Cargando…

The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care

BACKGROUND: Older people in poor health are more likely to need extra money, aids and adaptations to allow them to remain independent and cope with ill health, yet in the UK many do not claim the welfare benefits to which they are entitled. Welfare rights advice interventions lead to greater welfare...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haighton, Catherine, Moffatt, Suzanne, Howel, Denise, McColl, Elaine, Milne, Eugene, Deverill, Mark, Rubin, Greg, Aspray, Terry, White, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3408348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22639988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-382
_version_ 1782239441612439552
author Haighton, Catherine
Moffatt, Suzanne
Howel, Denise
McColl, Elaine
Milne, Eugene
Deverill, Mark
Rubin, Greg
Aspray, Terry
White, Martin
author_facet Haighton, Catherine
Moffatt, Suzanne
Howel, Denise
McColl, Elaine
Milne, Eugene
Deverill, Mark
Rubin, Greg
Aspray, Terry
White, Martin
author_sort Haighton, Catherine
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Older people in poor health are more likely to need extra money, aids and adaptations to allow them to remain independent and cope with ill health, yet in the UK many do not claim the welfare benefits to which they are entitled. Welfare rights advice interventions lead to greater welfare income, but have not been rigorously evaluated for health benefits. This study will evaluate the effects on health and well-being of a domiciliary welfare rights advice service provided by local government or voluntary organisations in North East England for independent living, socio-economically disadvantaged older people (aged ≥60 yrs), recruited from general (primary care) practices. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a pragmatic, individually randomised, single blinded, wait-list controlled trial of welfare rights advice versus usual care, with embedded economic and qualitative process evaluations. The qualitative study will examine whether the intervention is delivered as intended; explore responses to the intervention and examine reasons for the trial findings; and explore the potential for translation of the intervention into routine policy and practice. The primary outcome is the effect on health-related quality of life, measured using the CASP 19 questionnaire. Volunteer men and women aged ≥60 years (1/household) will be identified from general practice patient registers. Patients in nursing homes or hospitals at the time of recruitment will be excluded. General practice populations will be recruited from disadvantaged areas of North East England, including urban, rural and semi-rural areas, with no previous access to targeted welfare rights advice services delivered to primary care patients. A minimum of 750 participants will be randomised to intervention and control arms in a 1:1 ratio. DISCUSSION: Achieving a trial design that is both ethical and acceptable to potential participants, required methodological compromises. The choice of follow-up length required a trade-off between sufficient time to demonstrate health impact and the need to allow the control group access to the intervention as early as possible. The study will have implications for fundamental understanding of social inequalities and how to tackle them, and provides a model for similar evaluations of health-orientated social interventions. If the health benefits of this intervention are proven, targeted welfare rights advice services should be extended to ensure widespread provision for older people and other vulnerable groups. CURRENT CONTROLLED TRIALS ISRCTN NUMBER: ISRCTN37380518
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3408348
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34083482012-07-31 The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care Haighton, Catherine Moffatt, Suzanne Howel, Denise McColl, Elaine Milne, Eugene Deverill, Mark Rubin, Greg Aspray, Terry White, Martin BMC Public Health Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Older people in poor health are more likely to need extra money, aids and adaptations to allow them to remain independent and cope with ill health, yet in the UK many do not claim the welfare benefits to which they are entitled. Welfare rights advice interventions lead to greater welfare income, but have not been rigorously evaluated for health benefits. This study will evaluate the effects on health and well-being of a domiciliary welfare rights advice service provided by local government or voluntary organisations in North East England for independent living, socio-economically disadvantaged older people (aged ≥60 yrs), recruited from general (primary care) practices. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a pragmatic, individually randomised, single blinded, wait-list controlled trial of welfare rights advice versus usual care, with embedded economic and qualitative process evaluations. The qualitative study will examine whether the intervention is delivered as intended; explore responses to the intervention and examine reasons for the trial findings; and explore the potential for translation of the intervention into routine policy and practice. The primary outcome is the effect on health-related quality of life, measured using the CASP 19 questionnaire. Volunteer men and women aged ≥60 years (1/household) will be identified from general practice patient registers. Patients in nursing homes or hospitals at the time of recruitment will be excluded. General practice populations will be recruited from disadvantaged areas of North East England, including urban, rural and semi-rural areas, with no previous access to targeted welfare rights advice services delivered to primary care patients. A minimum of 750 participants will be randomised to intervention and control arms in a 1:1 ratio. DISCUSSION: Achieving a trial design that is both ethical and acceptable to potential participants, required methodological compromises. The choice of follow-up length required a trade-off between sufficient time to demonstrate health impact and the need to allow the control group access to the intervention as early as possible. The study will have implications for fundamental understanding of social inequalities and how to tackle them, and provides a model for similar evaluations of health-orientated social interventions. If the health benefits of this intervention are proven, targeted welfare rights advice services should be extended to ensure widespread provision for older people and other vulnerable groups. CURRENT CONTROLLED TRIALS ISRCTN NUMBER: ISRCTN37380518 BioMed Central 2012-05-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3408348/ /pubmed/22639988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-382 Text en Copyright ©2012 Haighton et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Haighton, Catherine
Moffatt, Suzanne
Howel, Denise
McColl, Elaine
Milne, Eugene
Deverill, Mark
Rubin, Greg
Aspray, Terry
White, Martin
The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title_full The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title_fullStr The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title_full_unstemmed The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title_short The Do-Well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
title_sort do-well study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial, economic and qualitative process evaluations of domiciliary welfare rights advice for socio-economically disadvantaged older people recruited via primary health care
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3408348/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22639988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-382
work_keys_str_mv AT haightoncatherine thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT moffattsuzanne thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT howeldenise thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT mccollelaine thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT milneeugene thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT deverillmark thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT rubingreg thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT asprayterry thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT whitemartin thedowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT haightoncatherine dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT moffattsuzanne dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT howeldenise dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT mccollelaine dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT milneeugene dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT deverillmark dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT rubingreg dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT asprayterry dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare
AT whitemartin dowellstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialeconomicandqualitativeprocessevaluationsofdomiciliarywelfarerightsadviceforsocioeconomicallydisadvantagedolderpeoplerecruitedviaprimaryhealthcare