric Unit. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2023; 44:960-973. [PMID: 37643312 DOI: 10.1080/01612840.2023.2236712] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
Abstract
Implementing sensory approaches in psychiatric units has proven challenging. This multi-staged study involved qualitative interviews (n = 7) with mental health care staff in an acute psychiatric ward to identify the local factors influencing use of sensory approaches, and co-design implementation strategies with key stakeholders to improve their use. Using framework analysis, results revealed that the use of sensory approaches were hindered by: inadequate access to sensory resources/equipment; lack of time; lack of staff knowledge; and belief that sensory approaches are not effective or part of staff's role. To address identified barriers a systematic theory-informed method was used to co-design implementation strategies to improve the use of sensory approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lisa Wright
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
- Metro North Mental Health - The Prince Charles Hospital, Metro North Health, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Sally Bennett
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Pamela Meredith
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
- School of Health and Behavioural Sciences, University of Sunshine Coast, Sunshine Coast, Australia
| | - Emmah Doig
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
- STARS Education and Research Alliance, Metro North Health, Brisbane, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Conroy D, Smith DM, Armitage CJ. Very small effects of an imagery-based randomised trial to promote adherence to wearing face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic and identification of future intervention targets. Psychol Health 2023; 38:1288-1308. [PMID: 35014578 DOI: 10.1080/08870446.2021.2012574] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2021] [Revised: 11/19/2021] [Accepted: 11/24/2021] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Mental imagery interventions are a cost-effective way of promoting health behaviour change. We tested a mental imagery intervention designed to promote adherence to wearing face coverings during the COVID-19 pandemic.Design: A four-arm randomised controlled trial to explore potential mechanisms of action. Main outcome measures: Measures of behaviour (frequency of self-reported face covering adherence), theory of planned behaviour constructs (i.e. intention, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control), personality traits, imagery ability and barrier self-efficacy were measured at baseline (T1). Behaviour was also assessed at four-week follow-up (T2).Results: Of 297 participants, a majority always wore face coverings (N = 216, 73% overall sample). Logistic regression analyses revealed no intervention effects on changes in adherence to wearing face coverings, though T1 wearing of face coverings and being male predicted T2 behaviour. Subgroup analysis of participants self-reporting 'suboptimal T1 adherence, revealed that T2 non-adherence was predicted by being a non-student and by subjective norms and lower T1 intention to wear face coverings.Conclusion: Imagery-based interventions to increase face covering wearing adherence may exert significant public health effects but only when conducted on a very large scale. Our findings suggest that interventions should target men and disrupt habitual past behaviour.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dominic Conroy
- School of Social Sciences and Professions, London Metropolitan University, London, UK
| | - Debbie M Smith
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Perinatal Mental Health and Research Unit (PRIME-RU), Manchester, UK
| | - Christopher J Armitage
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Faija CL, Connell J, Gellatly J, Rushton K, Lovell K, Brooks H, Armitage C, Bower P, Bee P. Enhancing the quality of psychological interventions delivered by telephone in mental health services: increasing the likelihood of successful implementation using a theory of change. BMC Psychiatry 2023; 23:405. [PMID: 37280575 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-023-04829-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2023] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The implementation of new and complex interventions in mental health settings can be challenging. This paper explores the use of a Theory of Change (ToC) for intervention design and evaluation to increase the likelihood of complex interventions being effective, sustainable, and scalable. Our intervention was developed to enhance the quality of psychological interventions delivered by telephone in primary care mental health services. METHODS A ToC represents how our designed quality improvement intervention targeting changes at service, practitioner, and patient levels was expected to improve engagement in, and the quality of, telephone-delivered psychological therapies. The intervention was evaluated following implementation in a feasibility study within three NHS Talking Therapies services through a qualitative research design incorporating semi-structured interviews and a focus group with key stakeholders (patients, practitioners, and service leads) (N = 15). Data were analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and the ToC was examined and modified accordingly following the findings. RESULTS CFIR analysis highlighted a set of challenges encountered during the implementation of our service quality improvement telephone intervention that appeared to have weakened the contribution to the change mechanisms set out by the initial ToC. Findings informed changes to the intervention and refinement of the ToC and are expected to increase the likelihood of successful future implementation in a randomised controlled trial. CONCLUSIONS Four key recommendations that could help to optimise implementation of a complex intervention involving different key stakeholder groups in any setting were identified. These include: 1-developing a good understanding of the intervention and its value among those receiving the intervention; 2-maximising engagement from key stakeholders; 3-ensuring clear planning and communication of implementation goals; and 4-encouraging the use of strategies to monitor implementation progress.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cintia L Faija
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
| | - Janice Connell
- Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - Judith Gellatly
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Kelly Rushton
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Karina Lovell
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
- Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Helen Brooks
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| | - Christopher Armitage
- Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, Division of Psychology and Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Manchester, UK
- NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Peter Bower
- Centre for Primary Care and Centre for Health Informatics, NIHR School for Primary Care Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Penny Bee
- School of Health Sciences, Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Waddell A, Spassova G, Sampson L, Jungbluth L, Dam J, Bragge P. Co-designing a theory-informed intervention to increase shared decision-making in maternity care. Health Res Policy Syst 2023; 21:15. [PMID: 36721156 PMCID: PMC9888748 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-023-00959-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2022] [Accepted: 01/09/2023] [Indexed: 02/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Shared decision-making (SDM) has been shown to improve healthcare outcomes and is a recognized right of patients. Policy requires health services to implement SDM. However, there is limited research into what interventions work and for what reasons. The aim of the study was to develop a series of interventions to increase the use of SDM in maternity care with stakeholders. METHODS Interventions to increase the use of SDM in the setting of pregnancy care were developed using Behaviour Change Wheel and Theoretical Domains Framework and building on findings of an in-depth qualitative study which were inductively analysed. Intervention development workshops involved co-design, with patients, clinicians, health service administrators and decision-makers, and government policy makers. Workshops focused on identifying viable SDM opportunities and tailoring interventions to the local context (the Royal Women's Hospital) and salient qualitative themes. RESULTS Pain management options during labour were identified by participants as a high priority for application of SDM, and three interventions were developed including patient and clinician access to the Victorian Government's maternity record via the patient portal and electronic medical records (EMR); a multi-layered persuasive communications campaign designed; and clinical champions and SDM simulation training. Factors identified by participants for successful implementation included having alignment with strategic direction of the service, support of leaders, using pre-standing resources and workflows, using clinical champions, and ensuring equity. CONCLUSION Three interventions co-designed to increase the use of SDM for pain management during labour address key barriers and facilitators to SDM in maternity care. This study exemplifies how health services can use behavioural science and co-design principles to increase the use of SDM. Insights into the co-design of interventions to implement SDM in routine practice provide a framework for other health services, policy makers and researchers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alex Waddell
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia.
- Victorian Department of Health, Safer Care Victoria, 50 Lonsdale St, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.
| | - Gerri Spassova
- Department of Marketing, Monash Business School, 900 Dandenong Rd, Caulfield East, Victoria, 3145, Australia
| | - Louise Sampson
- Royal Women's Hospital, 20 Flemington Rd, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, 3052, Australia
| | - Lena Jungbluth
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia
| | - Jennifer Dam
- Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton Campus, VIC, 3800, Clayton, Australia
| | - Peter Bragge
- Evidence Review Service, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Monash University, 8 Scenic Boulevard, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Paltin D, Montoya JL, Weise C, Conroy C, Radatz EE, Strange KC, Moore DJ, Sajatovic M, Levin JB. Effective engagement of a stakeholder advisory board in severe mental illness (SMI) research: A case study of a clinical trial to improve adherence among people with SMI and hypertension. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTHCARE 2022; 8:9-18. [PMID: 36741506 PMCID: PMC9894380 DOI: 10.5430/ijh.v8n2p9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Objective Poor adherence to antihypertensive medication occurs in 50-80% of patients. An ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT) is evaluating a personalized mobile-health intervention in poorly adherent hypertensive persons with bipolar disorder. To enhance efficacy, the ongoing trial elicited guidance from a Stakeholder Advisory Board (SAB) comprised of patients, family members, clinicians, and health system administrators. Our goal is to describe the formation, role, decision-making process, and key contributions of the SAB as a means of demonstrating meaningful community engagement in mental health research. Methods Using models and measures from the field of implementation science, eleven SAB members convened across three meetings followed by quantitative surveys that assessed SAB member satisfaction and engagement during the meeting. Results Significant suggestions from the SAB included 1) expanding inclusion/exclusion criteria, and 2) operationalizing remote implementation of the RCT. Primary study implementation challenges identified by the SAB were 1) participant difficulty engaging in the mHealth intervention, and 2) identification of procedures for monitoring participant adherence to the RCT protocol and contacting under-engaged participants. Quantitative surveys indicated that all SAB members believed that the objectives of the meetings were clear, perceived that they were able to participate in the discussions, and that they were heard. Conclusions Increasing evidence demonstrates the feasibility of engaging with SABs in clinical research and that this process improves intervention design, increases participant engagement, reduces mental health-related stigma, and produces more effective implementation strategies. We encourage future investigators to use an implementation science framework in partnership with SABs to refine their proposed interventions and improve clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dafna Paltin
- SDSU/UC San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, California, USA
| | | | - Celeste Weise
- Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Carla Conroy
- Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Ethan E. Radatz
- Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Kurt C. Strange
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - David J. Moore
- Department of Psychiatry, UC San Diego, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Martha Sajatovic
- Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Neurological and Behavioral Outcomes Center, University Hospitals of Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Jennifer B. Levin
- Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Neurological and Behavioral Outcomes Center, University Hospitals of Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
- Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wei H, Daniels S, Whitfield CA, Han Y, Denning DW, Hall I, Regan M, Verma A, van Tongeren M. Agility and Sustainability: A Qualitative Evaluation of COVID-19 Non-pharmaceutical Interventions in the UK Logistics Sector. Front Public Health 2022; 10:864506. [PMID: 35719658 PMCID: PMC9198245 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.864506] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Accepted: 05/10/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The emergence of SARS-CoV-2 triggered a chain of public health responses that radically changed our way of living and working. Non-healthcare sectors, such as the logistics sector, play a key role in such responses. This research aims to qualitatively evaluate the non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented in the UK logistics sector during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted nine semi-structured interviews in July-August 2020 and May-June 2021. In total 11 interviewees represented six companies occupying a range of positions in the UK's logistics sector, including takeaway food delivery, large and small goods delivery and home appliance installation, and logistics technology providers. Thematic analysis was completed using NVivo12. Codes relevant to NPIs were grouped into themes and mapped deductively onto an adapted Hierarchy of Control (HoC) framework, focusing on delivery workers. Codes relevant to the implementation process of NPIs were grouped into themes/subthemes to identify key characteristics of rapid responses, and barriers and facilitators. Results HoC analysis suggests the sector has implemented a wide range of risk mitigation measures, with each company developing their own portfolio of measures. Contact-free delivery was the most commonly implemented measure and perceived effective. The other implemented measures included social distancing, internal contact tracing, communication and collaboration with other key stakeholders of the sector. Process evaluation identified facilitators of rapid responses including capacity to develop interventions internally, localized government support, strong external mandates, effective communication, leadership support and financial support for self-isolation, while barriers included unclear government guidance, shortage of testing capacity and supply, high costs and diversified language and cultural backgrounds. Main sustainability issues included compliance fatigue, and the possible mental health impacts of a prolonged rapid response. Conclusions This research identified drivers and obstacles of rapid implementation of NPIs in response to a respiratory infection pandemic. Existing implementation process models do not consider speed to respond and the absence or lack of guidance in emergency situations such as the COVID-19. We recommend the development of a rapid response model to inform the design of effective and sustainable infection prevention and control policies and to focus future research priorities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hua Wei
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Sarah Daniels
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Carl A. Whitfield
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Department of Mathematics, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Yang Han
- Department of Mathematics, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - David W. Denning
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Division of Evolution, Infection & Genomics, School of Biological Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Ian Hall
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Department of Mathematics, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Public Health, Advice, Guidance and Expertise, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom
| | - Martyn Regan
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- National COVID-19 Response Centre, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom
| | - Arpana Verma
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Martie van Tongeren
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Tyler N, Planner C, Byrne M, Blakeman T, Keers RN, Wright O, Pascall Jones P, Giles S, Keyworth C, Hodkinson A, Taylor CDJ, Armitage CJ, Campbell S, Panagioti M. Developing Best Practice Guidance for Discharge Planning Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Front Psychiatry 2021; 12:789418. [PMID: 34925112 PMCID: PMC8680088 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.789418] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/04/2021] [Accepted: 11/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Discharge from acute mental health inpatient units is often a vulnerable period for patients. Multiple professionals and agencies are involved and processes and procedures are not standardized, often resulting in communication delays and co-ordination failures. Early and appropriate discharge planning and standardization of procedures could make inpatient care safer. Aim: To inform the development of a multi-component best practice guidance for discharge planning (including the 6 component SAFER patient flow bundle) to support safer patient transition from mental health hospitals to the community. Methods: Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness method, a panel of 10 professional stakeholders (psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, clinical psychologists, pharmacists, academics, and policy makers) rated evidence-based statements. Six hundred and sixty-eight statements corresponding to 10 potential components of discharge planning best practice were rated on a 9-point integer scale for clarity, appropriateness and feasibility (median ≥ 7-9) using an online questionnaire then remote online face-to-face meetings. Results: Five of the six "SAFER" patient flow bundle components were appropriate and feasible for inpatient mental health. One component, "Early Flow," was rated inappropriate as mental health settings require more flexibility. Overall, 285 statements were rated as appropriate and feasible. Forty-four statements were considered appropriate but not feasible to implement. Discussion: This consensus study has identified components of a best practice guidance/intervention for discharge planning for UK mental health settings. Although some components describe processes that already happen in everyday clinical interactions (i.e., review by a senior clinician), standardizing such processes could have important safety benefits alongside a tailored and timely approach to post-discharge care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Natasha Tyler
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,National Institute for Health Research, School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Claire Planner
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Matthew Byrne
- Division of Dentistry, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas Blakeman
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Richard N Keers
- Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, Division of Pharmacy and Optometry, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Suicide, Risk and Safety Research Unit, Greater Manchester Mental Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Oliver Wright
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Paul Pascall Jones
- Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, Centre for Primary Care and Health Services Research, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Sally Giles
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Chris Keyworth
- School of Psychology, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
| | - Alexander Hodkinson
- National Institute for Health Research, School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Christopher D J Taylor
- Secondary Care Psychological Therapies Service, Pennine Care National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, Bury, United Kingdom.,Division of Psychology and Mental Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Christopher J Armitage
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,Manchester Centre for Health Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,University National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, Manchester, United Kingdom.,National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Manchester Biomedical Research Council, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Campbell
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,National Institute for Health Research, School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Maria Panagioti
- National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.,National Institute for Health Research, School for Primary Care Research, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|