IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v296y2022ics0277953622000491.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A review of the effectiveness and experiences of welfare advice services co-located in health settings: A critical narrative systematic review

Author

Listed:
  • Reece, Sian
  • Sheldon, Trevor A.
  • Dickerson, Josie
  • Pickett, Kate E.

Abstract

We conducted a narrative systematic review to assess the health, social and financial impacts of co-located welfare services in the UK and to explore the effectiveness of and facilitators and barriers to successful implementation of these services, in order to guide future policy and practice. We searched Medline, EMBASE and other literature sources, from January 2010 to November 2020, for literature examining the impact of co-located welfare services in the UK on any outcome. The review identified 14 studies employing a range of study designs, including: one non-randomised controlled trial; one pilot randomised controlled trial; one before-and-after-study; three qualitative studies; and eight case studies. A theory of change model, developed a priori, was used as an analytical framework against which to map the evidence on how the services work, why and for whom. All studies demonstrated improved financial security for participants, generating an average of £27 of social, economic and environmental return per £1 invested. Some studies reported improved mental health for individuals accessing services. Several studies attributed subjective improvements in physical health to the service addressing key social determinants of health. Benefits to the health service were also demonstrated through reduced workload for healthcare professionals. Key components of a successful service included co-production during service development and ongoing enhanced multi-disciplinary collaboration. Overall, this review demonstrates improved financial security for participants and for the first time models the wider health and welfare benefits for participants and for health service from these services. However, given the generally poor scientific quality of the studies, care must be taken in drawing firm conclusions. There remains a need for more high quality research, using experimental methods and larger sample sizes, to further build upon this evidence base and to measure the strength of the proposed theoretical pathways in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Reece, Sian & Sheldon, Trevor A. & Dickerson, Josie & Pickett, Kate E., 2022. "A review of the effectiveness and experiences of welfare advice services co-located in health settings: A critical narrative systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:296:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622000491
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622000491
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114746?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suzanne Moffatt & Emma Noble & Martin White, 2012. "Addressing the Financial Consequences of Cancer: Qualitative Evaluation of a Welfare Rights Advice Service," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-10, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Denise Howel & Suzanne Moffatt & Catherine Haighton & Andrew Bryant & Frauke Becker & Melanie Steer & Sarah Lawson & Terry Aspray & Eugene M G Milne & Luke Vale & Elaine McColl & Martin White, 2019. "Does domiciliary welfare rights advice improve health-related quality of life in independent-living, socio-economically disadvantaged people aged ≥60 years? Randomised controlled trial, economic and p," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-31, January.
    2. Aileen Timmons & Rachael Gooberman-Hill & Linda Sharp, 2013. ""It's at a Time in Your Life When You Are Most Vulnerable": A Qualitative Exploration of the Financial Impact of a Cancer Diagnosis and Implications for Financial Protection in Health," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(11), pages 1-1, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:296:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622000491. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.