CMHT Service Users' Interest in Social Prescriptions
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Why dive in? Social Prescriptions in a ‘Pool’: An investigation into community mental health clients’ interest in accessing Social Prescriptions and a potential way to fund these
IRAS ID
258550
Contact name
Gaia Cetrano
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of York
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 6 months, 30 days
Research summary
The study is interested in understanding the level of interest among community mental health clients of accessing Social Prescriptions: non-medical interventions that put an emphasis on improving well-being and reducing loneliness by connecting people with leisure/activity/support services in their local area. These are currently accessed in the UK via GP referral to a Link Service who then meet with the person and co-design the Social Prescription with them. There is a growing evidence base that this sort of intervention can help improve well-being and reduce loneliness. Not all activities that a person may wish to encompass within their Social Prescription will be free and thus this study looks to understand whether participants would be open to paying for these with the resources they have (e.g. with savings, their personal independence payment). It will also examine interest in the 'pooling' model for funding these; where people can put their resources together to purchase a service in the hope of reducing costs.
Alongside the above, the study will also explore feelings of loneliness and well-being to understand whether these are predictors for level of interest in accessing a Social Prescription. Some recent research has highlighted self-stigma as a potential barrier to reducing loneliness and thus the study will explore whether this acts as a moderator of the predictive strength of loneliness and well-being on interest in accessing a Social Prescription.
It is hoped that the results will help community practitioners in the study site to better understand whether Social Prescriptions should be offered to clients as part of their recovery as well as potential ways to identify clients who may be interested in them, what clients would be willing to do to access those that are not free, and whether self-stigma may be a barrier to wanting to access them at all.
REC name
London - Bromley Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
19/LO/0946
Date of REC Opinion
10 Jul 2019
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion