Exploration of Evaluation Practices in Social Prescribing Services in Ireland: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study

Author:

Connolly Hayley1ORCID,Delimata Natalie2,Galway Karen3ORCID,Kiely Bridget4,Lawler Margaret1,Mulholland Jill3,O’Grady Megan5ORCID,Connolly Deirdre1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Discipline of Occupational Therapy, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, F91 YW50 Sligo, Ireland

2. Department of Social Sciences, Atlantic Technological University, F91 YW50 Sligo, Ireland

3. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast BT9 7BL, UK

4. Department of General Practice, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, D02 YN77 Dublin, Ireland

5. Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St. James’ Hospital, D08 W9RT Dublin, Ireland

Abstract

National health services in Ireland and the UK fund the majority of social prescribing services and have issued recommendations for evaluation. However, it is not known what outcomes are prioritised for evaluation within individual services and what evaluation methods are used to capture recommended outcomes. A survey was carried out to examine evaluation practices of social prescribing services on the island of Ireland. This study used a cross-sectional observational design. The sample was all the staff involved in delivering and/or managing SP services on the island of Ireland. Questionnaires were distributed at a national SP conference and online. Closed-response questions were analysed using descriptive statistics. Content analysis was used for open-ended questions. Eighty-four usable surveys were returned (50% from the Republic of Ireland and 50% from Northern Ireland). All respondents (100%) agreed on the importance of measuring SP outcomes. The most frequently measured outcomes were health and well-being (89.2%) and loneliness (84%). The least frequently measured outcome was the satisfaction of healthcare professionals referring to SP: 78.4% of respondents never measured this outcome. The most frequently used measurement tool was the Short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale, with 38/76 (50%) respondents using this measure. There was a lack of standardised measures identified for some outcomes. For example, 70% of respondents reported always measuring physical activity (PA), but only four respondents identified a specific PA measure. In open-ended questions, respondents recommended flexibility in evaluation methods to reflect the complexity and individualised focus of SP. They also identified the need for protected time to complete evaluations and recommended a national strategy to inform priorities in evaluations. This study demonstrates a wide variation on the island of Ireland on how SP services are measuring outcomes, with many outcomes rarely or never measured using standardised measures. Agreement is needed on a core outcome set for social prescribing in order to guide service delivery and evaluations.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3