Stakeholder understanding of social prescribing in England: a qualitative study in primary care.

IF 2.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
I Fattorini, D Westlake, A Turk, K R Mahtani, S Tierney
{"title":"Stakeholder understanding of social prescribing in England: a qualitative study in primary care.","authors":"I Fattorini, D Westlake, A Turk, K R Mahtani, S Tierney","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02908-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Social prescribing (SP) seeks to support patients' wider needs by connecting them to non-medical community resources. Link workers (LWs) facilitate SP's delivery across the National Health Service (NHS) in England. As a concept, SP may be perceived in different ways by various stakeholders. This study set out to explore how SP is understood among healthcare professionals (HCPs), voluntary and community sector (VCS) representatives, LWs, and patients (Ps) in England.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A secondary qualitative analysis was conducted using interview data from a realist evaluation on the implementation of LWs in primary care. Interview data from 106 participants (HCPs, VCS representatives, LWs, Ps), across seven sites in England, were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Analysis resulted in 127 codes. These were clustered into the following themes: (1) the need for system optimisation, (2) SP as a tool for personal empowerment, (3) SP's broad and inclusive nature, (4) community engagement through LWs, and (5) a holistic approach to well-being. These themes highlight SP's potential as an integrated and empowering ecosystem; requiring effective collaboration and clearer communication among stakeholders to enhance understanding of its purpose, streamline referral processes, and align expectations for greater impact. Understanding of SP could be related to five broad questions around how, who, what, where, and why; the themes produced from the analysis aligned with these questions, each exploring different dimensions of SP. Through this, we developed the 5Ws Framework, which is outlined in the paper.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>SP is not a standalone intervention; it is a complex system that requires optimisation and balance across its elements. Its effectiveness as an integrated empowerment ecosystem depends on addressing all facets of the 5Ws-how, who, what, where, and why it operates-engaging the right stakeholders, clearly defining its scope, and implementing it appropriately. Policymakers and commissioners could use the 5Ws Framework to guide decision-making, align health system priorities, and ensure the effective integration of SP within primary care.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"230"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12285178/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02908-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Social prescribing (SP) seeks to support patients' wider needs by connecting them to non-medical community resources. Link workers (LWs) facilitate SP's delivery across the National Health Service (NHS) in England. As a concept, SP may be perceived in different ways by various stakeholders. This study set out to explore how SP is understood among healthcare professionals (HCPs), voluntary and community sector (VCS) representatives, LWs, and patients (Ps) in England.

Methods: A secondary qualitative analysis was conducted using interview data from a realist evaluation on the implementation of LWs in primary care. Interview data from 106 participants (HCPs, VCS representatives, LWs, Ps), across seven sites in England, were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results: Analysis resulted in 127 codes. These were clustered into the following themes: (1) the need for system optimisation, (2) SP as a tool for personal empowerment, (3) SP's broad and inclusive nature, (4) community engagement through LWs, and (5) a holistic approach to well-being. These themes highlight SP's potential as an integrated and empowering ecosystem; requiring effective collaboration and clearer communication among stakeholders to enhance understanding of its purpose, streamline referral processes, and align expectations for greater impact. Understanding of SP could be related to five broad questions around how, who, what, where, and why; the themes produced from the analysis aligned with these questions, each exploring different dimensions of SP. Through this, we developed the 5Ws Framework, which is outlined in the paper.

Conclusions: SP is not a standalone intervention; it is a complex system that requires optimisation and balance across its elements. Its effectiveness as an integrated empowerment ecosystem depends on addressing all facets of the 5Ws-how, who, what, where, and why it operates-engaging the right stakeholders, clearly defining its scope, and implementing it appropriately. Policymakers and commissioners could use the 5Ws Framework to guide decision-making, align health system priorities, and ensure the effective integration of SP within primary care.

Abstract Image

利益相关者对英国社会处方的理解:一项初级保健的定性研究。
背景:社会处方(SP)寻求通过将患者与非医疗社区资源联系起来来支持患者更广泛的需求。链接工人(LWs)促进SP的交付在英国的国家卫生服务(NHS)。作为一个概念,SP可能会被不同的利益相关者以不同的方式感知。本研究旨在探讨英国医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)、志愿者和社区部门(VCS)代表、LWs和患者(Ps)如何理解SP。方法:采用访谈数据进行二次定性分析,访谈数据来自对初级保健中LWs实施情况的现实评估。访谈数据来自106名参与者(HCPs, VCS代表,LWs, Ps),在英国的七个站点,使用反身性主题分析进行分析。结果:分析得到127个编码。这些主题集中在以下几个方面:(1)系统优化的需要;(2)社会福利作为个人赋权的工具;(3)社会福利的广泛和包容性;(4)通过社会福利参与社区;(5)福祉的整体方法。这些主题突出了SP作为一个综合和赋权生态系统的潜力;需要在利益相关者之间进行有效的协作和更清晰的沟通,以加强对其目的的理解,简化推荐流程,并调整期望以产生更大的影响。对SP的理解可能与五个广泛的问题有关:如何、谁、什么、在哪里和为什么;从分析中产生的主题与这些问题一致,每个主题都探索了SP的不同维度。通过这一点,我们开发了5w框架,并在本文中进行了概述。结论:SP不是一种独立的干预;这是一个复杂的系统,需要优化和平衡各个元素。它作为一个集成授权生态系统的有效性取决于解决5ws的所有方面——如何、谁、做什么、在哪里以及为什么操作——吸引合适的涉众,清楚地定义它的范围,并适当地实现它。政策制定者和专员可以使用5w框架来指导决策,调整卫生系统的优先事项,并确保将SP有效地纳入初级保健。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信