Background People at high risk of severe illness from COVID-19 have experienced greater restrictions during the pandemic, yet there is a paucity of research exploring their lived experience. Objectives This study explored the impact of COVID-19 on people identified as at high risk of severe illness by UK Government, and in particular, the impact of the first lockdown on access to healthcare, medications and use of technological platforms. Methods 1038 UK adults who identified as at high risk of severe illness from COVID-19 in line with UK Government guidance or self-identified with acute or other chronic health conditions, completed the Awareness, Attitudes and Actions survey which explored the impact of COVID-19 on access to healthcare, management of long-term health condition, mental health, and health behaviours. Results Most participants reported feelings of vulnerability, anxiety and isolation, noticed that other people changed their behaviour towards them including a feeling of being stigmatised by people not categorised as high risk. Participants described the largely negative impact that the COVID-19 lockdown had on to health-related behaviours and access to healthcare, which had resulted in large declines in mental health and wellbeing. Participants also indicated disappointment at the UK Governments response and handling of the COVID-19 lockdown. Implications This study provides novel evidence of the lived experience of the first COVID-19 lockdown for people identified as at high risk of severe illness. In the context of behavioural health interventions, the ubiquity of digital technologies and their adoption into day-to-day life translates into greater potential reach than traditional interventions, and consequently, greater potential for positive public health impact. Findings should be considered by policymakers and healthcare professionals to support people now and as we transition through the recovery phase with a particular emphasis on supporting mental health and changes to the management of long-term health conditions.

Objectives: Reported health behaviour change intervention attrition rates vary considerably, from 10% to more than 80%, depending on the type and setting of the treatment programme. A better understanding of the determinants of programme adherence is required. Between March and August 2020, a convenience sample of 44 individual telephone interviews, as well as 42 online Qualtrics surveys took place. The objective was to explore perceived barriers, facilitators, and opportunities for participation, sustained participation as well as initial non-participation to better understand reasons for attrition in online delivery during the COVID-19 lockdown among vulnerable and under-served groups within an Integrated Healthy Lifestyle Service (IHLS). Methods: A convenience sample of 44 individual telephone interviews, as well as 42 online Qualtrics surveys resulted in a total of 86 (33 male) individuals comprising intervention clients. Clients included children and young people (n = 16), manual workers (n = 7), Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic (n = 19), physical disability (n = 8), learning disability (n = 6), and those from areas of high deprivation (n = 19), as well as Integrated Healthy Lifestyle Service practitioners (n = 11). Results: The study revealed that more resources and support are needed for Black, Asian or Minority Ethnic; manual worker; learning disability; and high-deprivation sub-groups in order to reduce attrition rates. Specifically, a lack of technological equipment and competence of using such equipment was identified as key barriers to initial and sustained attendance among these vulnerable and under-served sub-groups during the COVID-19 lockdown. Conclusion: The pattern of differences in attrition during the COVID-19 lockdown suggests that further research is required to explore how best to ensure online health behaviour change offers are scalable and accessible to all.

No abstract

Aims: The current study aimed to evaluate implementation fidelity of an Integrated Healthy Lifestyle Service (IHLS). Methods: A pragmatic sample of 28 individual interviews and 11 focus groups were conducted. This resulted in a total of 81 (22 male) individuals comprising key stakeholders (n = 18), as well as intervention staff across senior management (n = 4), team lead (n = 14) and practitioner (n = 11) roles, and intervention clients (n = 34). Results: A mixed degree of implementation fidelity was demonstrated throughout the five a priori fidelity domains of study design, provider training, intervention delivery, intervention receipt, and enactment. Stakeholders, staff and clients alike noted a high degree of intervention receipt across all services offered. Contrastingly, practitioners noted that they received minimal formal operational, data systems, clinical, and curriculum training as well as a lack of personal development opportunities. Consequently, practitioners reported low confidence in delivering sessions and collecting and analysing any data. A top-down approach to information dissemination within the service was also noted among practitioners which affected motivation and overall team morale. Conclusion: Results can be used to conceptualise best practices as a process to further strengthen the design, delivery and recruitment strategies of the IHLS.

No abstract