Social prescribing
BMJ 2019; 364 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1285 (Published 28 March 2019) Cite this as: BMJ 2019;364:l1285Linked opinion
Prescribing should be personalised, whether it’s social or pharmacological
Linked opinion
Social prescribing offers huge potential but requires a nuanced evidence base
Linked feature
Social prescribing: coffee mornings, singing groups, and dance lessons on the NHS
Linked Editorial
Sustainable practice: what can I do?
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Responding to previous comments:
Glenn Stewart - I agree. I would love to live in a more fair, equal and just society that was serious about addressing wider determinants and was intent on normalising healthy choices. Unfortunately we are in the here and now and there is increasing evidence that social prescribing can be an effective way of meeting at least some of the needs of the increasing number of casualties of our unequal society.
Diana Burgh-Murua and J K Anand - There is a recruitment crisis in community social work and in some communities they are treated with a degree of suspicion because of the difficult issues they have to deal with in relation to safeguarding. I think it is unlikely that they would be prepared to take on this role.
Sarah Hagyard - I agree we should be doing everything possible to reduce our carbon footprint. Pain, opioid use, musculo-skeletal disease, inactivity and social prescribing deserves its own in-depth approach.
Competing interests: No competing interests
‘Social prescribing’ benefits both patients and society. Some prescribing however, whilst benefiting the patient might actually be viewed as being ‘anti-social’. We anaesthetists have recently become aware that our ultra-stable and ‘ultra-clean’ volatile anaesthetic desflurane is in fact far more environmentally damaging than other similar agents. The slightly faster wake-up profile comes at a pollution cost to the planet equivalent to burning buckets rather than bottles full of petrol. An invisible but real inferno in the operating theatre.
And our more liberal use of strong opioids to manage postoperative pain following early discharge from hospital. Often effective in the short-term and well-meaning undoubtedly, but perhaps one of the factors responsible for promoting long-term addiction, misuse and social misery.
Just as we need to think about ‘social prescribing’ we should also consider the possible ‘anti-social’ consequences of the medicines we use. We need not only to care for our patients, but also to look after their children and grandchildren.
Competing interests: No competing interests
These comments are for the attention of Ms Diana Burgui-Murua, a Senior Medical Social Worker. She describes social prescribing as part of the remit of a social worker and recalls the work of the “Lady Almoner”.
Of course she is too young to have known about the Lady Almoners first hand. In the days of my comparative youth (I am only 87) I had the pleasure of working with these good ladies. From 1960s onward , in hospitals in the Midlands and in London, I remember the Almoners (I Should say LADY Almoners) did mostly take care of financial problems of the patients, and sometimes helped soothe the marital discords of the patients.
As would be obvious from the title, they started off disbursing ALMS, free monies donated to the hospitals to the patients in need and for meeting travelling expenses of relatives of long stay patients.
Let us now move forward to Sebhomisation of the social services. I remember it well... ...May I leave it to Ms Burgui-Murua to trace the further history. I might then fill in the gaps. I was there!
Competing interests: No competing interests
I read this article with contentment but with worry. What the author is describing I trust is common remit of social workers attached to healthcare settings (and not exclusively, also in Primary Care). I myself have been doing this since 1994 and it is a pillar in my role in the Memory Clinic where I work. Social prescribing was not singled out and newly named, yet an integral part of the role description of a social worker.
I am delighted to see the spotlight placed in how social determinants have a major impact in health outcomes. Also in the fact that the bio-psycho-social approach to health care is realising the importance of the psychological and the social aspect in its very own name. The WHO in 1948 defined Health as "State of complete physical, mental, and social well being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity” Yet we are still to this date having to emphasise how social determinants are key to health.
Social workers work from a Person Centred approach. We embed this person centred approach in a systems approach and from there we work on a life-course approach to health, including education, healthy eating, exercise, limit alcohol, no smoking, socialization, mental stimulation, good sleep, good mental health, availability of talking therapies, family support, support to families in crisis, support with social welfare/income as part of a plan for change, signposting of services, and this is by no means exhaustive.
The predecessors of medical social workers, the lady almoners, in the middle of the last century (1948) were already trying to address similar issues of recognising of their roles.
Aneurin Bevan, Minister for Health in the UK at the time, addressed their AGM in 1950, saying:
"The work of the doctor must be reinforced by the work of the Almoner, for it is now recognized that it is not possible for even the most skilled medical service to have its best beneficial effects upon the patient if he is harassed by domestic anxieties and by fears of the future that intelligent activity can remove. Therefore the Almoner has become a very important part indeed of the modern healing work."
"If a protest is not made, it seems to me possible that the almoner may come to be regarded merely as an assessment officer & as such relegated to work of little importance or even abolished.
She may have been reassured that the research & hospital work role of the
almoner would not be assigned either to the medical profession or to health visitors. (1)
So here is my protest of sorts - I wholeheartedly agree with the need of social prescribing. Just do not invent new names for the most adequate professional to administer this. Use the Social Workers you already have.
(1)(Aneurin Bevan, The Minister of Health Addresses the Annual General Meeting
The Almoner (April 1948), p. 5, MRC, MSS.378/IMSW/A/17/9/1)
Competing interests: No competing interests
As highlighted by Drinkwater et.al (1) social prescribing is increasingly popular with the Long Term Plan aiming for over 900,000 people to be referred to social prescribing by 2023/24 (2). However, depending on how ‘wider determinants of health’ are defined it is possibly not true to assert that social prescribing will address them and may therefore distract attention from factors that may have a greater impact upon population health.
The classic Dahlgreen and Whitehead model (3) has four layers of factors affecting health; social and community networks sitting between such as ‘living and working conditions’ and ‘individual life-style factors’. This has been modified by such as Barton and Grant (2006) (4) who placed ‘Community networks, social capital’ between ‘life-style’ and ‘local community’. These are not only academic points but profoundly important as the following example may illustrate.
Drinkwater et. al give the examples the social prescribing of physical activity, associated with reducing all long-term conditions (LTCs) by 20 – 40% depending on the condition (5). From a health perspective therefore the question is what social determinants have meant that physical activity levels are so low (objective rather than self-report measurement indicates that it may be that only 5% of the population meets recommended guidelines (6)) and how to raise them. The causes of physical inactivity may be as complex as those of obesity highlighted by the Foresight Report (7) and include the increasing mechanisation and electronification of life. However, physical activity can also be integrated into everyday life; in Copenhagen 41% of journeys to work or education are by bicycle with ‘being faster’ and ‘easier’ each being cited by over 50% of survey respondents as the reason for cycling (8). In Copenhagen therefore for many physical activity is the default choice; people are physically activity simply because they are going from A to B. London Sport has a target of making London the most physically active city in the world. It may be useful to consider the lessons that might be learnt from example of where people are physically active at the beginning and end of working day.
There are many ways in which the social determinants of health may be defined. From a population perspective though it may be useful to think that ‘the system is perfectly aligned to produce the results that it does’. If lifestyle choices are being prescribing so that people need to make an effort / go out of their way then it is not the ‘social determinants of health’ that are being addressed. And, that in an age of austerity and when the NHS is spending 70% of its budget on LTCs this is profoundly important (9).
References
(1) Drinkwater C, Wildman J, Moffatt S. Clinical Update: Social Prescribing. BMJ 2019;364:1285-doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l1285.
(2) NHS. THe NHS Long Term Plan. 2019:www.longtermplan.nhs.uk.
(3) Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. Policies and Strategies to Promote Social Equity in Health. 1991;Institute for Futures Studies. Stockholm. Sweden.
(4) Barton H, Grant M. A health map for the local human habitat. Journal of The Royal Society for the Promotion of Health 2006;126(6):252-261.
(5) Department of Health. Start Active, Stay Active. A report on physical activity for health from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers. 2011.
(6) Craig R, Shelton N(. Health Survey for England 2007 Volume 1. Healthy lifestyles: knowledge, attitudes and behaviour. 2008.
(7) Butland B, Jebb S, Kopelman P, MacPherson K, Thomas S, Mardell J, et al. Tackling obesities: future choices – project report (2nd Ed). London: Foresight Programme of the Government Office for Science. 2007.
(8) City of Copenhagen. Copenhagen. City of Cyclists. Facts and Figures 2017. 2017.
(9) NHS. Five year forward view. 2014.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Re: Social prescribing and GP workload
Drinkwater et al.[1] comprehensively address an important aspect of care, namely social prescribing. Although the essential items for success continue to worked out (and there are many competing and mutually exclusive variables), we are not convinced by Drinkwater’s first bullet point. While it is true that social prescribing can improve patient welfare and, as shown by a Sheffield group, social prescribing may reduce demand on hospital services, [2] the workload of general practice has not been reduced convincingly by social prescribing.[3] We have also found this neutral effect in the over 65 year olds, a particular group in need of social prescribing.[4] Recently telephone-first systems had also been hailed as a means of reducing hospital attendances and admissions[5] before thorough evaluation had shown that this innovation was not the panacea for managing excess demand on primary healthcare services.[6] Available evidence should always be carefully and critically appraised for headline messages.
References
1 Drinkwater C, Wildman J, Moffatt S. Social Prescribing. BMJ. 2019;364:l1285. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l1285
2 Dayson C, Bashir N. The social and economic impact of the Rotherham social prescribing pilot: main evaluation report. 2014.
3 Bickerdike L, Booth A, Wilson PM, Farley K, Wright K. Social prescribing: less rhetoric and more reality. A systematic review of the evidence. BMJ Open 2017;7:e015203.
4 Loftus AM, McCauley F, McCarron MO. Impact of social prescribing on general practice workload and polypharmacy. Public Health 2017;148:96-101. doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2017.03.010.
5 England NHS. High quality care now and for future generations: Transforming urgent and emergency care services in England. Page 35-36. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/urg-emerg-care-ev-...
6 Newbould J, Abel G, Ball S, et al. Evaluation of telephone first approach to demand management in English general practice: observational study. BMJ 2017;358:j4197.
Competing interests: No competing interests