Search Results

1810d0c8-e9bb-4a7c-9947-bbac48f4dd69 Mental Health, Workforce and Well-being Research Framework - ARC Collaboration More details on ARC Greater Manchester website What are we trying to do? The purpose of the document is to propose a pan National Insititue of Health Research (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) workforce focused mental health and well-being research framework. The aim is for the research framework to serve as a reference point to: Create coherence and comparability across the research carried out by NIHR ARCs Reduce duplication of work to reduce workforce burden. Adopting a coherent approach with an agreed purpose and broad aims will maximise the potential for cross-ARC collaboration, synergy and impact. While the focus of this research has a COVID-19 focus, the ambition is that this framework should facilitate research beyond the current pandemic, ensuring programme sustainability and longevity across the lifetime of this 5-year NIHR ARC funding cycle. This framework is not intended to be prescriptive, rather, it is a call to colleagues doing research under the NIHR ARC umbrella to use the framework as a point of reference in the development of research projects and programmes. It is a modular approach which allows flexibility to fit the scientific questions and data collection to the needs of the specific workforce and context being studied. Why is it important? The NIHR has invested £135 million to support 15 collaboratives covering every region within England. The NIHR ARC collaborative provides a framework within which key stakeholders are brought together locally and nationally with a mandate to tackle difficult issues facing our health and care system including: patient outcomes, effectiveness of our health and care system, system sustainability, and carrying out research with an applied focus to facilitate the rapid translation of research into practice. Moreover, the designation of ARC South London and ARC East of England as national leads for mental health and the establishment of a National Mental Health Priorities Network provides a further opportunity for effective collaboration. The NIHR ARC network presents a unique opportunity to develop a coherent and consistent approach to workforce mental health and well-being research which embodies these principles. What will we do? The framework is available for any NIHR ARC to review and align with, to guide the development of work that aligns to the fundamental principles of the NIHR ARC programme. Who are we working with? The NIHR ARCs and their research themes are set out in a table included in the document. In line with the framework, colleagues are encouraged to work collaboratively to maximise synergy, impact, and reduce duplication and burden. The origins of this framework arose out of conversation with colleagues from across NIHR ARC sites between April 2020-June 2020. The framework has been developed by: Kirsten Windfuhr (ARC Greater Manchester), Jane Ball (ARC Wessex), Karina Lovell (ARC Greater Manchester) Penny Bee (ARC Greater Manchester). Additional contributions and comments were gratefully received from ARC colleagues, and in particular Kristy Sanderson (ARC East of England). More information For further information about this work, please contact Alison Littlewood (Programme Manager). (ARC GM) Download - Mental Health, Workforce and Well-being Research Framework

Dr Preeti Dhuria (University of Southampton) and Professor Christina Vogel (The Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London) discuss how weak enforcement lets retailers bypass UK obesity regulations < Back Chocolate at the checkout Weak enforcement of obesity regulations is undermining public health Dr Preeti Dhuria (University of Southampton) and Professor Christina Vogel (The Centre for Food Policy, City St George’s, University of London) discuss how weak enforcement lets retailers bypass UK obesity regulations It’s far too easy to choose unhealthy options in retail stores in the UK. This isn’t just a personal challenge for citizens, it’s a public health crisis. The places we shop shape our food choices and quite frankly, the odds are stacked against us in selecting healthy food. There is a growing momentum for strong policies to rein in the aggressive promotion of unhealthy foods, and that’s a positive step. In fact, the UK government introduced a ban on placing unhealthy foods at checkouts, aisle-ends and store entrances in 2022. But you wouldn’t necessarily know it as a shopper. Our research shows there is a significant lack of resources for adequate enforcement. This situation means we still see chocolate at checkouts in some stores and alcohol at the aisle-ends in others because stores are either breaking the rules or using loopholes to continue making money at the expense of the country’s health. Regulating the food retail environment is an important part of the solution to lower levels of obesity but weak enforcement can undermine health goals. The Food (Promotion and Placement) Regulations 2021 are designed to limit the promotion of unhealthy foods in most retail stores and online equivalents in England. When 22 local government officers were asked about their approach to enforcement before the regulations came into effect, the clear narrative was that these regulations would not be robustly enforced because of a lack of staff and training. Our research showed the key obstacles to enforcing these regulations include: Staffing Constraints : There is limited capacity within local authority enforcement teams to enforce these regulations. Their scarce resources are used for immediate threats to life like knife crime rather than assessing breaches, issuing notices and processing fines for these anti-obesity regulations. Inadequate financial support: Funding constraints further hinder enforcement because only £281k in funding has been allocated across the 317 local authorities in England to support these enforcement tasks, leading to inconsistencies across regions. Minimal training: Enforcement officers are likely to rely on personal judgment and experience due to limited training and guidance on how to interpret the definitions in the regulations, leading to significant variations in the interpretation and enforcement of the rules across regions. Despite the regulations’ long-term health goals, it is clear that they are ranked as a low priority and the process of issuing infringement notices is cumbersome. This situation is leading to patchy enforcement, and businesses not being held accountable uniformly. The processes for reporting breaches are also unclear meaning even action by the public is usually difficult. A freedom of information request covering a three-month period showed that no improvement notices had been issued despite instances of non-compliance being observed. A Call for Stronger Enforcement Our research outlines actions at the national and local levels that could help to improve the level of enforcement being undertaken. National-level actions Provide adequate and dedicated funding to local authorities to recruit and allocate staff specifically for compliance assessment of these regulations. Provide centralised training and detailed guidelines for enforcement officers to ensure consistency and build confidence among enforcement teams. Streamline compliance assessments by requiring manufacturers to disclose nutrient profile scores for their products and retailers to provide key details, such as store square footage and employee count, to their local authorities. Local-level actions Instigate linkages within local authorities by supporting cross departmental activity between trading standards, environmental health and public health officers to make enforcement efficient. Raise regulations’ priority by incorporating into joint strategic needs assessment within local authorities to increase buy-ins from councillors and Directors of Public Health. Lack of enforcement compromises impact Investing in enforcement is essential to securing regulation compliance and achieving the level playing field that food businesses and public health advocates called for. Early enforcement ensures that businesses fully understand their obligations, comply with the rules, and help build a precedent for healthier retail environments. Proactive enforcement sends a clear message- the regulations are here to stay, and compliance is non-negotiable. But local authorities cannot achieve strong compliance without adequate funding and the right tools. A lack of enforcement risks being misinterpreted as a sign of regulatory failure and withdrawal of the regulations. This outcome would be detrimental to the health of British children and families. Here are a few instances recently where our research team have spotted non-compliance but do not know how to effectively report the instances, and even approaching the store manager has not led to an immediate removal of products from restricted areas. To truly make an impact, future food policies must incorporate robust enforcement strategies and dedicated funding from the outset to maximise the regulations’ impact and safeguard public health. Previous Next

Research areas Key research themes Ageing and Dementia Read More Long Term Conditions Read More Healthy Communities Read More Workforce & Health Systems Read More Cross-cutting research projects Mental Health Hub Read More Social Care Read More

40fed7f8-d8d0-46f4-80c3-660e33675330 PIVOT: Promoting Increased physical actiVity in hospitalised Older adults with Trained volunteers NIHR Advanced Fellowship Award: Dr Stephen Lim, Honorary Consultant Geriatrician University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust and Principal Clinical Research Fellow, University of Southampton Team : Dr Samantha Meredith Research Fellow, University of Southampton, Professor Beth Stuart Clinical Trials Co-director of the Pragmatic Trials Unit, Queen Mary University of London, Professor Carl Thompson Applied Health Research, University of Leeds Aim(s) of the research To determine whether hospital volunteers can be trained to engage older people in hospital to be more active. We want to know if this intervention will work in different hospitals and explore factors that will support or prevent it from being delivered successfully. Background to the research Between 30 and 60% of older people in hospital are at risk of losing muscle strength and function, known as deconditioning. This reduces their ability to look after themselves independently. Low physical activity level contributes to deconditioning but dedicated physical activity sessions can benefit older inpatients. In most studies, physical activity is led by paid staff. New ideas are needed to ensure additional physical activity sessions are costeffective and sustainable. The Southampton Mobility Volunteer study showed that trained volunteers can safely engage older inpatients to be more active. However, more information is needed on how to make this approach accessible to more people in more hospitals. Design and methods used Hospital inpatients aged 65 years and older will be invited to participate in the study. We will conduct the study in four hospitals. The hospitals will be different in size and from a wider region to include a range of population groups from different settings and context. This is so that different social groups are represented, and the research will be more representative of the wider population. We will use one hospital as a ‘control site’ – where patients will not get volunteer input – to compare our findings against. Volunteers will encourage participants who can walk independently to walk twice daily. Patients who need help with walking will do bedside exercises. They will be encouraged to walk once they can do so independently. We want to know whether trained volunteer delivered exercise sessions are feasible and acceptable to hospitals. We will determine this by collecting data on volunteer recruitment and training, patient recruitment and the walking/ exercises intervention. We will interview patients, staff, and volunteers as the intervention is delivered to establish what worked well and what could be improved. Other outcomes will include physical abilities, muscle strength, length of stay and readmission rates. We will analyse how much money it costs the NHS to deliver the intervention. Patient/service user, carer and public involvement The James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership has highlighted promoting of independence, and physical and emotional well-being as 2 of the top 3 key research priorities for older adults. More specifically, our PPI research with 92 older people showed that 45% of them had experience with hospital volunteers and all spoke highly of their contribution. Most respondents thought volunteers could be trained to help with mobility. My feasibility study (SoMoVe study) confirmed the volunteer-led intervention was acceptable to patients, volunteers, and staff in one hospital. Patients were grateful that the volunteers encouraged them to be more active. Staff members valued the work of the volunteers. This proposal was developed with the support of 2 public researchers, the volunteer services manager and a hospital therapy lead. The study protocol and study documents will be developed with PPI collaboration. 2 public researchers will be invited to join the study steering group. PPI input will be paid at INVOLVE rates. Dissemination Findings from this study will be shared through conferences, academic papers/reports, and media/social media. In collaboration with the Academic Health Science Network, we will share our findings with commissioners, providers of care and voluntary organisations. Study findings will be of interest to voluntary services, healthcare professionals, and directorate managers. A collection of resources will be produced to encourage the adoption of this intervention in other settings.

Our partners At NIHR ARC Wessex we are a collaboration of organisations working together to carry out the most relevant and best quality health and care research with real-life impact. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care System (ICS) Dorset Integrated Care System (Our Dorset) ! Widget Didn’t Load Check your internet and refresh this page. If that doesn’t work, contact us.

Buy-in and Engagement Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Adoption and Spread Checklist, webinar and resources Quick links: Project Outputs This domain helps you consider who needs to be engaged as part of the implementation process, what routes to engagement to use and how engagement will be maintained during implementation. No FAQs yet This category doesn't have any FAQs at the moment. Check back later or explore other categories. What should I consider for my project? Adoption and Spread Project Outputs Buy-in and Engagement Fit with Health and Social Care Systems Alignment with Health and Social Care Priorities Outcomes and Impact Case study “From the start, we decided it was important to use our current networks and involve key people who had established credibility and who were trusted . The commitment and drive for the project by the lead ensured others readily identified its value and were prepared to engage and commit to see the project to realisation. We involved our Communications Team at this early stage and provided regular updates both internally and to partner organisations so that they were aware and felt involved in the project. We continued to recruit key people from partner organisations so that they would spread the message and obtain buy-in within their organisations. Our stakeholder group established a clear plan, including ensuring we considered all governance processes and decisions were actioned. We also identified early on who our ‘anti-champions’ were and discussed how we would manage their resistance or if they attempted to derail implementation. It was a massive team effort that required time and input from all involved. We also confirmed our organisation was fully committed to adoption and this enabled us to show that the intervention was commissioned. This resulted in other organisations having reassurance and confidence to engage and not having to ‘take a risk’ and be the first to sign up. ” Drive Partnership Working Project (DPWP) Take away tips Buy-in and engagement is integral and should be considered at the start and throughout implementation Engagement is necessary at all levels and must be sustained

16c59677-d7b2-4332-b74a-b4b17ed064ed COMPLETED: How to Support children with cancer, or another serious condition, and their parents during the COVID-19 outbreak How to Support cHildren with cAncer, or another serious condition, and theiR parents during the COVID-19 outbreak?: understanding Experiences, information and support needs, and decision-making – the SHARE study Research team Chief Investigators: Professor Anne-Sophie Darlington- Professor of Child and Family Psychological Health- University of Southampton Dr Bob Philips- Senior Lecturer and Honorary Consultant in Paediatric / Teenage-Young Adult Oncology-The Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust Dr Jess Morgan- Senior Research Fellow & Paediatric Oncology Trainee- University of York Mr Ashley Ball-Gamble- CEO of Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Group (CCLG)- CCLG Project team members: Dr Nicole Collaço- Research Fellow- University of Southampton Dr Luise Marino- Clinical Academic Paediatric Dietitian- University Hospital Southampton Dr Arvind Nagra- Paediatric Nephrologist- University Hospital Southampton PPI group Organisations involved: University of York, Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Group, University of Southampton, University Hospital Southampton, The Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Kidney Research UK, Kidney Care UK, British Heart Foundation, Children’s Heart Foundation ,Cystic Fibrosis Trust, Together for Short Lives, The Martin House Research Centre, Harry’s Hat, Shine. Summary Children and young people with cancer may be particularly vulnerable. Those undergoing treatment have a weakened immune system, meaning they will find it more difficult to fight infections. [1] Comprehensive advice for parents has been compiled by experts and disseminated through the UKs Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Group (CCLG).[1] However, we urgently need to increase our understanding of evolving experiences, information needs and decision-making of these families under these extraordinarily stressful circumstances. Only through investigating parents’/main carers’ experiences and needs will we be able to tailor and provide the right support, in terms of guidance, information updates, and online interventions to reduce distress and anxiety. What did we find out? We found that the impact of COVID-19 on different populations shared some common experiences: Disruption to healthcare services- all populations faced challenges due to disruptions in healthcare services which affected access to necessary medical care and treatments Increased anxiety and stress- COVID-19 brought about increased anxiety and stress levels in all populations, particularly amongst caregivers who had specific concerns about their child’s health and safety Limited social interactions- the pandemic led to limited social interactions for all populations, resulting in feelings of isolation and loneliness Social support networks: families in general faced amplified challenges due to limited social support networks, emphasizing the importance of community resources in managing the pandemic’s effects. Reassurance gained that certain populations may not be at significantly higher risk of adverse outcomes or psychological distress. Findings emphasised the need for tailored support services, clear communication, education and psychological support to address challenges faced by these populations during the COVID-19 pandemic. What difference will this make? Insights provided valuable information for healthcare providers and relevant charities organisations to make informed decisions about how to support people and allocate resources effectively. In addition the information can be used to develop targeted strategies and interventions that address the specific challenges faced by different populations such as disruption to healthcare services, increased anxiety and stress and limited social interactions. By understanding the impact of COVID-19 on various populations, policies can be developed to address the specific needs and concerns of different groups. Findings emphasised the importance of prioritising clear communication, education and psychological support to ensure the wellbeing of these populations. Why is this important for patients, health and care providers and policy makers? Patient care: understanding the impact of COVID-19 on different populations helps healthcare providers tailor their services to meet specific needs; including ensuring access to healthcare services, managing increased anxiety and stress and providing psychological support. Health & Care Providers: the findings provide valuable insights for healthcare providers to address the challenges faced by different populations. This includes adapting healthcare services, clear communication and providing education to effectively support patients. Policymakers: Knowledge of the impact of COVID-19 on various population helps policymakers make informed decisions, including allocating resources, developing tailored support services, and implementing policies to address the specific needs of different populations. Research outputs: COVID-19: experiences of lockdown and support needs in children and young adults with kidney conditions Yincent Tse, Anne-Sophie E. Darlington, Kay Tyerman, Dean Wallace, Tanya Pankhurst, Sofia Chantziara, David Culliford, Alejandra Recio-Saucedo & Arvind Nagra COVID‐19 and children with cancer: Parents’ experiences, anxieties and support needs Anne‐Sophie E. Darlington, Jessica E. Morgan, Richard Wagland, Samantha C. Sodergren, David Culliford, Ashley Gamble, Bob Phillips https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pbc.28790 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21501351211007102 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00467-021-05041-8 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ppul.25537 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/apa.16229 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00381-023-05980-7 https://adc.bmj.com/content/108/3/198.abstract https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11968084/coronation-street-mitochondrial-disease/ https://www.togetherforshortlives.org.uk/forgotten-families-families-feel-more-isolated-than-ever-under-lockdown/ https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2021/04/share-study-results.page https://www.ncri.org.uk/areas-of-interest/cancer-covid-19/ 11-share-study | Institute for Life Sciences | University of Southampton Life Sciences Annual Reports | Institute for Life Sciences | University of Southampton Conferences/presentations: SIOP (International Society of Pediatric Oncology)- E-poster discussion (2021) Royal College of pediatrics and child health- poster presentation (2021) 53rd ESPN Annual Meeting- oral presentation (2021) 7th King John Price pediatric respiratory conference- poster presentation (2021) Webinar- Nutricia- What's next for improving nutrition & growth outcomes in infants with congenital heart disease? (2021) Webinar- University of Surrey: Impact of Covid-19 on families: a focus on new parents, children, and people with learning disabilities, with reflections from professional practice (2021) Webinar: Pediatric Oncology Educational meetings (2021) Webinar: European Paediatric Psychology Network (EPPN) – background and mission (2020)

9ae71e9b-aaf2-477f-a174-17b115a2513a COMPLETED ADOPTED PROJECT: Neuro LTC: Assessing Baseline Factors, Critical Events and Fatigue in Long Term Neurological Conditions Principal Investigator: Dr Chris Kipps, Neurologist and Hon Senior Lecturer, University of Southampton Team Members: Dr Helen Roberts Veena Agarwal Dr John Spreadbury Dr Emma Stack Dr Sarah Fearn Prof. Ann Ashburn Start Date: 23/08/17 End Date: 31/12/22 Project Funder: University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Lay Summary Many neurological conditions have a long-term impact on quality of life with varying requirements for intervention and care over time. This has the potential to create a mismatch between the needs of patients at particular stages in their illness, and the skill levels of clinicians and available resources required to assist them appropriately. This project aims to identify the factors that influence everyday care requirements (baseline factors) and to identify the critical events that have the potential to lead to an increase in care requirements. In many neurological conditions, there may also be ‘hidden’, less evident or more subjectively perceived factors that influence care requirements, of which fatigue may be amongst the most common. Thus, this project also includes research into the prevalence and effects of fatigue in neurological conditions. By identifying and better understanding baseline factors, critical events and the features of fatigue in long term neurological conditions, this project will help to enable future research to stratify long-term neurological conditions by the degree of complexity and individual burden and match service users more effectively to appropriate clinical and social care resources. Method The research will focus on the following five neurological conditions: epilepsy, Huntington's disease, motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson's disease. The study will involve the use of mixed methods. We will use surveys and focus groups with service users (patients and caregivers) to identify the factors that help to maintain an individual’s optimal level of living with the neurological condition (baseline factors), the critical events that can cause a change in care requirements in each of the five neurological conditions, and the impact of fatigue. What did we learn? 1. What factors affect the care that people living with a neurological condition require? We found that mobility was the most important factor for assessing care needs from the patient perspective. This was followed by dexterity, eating and drinking, speech and communication, cognitive impairment and mental health. This order of relative importance was found to be constant by age, disease progression, gender, living alone, or presence of co-morbidities. However, younger patients, more progressed patients, females, those living alone and those with co-morbidities tended to produce higher average scores of importance, meaning they felt their symptoms in these areas had a higher impact on their care needs. We asked participants what helped them to manage their condition and live well. The most important factors were: Social support, exercise, lifestyle factors and supportive equipment. Less recognised factors such as access to healthcare professionals, the patient’s mentality and diet were also noted. We found that recently diagnosed patients cited ‘employment’ and ‘feeling informed’ more frequently, whilst less recently diagnosed patients mentioned ‘having a carer’ and ‘getting out of the house’ more frequently. 2. What events lead to an unplanned GP or hospital visit for people living with a neurological condition? We found that there are specific events that are likely to lead to an unplanned GP or hospital visit for people with neurological conditions. In addition to well-recognised causes of crisis such as falls, trigger events less widely associated with crisis were identified, including difficulties with activities of daily living and carer absence. The less-recognised trigger events tended to be managed more frequently in the community. Many of these community-based crises had a greater impact on care needs than the better-known causes of crisis that more frequently required hospital care. Patient and carer responses indicated a good general knowledge of potential crisis triggers. Patients were more aware of mental health issues, and carers were more aware of cognitive impairment and issues with medications. 3. What is the frequency and impact of fatigue for people living with neurological conditions? We found that the prevalence of clinically significant fatigue across five neurological conditions (Parkinson’s, MS, epilepsy, MND and Huntington’s disease) was 51%. The highest prevalence of fatigue was amongst people with MS and MND, and lowest was amongst people with epilepsy. More than a third of participants reported that fatigue frequently impacted their social life and ability to concentrate. Factors associated with clinically significant fatigue were male gender, age, frequency of fatigue greater than twice a week and fatigue often having a detrimental effect on social life. What difference can this new knowledge make? Understanding the factors that affect the care needs of people living with neurological conditions can help to ensure care resources are targeted at those most at risk of high care needs. Understanding that younger patients, more progressed patients, females, those living alone and those with co-morbidities generally considered their symptoms to have a higher impact on their care needs, can allow us to target these patients with relevant support and interventions. Identifying the most important factors for people with neurological conditions to self-manage their conditions and live well can enable us to share this information more widely and promote self-management tools and techniques amongst this population. By increasing understanding of events that lead to a GP or hospital visit, we can better inform strategies to prevent them. Similarly, by identifying under-recognised crisis triggers we can build a better understanding of ‘risk factors’ for an unplanned GP visit or hospital admission. Identifying that Patients were more aware of mental health issues, and carers were more aware of cognitive impairment and issues with medications means that we can ensure healthcare professionals are asking the right questions to the right person. We also noted some differences in how patients and clinicians describe the events that precede a GP or hospital visit. This can help to ensure healthcare professionals are using the right language when assessing the risk of individual patients. By increasing understanding of events that lead to a GP or hospital visit, we can better inform strategies to prevent them. Similarly, by identifying under-recognised crisis triggers we can build a better understanding of ‘risk factors’ for an unplanned GP visit or hospital admission. Identifying that patients were more aware of mental health issues, and carers were more aware of cognitive impairment and issues with medications means that we can ensure healthcare professionals are asking the right questions to the right person. We also noted some differences in how patients and clinicians describe the events that precede a GP or hospital visit. This can help to ensure healthcare professionals are using the right language when assessing the risk of individual patients. Why is this important? The number of people with a neurological condition is rising, with around 17 million cases in the UK. Approximately 4% of NHS funding goes to neurology care. People with a neurological condition are more at risk of unplanned hospital visits and admissions than many other groups. Identifying factors that promote self-management and well-being could improve patient diagnosis and quality of life, reducing care requirements from the NHS. Reducing unplanned GP and hospital visits could improve patient quality of life and reduce resources spent by the NHS. Identifying the frequency and impact of fatigue and ways to manage it could improve patient and reduce resources spent by the NHS. What Next? We have already taken some of the findings from this study to: -Publish academic publications -Present at medical conferences -Present to groups of people with neurological conditions -Present to national support organisations -Create an impact inventory for neurological pathways -Create questionnaires that aim to identify those most at risk of an unplanned GP or hospital visit (implemented through My Medical Record) We are continuing to analyse the data and disseminate findings to a wide audience. Publications The Causes and Impact of Crisis for People with Parkinson’s Disease: A Patient and Carer Perspective - Sarah Fearn, Sandra Bartolomeu Pires, Veena Agarwal, Helen C. Roberts, John Spreadbury, Christopher Kipps, 2021

Research Fellow < Back Laila Khawaja Research Fellow Long Term Conditions Dr. Laila Khawaja holds a PhD in Social Sciences from the University of Southampton and is an experienced qualitative researcher with a strong background in public health, well-being, and social engagement. She has worked extensively on projects that explore the intersection of mental health, agency, and lifestyle behaviors, particularly among young people. Laila was involved in a National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) project that focused on empowering young individuals to enhance their sense of agency and well-being. This work aimed to positively influence their mental health, dietary choices, and physical activity habits through participatory engagement strategies. Currently, Laila is contributing to the Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) Wessex Long-Term Conditions theme, where she is actively engaged in two key projects: the SCALE project, which examines enablers and barriers of using a long term conditions-scale tool and a study on Social Prescribing for Link Workers , which investigates how healthcare professionals can better connect individuals to community-based resources to improve well-being and health outcomes. Her research interests include health inequalities, patient and public involvement in healthcare, and the role of social interventions in managing long-term conditions. Previous Next

532de301-847c-4966-bc5a-4870a7af237f COMPLETED: COVID-19 Emergency Department Project NIHR ARC Wessex is supporting this research Summary The COVID-19 pandemic created an unprecedented demand for acute care services. Hospitals faced the challenge of needing to rapidly restructure care pathways and resourcing priorities to maximise survival rates for critically ill patients. University Hospital Southampton (UHS) needed evidence-based tools to support clinical and resource planning decisions in response to the pandemic. COVID-19-ED was able to provide rapid response insight to analytics questions provided by UHS. Who worked on the project? Professor Michael Boniface – University of Southampton Dr Hang Phan – University of Southampton Dr Francis Chmiel – University of Southampton Dr Daniel Burns – University of Southampton Professor Ben MacArthur – University of Southampton Professor Dave Woods – University of Southampton Dr Derek Sandeman – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Dr Thomas Daniels – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Dr Michael Kiuber – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Neil Tape – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Martin Azor – University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust Dr Matthew Stammers – University of Southampton NHS Foundation Trust What did we find out? We found that computational models of COVID-19 epidemiology could be used to help forecast COVID-19 hospital demand and support the University Hospital Southampton (UHSFT) in their response to the pandemic. We learnt how to deliver a series of models and insight throughout the phases of the pandemic first wave (alert, pre-peak, post-peak, recovery). We learnt to adapt approaches through experimentation and as new information became available to the research team: Initially a 10-day rapid response was required balancing timeliness and precision of answers. Little was known about COVID-19 and a simple approach was developed to forecast the time and size of the first peak. We then extended the model to consider actual hospital data along with the prevalence of infected people in communities and occupancy types such as general or intensive care beds. Finally, the impact of social distancing was incorporated to modify community transmission rates allowing UHS to run what if scenarios considering future assumptions about social distancing policies from the UK government. What difference did it make? COVID-19-ED provided a source of rapid insight response for UHSFT operations teams at a time when they had little information to plan resources. Why was it so important? Community disease prevalence modelling is an important tool to support capacity planning and resource planning for integrated care systems. Vital to provide rapid insights with limited information and changing disease and policy situations. What happened next? The knowledge gained about COVID-19 epidemic modelling led to UK wider leadership of data analytics for Dr Dan Burns in the COVID-19 Regulator Testing Programme Kidd, S.P., Burns, D., Armson, B., Beggs, A.D., Howson, E.L., Williams, A., Snell, G., Wise, E.L., Goring, A., Vincent-Mistiaen, Z. and Grippon, S., 2022. Reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification has high accuracy for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in saliva and nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swabs from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals. The Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 24(4), pp.320-336. Ptasinska, A., Whalley, C., Bosworth, A., Poxon, C., Bryer, C., Machin, N., Grippon, S., Wise, E.L., Armson, B., Howson, E.L. and Goring, A., 2021. Diagnostic accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification coupled to nanopore sequencing (LamPORE) for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection at scale in symptomatic and asymptomatic populations. Clinical microbiology and infection, 27(9), pp.1348-e1. Rapid analytics support to NHSE Chief Scientific Officer’s (NHSE CSO) team including: Statistical validation of the PCR technology for Project Jupiter in Leamington Spa, which now covers 300,000 PCR tests a day of the UK’s Pillar 2 testing infrastructure Development of a calculator tool for TVG which will be used to validate several COVID-19 testing technologies Research design for laboratory validation studies Publications https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02481-y

< Back This is a Title 03 This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. This is placeholder text. To change this content, double-click on the element and click Change Content. Want to view and manage all your collections? Click on the Content Manager button in the Add panel on the left. Here, you can make changes to your content, add new fields, create dynamic pages and more. You can create as many collections as you need. Your collection is already set up for you with fields and content. Add your own, or import content from a CSV file. Add fields for any type of content you want to display, such as rich text, images, videos and more. You can also collect and store information from your site visitors using input elements like custom forms and fields. Be sure to click Sync after making changes in a collection, so visitors can see your newest content on your live site. Preview your site to check that all your elements are displaying content from the right collection fields. Previous Next

e57a4343-00e9-4e08-9056-d084e47c8870 Reframing responsibility through public empowerment: proposing the ‘FoodEnviroScan’ app to unmask unfair environmental cues influencing poor diets Team Dr Nestor Serrano-Fuentes. Senior Research Fellow. School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton. Dr Lyn Ellett. Associate Professor of Clinical Psychology. School of Psychology. University of Southampton. Prof Mari Carmen Portillo. Professor of Long-Term Conditions. School of Health Sciences University of Southampton. Prof Janis Baird. Professor of Public Health and Epidemiology, MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton. Prof Christina Vogel. Deputy Director, Centre for Food Policy City, University of London. Partners Peter Rhodes (potential support). Senior Programme Manager, Industry and Innovations (AHSN). Jessica Berry (potential support). Personalised Care Programme (ICS). Dr Alexandra Mant (potential support). Institute for Life Sciences Collaboration Manager at the University of Southampton. Dr Lindsay Welch. Clinical associate professor at the University of Bournemouth. Previous Program Lead Health Inequalities (Health Innovation Wessex) Starts: 27th February 2023 Ends: 30th September 2024 Summary Our cities have changed a lot since the 1960s. One of the biggest changes is that there are now a lot more places to buy unhealthy fast food and sugary drinks, like takeaway shops. The food and drink companies have also used clever marketing strategies so we buy more of their products. Some of their strategies are hard to spot, but they have impacted people living in poorer areas the most. For example, these people might see a lot more ads and deals for fast food and junk food around where they live and work. Research shows that the best way to improve our diets is to have stronger rules for how the food industry is allowed to advertise to us. But currently there are not many policies like this. And there is not much public support for stronger rules either. That is because many people still think it's up to them alone to eat healthily. We want to talk to the public to discuss how we can get more public attention on the power big food companies have. We also want to talk about what else we as a society can do to put more pressure on the food industry to change. We are also interested in whether new technologies could help with these goals.