BackgroundStreet Triage is a collaborative service between mental health workers and police which aims to improve the emergency response to individuals experiencing crisis, but peer reviewed evidence of the effectiveness of these services is limited. We examined the design and potential impact of two services, along with factors that hindered and facilitated the implementation of the services.MethodsWe conducted 14 semi-structured interviews with mental health and police stakeholders with experience of a Street Triage service in two locations of the UK. Framework analysis identified themes related to key aspects of the Street Triage service, perceived benefits of Street Triage, and ways in which the service could be developed in the future.ResultsStakeholders endorsed the Street Triage services which utilised different operating models. These models had several components including a joint response vehicle or a mental health worker in a police control room. Operating models were developed with consideration of the local geographical and population density. The ability to make referrals to the existing mental health service was perceived as key to the success of the service yet there was evidence to suggest Street Triage had the potential to increase pressure on already stretched mental health and police services. Identifying staff with skills and experience for Street Triage work was important, and their joint response resulted in shared decision making which was less risk averse for the police and regarded as in the interest of patient care by mental health professionals. Collaboration during Street Triage improved the understanding of roles and responsibilities in the ‘other’ agency and led to the development of local information sharing agreements. Views about the future direction of the service focused on expansion of Street Triage to address other shared priorities such as frequent users of police and mental health services, and a reduction in the police involvement in crisis response.ConclusionThe Street Triage service received strong support from stakeholders involved in it. Referral to existing health services is a key function of Street Triage, and its impact on referral behaviour requires rigorous evaluation. Street Triage may result in improvement to collaborative working but competing demands for resources within mental health and police services presented challenges for implementation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-1026-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

Objective To assess whether non-clinical staff can effectively manage people at high risk of cardiovascular disease using digital health technologies.Design Pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.Setting 42 general practices in three areas of England.Participants Between 3 December 2012 and 23 July 2013 we recruited 641 adults aged 40 to 74 years with a 10 year cardiovascular disease risk of 20% or more, no previous cardiovascular event, at least one modifiable risk factor (systolic blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg, body mass index ≥30, current smoker), and access to a telephone, the internet, and email. Participants were individually allocated to intervention (n=325) or control (n=316) groups using automated randomisation stratified by site, minimised by practice and baseline risk score.Interventions Intervention was the Healthlines service (alongside usual care), comprising regular telephone calls from trained lay health advisors following scripts generated by interactive software. Advisors facilitated self management by supporting participants to use online resources to reduce risk factors, and sought to optimise drug use, improve treatment adherence, and encourage healthier lifestyles. The control group comprised usual care alone.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the proportion of participants responding to treatment, defined as maintaining or reducing their cardiovascular risk after 12 months. Outcomes were collected six and 12 months after randomisation and analysed masked. Participants were not masked.Results 50% (148/295) of participants in the intervention group responded to treatment compared with 43% (124/291) in the control group (adjusted odds ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 1.9; number needed to treat=13); a difference possibly due to chance (P=0.08). The intervention was associated with reductions in blood pressure (difference in mean systolic −2.7 mm Hg (95% confidence interval −4.7 to −0.6 mm Hg), mean diastolic −2.8 (−4.0 to −1.6 mm Hg); weight −1.0 kg (−1.8 to −0.3 kg), and body mass index −0.4 ( −0.6 to −0.1) but not cholesterol −0.1 (−0.2 to 0.0), smoking status (adjusted odds ratio 0.4, 0.2 to 1.0), or overall cardiovascular risk as a continuous measure (−0.4, −1.2 to 0.3)). The intervention was associated with improvements in diet, physical activity, drug adherence, and satisfaction with access to care, treatment received, and care coordination. One serious related adverse event occurred, when a participant was admitted to hospital with low blood pressure.Conclusions This evidence based telehealth approach was associated with small clinical benefits for a minority of people with high cardiovascular risk, and there was no overall improvement in average risk. The Healthlines service was, however, associated with improvements in some risk behaviours, and in perceptions of support and access to care.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 27508731.

No abstract

Clinical decision rules and D-dimer are not helpful for diagnosing pregnant/postpartum women with suspected PE.