Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence

被引:438
|
作者
Bickerdike, Liz [1 ]
Booth, Alison [2 ]
Wilson, Paul M. [3 ]
Farley, Kate [4 ]
Wright, Kath [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ York, Ctr Reviews & Disseminat, York, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ York, York Trials Unit, York, N Yorkshire, England
[3] Univ Manchester, Alliance Manchester Business Sch, Manchester, Lancs, England
[4] Univ Leeds, Sch Healthcare, Leeds, W Yorkshire, England
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2017年 / 7卷 / 04期
关键词
PRIMARY-CARE; HEALTH; VOLUNTARY; SERVICES;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013384
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives: Social prescribing is a way of linking patients in primary care with sources of support within the community to help improve their health and wellbeing. Social prescribing programmes are being widely promoted and adopted in the UK National Health Service and so we conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence for their effectiveness. Setting/data sources: Nine databases were searched from 2000 to January 2016 for studies conducted in the UK. Relevant reports and guidelines, websites and reference lists of retrieved articles were scanned to identify additional studies. All the searches were restricted to English language only. Participants: Systematic reviews and any published evaluation of programmes where patient referral was made from a primary care setting to a link worker or facilitator of social prescribing were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias for included studies was undertaken independently by two reviewers and a narrative synthesis was performed. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary outcomes of interest were any measures of health and well-being and/or usage of health services. Results: We included a total of 15 evaluations of social prescribing programmes. Most were small scale and limited by poor design and reporting. All were rated as a having a high risk of bias. Common design issues included a lack of comparative controls, short follow-up durations, a lack of standardised and validated measuring tools, missing data and a failure to consider potential confounding factors. Despite clear methodological shortcomings, most evaluations presented positive conclusions. Conclusions: Social prescribing is being widely advocated and implemented but current evidence fails to provide sufficient detail to judge either success or value for money. If social prescribing is to realise its potential, future evaluations must be comparative by design and consider when, by whom, for whom, how well and at what cost.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 42 条
  • [1] Factors influencing social prescribing initiatives: a systematic review of qualitative evidence
    Ebrahimoghli, R.
    Pezeshki, M. Z.
    Farajzadeh, P.
    Arab-Zozani, M.
    Mehrtak, M.
    Alizadeh, M.
    PERSPECTIVES IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023,
  • [2] Social prescribing for migrants in the United Kingdom: A systematic review and call for evidence
    Zhang, Claire X.
    Wurie, Fatima
    Browne, Annabel
    Haworth, Steven
    Burns, Rachel
    Aldridge, Robert
    Zenner, Dominik
    Tran, Anh
    Campos-Matos, Ines
    JOURNAL OF MIGRATION AND HEALTH, 2021, 4
  • [3] The impact of social prescribing services on service users: a systematic review of the evidence
    Pescheny, Julia, V
    Randhawa, Gurch
    Pappas, Yannis
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 30 (04): : 664 - 673
  • [4] Can Social Prescribing Foster Individual and Community Well-Being? A Systematic Review of the Evidence
    Vidovic, Dragana
    Reinhardt, Gina Yannitell
    Hammerton, Clare
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2021, 18 (10)
  • [5] Intervention Characteristics and Mechanisms and Their Relationship with the Influence of Social Prescribing: A Systematic Review
    Dubbeldeman, Eveline M.
    Kiefte-de Jong, Jessica C.
    Ardesch, Frank H.
    Boelens, Mirte
    van der Velde, Laura A.
    van der Steen, Sophie G. L.
    Heijnders, Miriam L.
    Crone, Mathilde R.
    HEALTH & SOCIAL CARE IN THE COMMUNITY, 2024, 2024
  • [6] The role of interprofessional collaboration for social prescribing: a systematic review
    Itua, Imose
    Wetzlmair-Kephart, Lisa-Christin
    Greave, Jane
    Wallace, Carolyn
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH-HEIDELBERG, 2025,
  • [7] Experiences of social prescribing in the UK: a qualitative systematic review
    Handayani, Nur Hidayati
    Wanat, Marta
    Tierney, Stephanie
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2025,
  • [8] Working less for more? A systematic review of the social, economic, and ecological effects of working time reduction policies in the global North
    Hanbury, Hugo
    Illien, Patrick
    Ming, Eva
    Moser, Stephanie
    Bader, Christoph
    Neubert, Sebastian
    SUSTAINABILITY-SCIENCE PRACTICE AND POLICY, 2023, 19 (01):
  • [9] Social prescribing outcomes: a mapping review of the evidence from 13 countries to identify key common outcomes
    Sonke, Jill
    Manhas, Nico
    Belden, Cassandra
    Morgan-Daniel, Jane
    Akram, Seher
    Marjani, Stefany
    Oduntan, Oluwasanmi
    Hammond, Gabrielle
    Martinez, Gabriella
    Davidson Carroll, Gray
    Rodriguez, Alexandra K.
    Burch, Shanae
    Colverson, Aaron J.
    Pesata, Virginia
    Fancourt, Daisy
    FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE, 2023, 10
  • [10] What is the quantity, quality and type of systematic review evidence available to inform the optimal prescribing of statins and antihypertensives? A systematic umbrella review and evidence and gap map
    Shaw, Liz
    Briscoe, Simon
    Nunns, Michael P.
    Lawal, Hassanat Mojirola
    Melendez-Torres, G. J.
    Turner, Malcolm
    Garside, Ruth
    Coon, Jo Thompson
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (02):