Outcomes from social prescribing Evidence from Southwark and elsewhere Jane Harris 16th May 2019
Overview • Why measure outcomes in social prescribing? • How to choose which outcomes to measure • How to choose useful measures of these outcomes • What is currently being measured in Southwark? • Suggestions for effective indicators to use
A useful way of thinking about outcomes: the logic model THEN IF MONITORING Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impacts £ • The resources needed to implement the project / programme, e.g. staff The things the programme does The “products” that result from the activities The immediate consequences and change that are a result of the activities • The longer-term results in people’s lives or in a system, which the service or activity may contribute towards, but which go beyond the direct and immediate change
Outcomes being measured in Southwark OUTCOMES • Increased engagement in activities • Increased confidence • Increased happiness • Increased independence • Increased ability to manage own health • Improved home environment • Reduction in use of health services WAYS OF MEASURING • Case studies • Bespoke questionnaires (self- report) • Friends and Family Test • Onward referrals • Patient Activation Measure (?) • Number of GP appointments (PCN service) • Number of A&E visits (PCN service) • Hospital admissions (PCN service)
Observations from the review so far • Many different approaches being taken to measuring outcomes. • Not many services are using validated outcomes measures. • Qualitative methods are most popular and in some cases these are most appropriate – for example, some people with dementia may not be able to complete questionnaires. • Sometimes there is confusion in reports between outputs and outcomes. • There are obvious challenges in devising an approach which is proportionate and feasible within the resources available. • In particular, we know it is challenging for voluntary organisations to develop systems for collecting information on outcomes. • Accessing health service usage data may be challenging, but worth doing – good partnership working is essential.
Possible criteria for choosing outcome measures • Has it been validated and tested to ensure psychometric validity? This is important, because if it has not, the tool is not a reliable measure of the change the service is seeking. • Howlong does it take to complete? Ideally, we would not want to use measures that usually take longer than 5 minutes, as people are less likely to complete them. • Who is it aimed at? Is it a measure that is specific to a particular group, or can it be used across service user groups? • Is it widely used in similar services? If it is, findings from your service can be compared with findings from elsewhere. • Is it free to use? If there is an equivalent measure which is free there will be no need to incur cost. • Are there any other considerations? For example, how has the measure generally been received by service users?
Finally • Thank you and any questions? Jane Harris email@example.com 020 7330 9170