Supporting self-management: development and evaluation of a digital resource for adults with asthma

The problem: Around 300 million people worldwide have asthma and prevalence is increasing. Support for optimal self-management can be effective in improving a range of outcomes and is cost effective, but is underutilised as a treatment strategy. Supporting optimum self-management using digital technology shows promise, but how best to do this is not clear. Aim: The purpose of this project was to explore the potential role of a digital intervention in promoting optimum self-management in adults with asthma. Methods: Following the MRC Guidance on the Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions which advocates using theory, evidence, user testing and appropriate modelling and piloting, this project had 3 phases. Phase 1: Examination of the literature to inform phases 2 and 3, using systematic review methods and focussed literature searching. Phase 2: Developing the Living Well with Asthma website. A prototype (paper-based) version of the website was developed iteratively with input from a multidisciplinary expert panel, empirical evidence from the literature (from phase 1), and potential end users via focus groups (adults with asthma and practice nurses). Implementation and behaviour change theories informed this process. The paper-based designs were converted to the website through an iterative user centred process (think aloud studies with adults with asthma). Participants considered contents, layout, and navigation. Development was agile using feedback from the think aloud sessions immediately to inform design and subsequent think aloud sessions. Phase 3: A pilot randomised controlled trial over 12 weeks to evaluate the feasibility of a Phase 3 trial of Living Well with Asthma to support self-management. Primary outcomes were 1) recruitment & retention; 2) website use; 3) Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) score change from baseline; 4) Mini Asthma Quality of Life (AQLQ) score change from baseline. Secondary outcomes were patient activation, adherence, lung function, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), generic quality of life measure (EQ-5D), medication use, prescribing and health services contacts. Results: Phase1: Demonstrated that while digital interventions show promise, with some evidence of effectiveness in certain outcomes, participants were poorly characterised, telling us little about the reach of these interventions. The interventions themselves were poorly described making drawing definitive conclusions about what worked and what did not impossible. Phase 2: The literature indicated that important aspects to cover in any self-management intervention (digital or not) included: asthma action plans, regular health professional review, trigger avoidance, psychological functioning, self-monitoring, inhaler technique, and goal setting. The website asked users to aim to be symptom free. Key behaviours targeted to achieve this include: optimising medication use (including inhaler technique); attending primary care asthma reviews; using asthma action plans; increasing physical activity levels; and stopping smoking. The website had 11 sections, plus email reminders, which promoted these behaviours. Feedback during think aloud studies was mainly positive with most changes focussing on clarification of language, order of pages and usability issues mainly relating to navigation difficulties. Phase 3: To achieve our recruitment target 5383 potential participants were invited, leading to 51 participants randomised (25 to intervention group). Age range 16-78 years; 75% female; 28% from most deprived quintile. Nineteen (76%) of the intervention group used the website for an average of 23 minutes. Non-significant improvements in favour of the intervention group observed in the ACQ score (-0.36; 95% confidence interval: -0.96, 0.23; p=0.225), and mini-AQLQ scores (0.38; -0.13, 0.89; p=0.136). A significant improvement was observed in the activity limitation domain of the mini-AQLQ (0.60; 0.05 to 1.15; p = 0.034). Secondary outcomes showed increased patient activation and reduced reliance on reliever medication. There was no significant difference in the remaining secondary outcomes. There were no adverse events. Conclusion: Living Well with Asthma has been shown to be acceptable to potential end users, and has potential for effectiveness. This intervention merits further development, and subsequent evaluation in a Phase III full scale RCT.

Tackling health inequalities in primary care: an exploration of GPs’ experience at the frontline

In Scotland, life expectancy and health outcomes are strongly tied to socioeconomic status. Specifically, socioeconomically deprived areas suffer disproportionately from high levels of premature multimorbidity and mortality. To tackle these inequalities in health, challenges in the most deprived areas must be addressed. One avenue that merits attention is the potential role of general medical practitioners (GPs) in helping to address health inequalities, particularly due to their long-term presence in deprived communities, their role in improving patient and population health, and their potential advocacy role on behalf of their patients. GPs can be seen as what Lipsky calls ‘street-level bureaucrats’ due to their considerable autonomy in the decisions they make surrounding individual patient needs, yet practising under the bureaucratic structure of the NHS. While previous research has examined the applicability of Lipsky’s framework to the role of GPs, there has been very little research exploring how GPs negotiate between the multiple identities in their work, how GPs ‘socially construct’ their patients, how GPs view their potential role as ‘advocate’, and what this means in terms of the contribution of GPs to addressing existing inequalities in health. Using semi-structured interviews, this study explored the experience and views of 24 GPs working in some of Scotland’s most deprived practices to understand how they might combat this growing health divide via the mitigation (and potential prevention) of existing health inequalities. Participants were selected based on several criteria including practice deprivation level and their individual involvement in the Deep End project, which is an informal network comprising the 100 most deprived general practices in Scotland. The research focused on understanding GPs’ perceptions of their work including its broader implications, within their practice, the communities within which they practise, and the health system as a whole. The concept of street-level bureaucracy proved to be useful in understanding GPs’ frontline work and how they negotiate dilemmas. However, this research demonstrated the need to look beyond Lipsky’s framework in order to understand how GPs reconcile their multiple identities, including advocate and manager. As a result, the term ‘street-level professional’ is offered to capture more fully the multiple identities which GPs inhabit and to explain how GPs’ elite status positions them to engage in political and policy advocacy. This study also provides evidence that GPs’ social constructions of patients are linked not only to how GPs conceptualise the causes of health inequalities, but also to how they view their role in tackling them. In line with this, the interviews established that many GPs felt they could make a difference through advocacy efforts at individual, community and policy/political levels. Furthermore, the study draws attention to the importance of practitioner-led groups—such as the Deep End project—in supporting GPs’ efforts and providing a platform for their advocacy. Within this study, a range of GPs’ views have been explored based on the sample. While it is unclear how common these views are amongst GPs in general, the study revealed that there is considerable scope for ‘political GPs’ who choose to exercise discretion in their communities and beyond. Consequently, GPs working in deprived areas should be encouraged to use their professional status and political clout not only to strengthen local communities, but also to advocate for policy change that might potentially affect the degree of disadvantage of their patients, and levels of social and health inequalities more generally.

Solidarity, the network and the history of workers' self-management from the Gdańsk Agreement to shock therapy

This PhD thesis is an empirical research project in the field of modern Polish history. The thesis focuses on Solidarity, the Network and the idea of workers’ self-management. In addition, the thesis is based on an in-depth analysis of Solidarity archival material. The Solidarity trade union was born in August 1980 after talks between the communist government and strike leaders at the Gdansk Lenin Shipyards. In 1981 a group called the Network rose up, due to cooperation between Poland’s great industrial factory plants. The Network grew out of Solidarity; it was made up of Solidarity activists, and the group acted as an economic partner to the union. The Network was the base of a grass-roots, nationwide workers’ self-management movement. Solidarity and the self-management movement were crushed by the imposition of Martial Law in December 1981. Solidarity revived itself immediately, and the union created an underground society. The Network also revived in the underground, and it continued to promote self-management activity where this was possible. When Solidarity regained its legal status in April 1989, workers’ self-management no longer had the same importance in the union. Solidarity’s new politico-economic strategy focused on free markets, foreign investment and privatization. This research project ends in July 1990, when the new Solidarity-backed government enacted a privatization law. The government decided to transform the property ownership structure through a centralized privatization process, which was a blow for supporters of workers’ self-management. This PhD thesis provides new insight into the evolution of the Solidarity union from 1980-1990 by analyzing the fate of workers’ self-management. This project also examines the role of the Network throughout the 1980s. There is analysis of the important link between workers’ self-management and the core ideas of Solidarity. In addition, the link between political and economic reform is an important theme in this research project. The Network was aware that authentic workers’ self-management required reforms to the authoritarian political system. Workers’ self-management competed against other politico-economic ideas during the 1980s in Poland. The outcome of this competition between different reform concepts has shaped modern-day Polish politics, economics and society.