The emergent fungal pathogen Candida auris is increasingly recognised as an important cause of healthcare-associated infections globally. It is highly transmissible, adaptable, and persistent, resulting in an organism with significant outbreak potential that risks devastating consequences. Progress in the ability to identify C. auris in clinical specimens is encouraging, but laboratory diagnostic capacity and surveillance systems are lacking in many countries. Intrinsic resistance to commonly used antifungals, combined with the ability to rapidly acquire resistance to therapy, substantially restricts treatment options and novel agents are desperately needed. Despite this, outbreaks can be interrupted, and mortality avoided or minimised, through the application of rigorous infection prevention and control measures with an increasing evidence base. This review provides an update on epidemiology, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, risk factors, identification and typing, resistance profiles, treatment, detection of colonisation, and infection prevention and control measures for C. auris. This review has informed a planned 2024 update to the United Kingdom Health Security Agency (UKHSA) guidance on the laboratory investigation, management, and infection prevention and control of Candida auris. A multidisciplinary response is needed to control C. auris transmission in a healthcare setting and should emphasise outbreak preparedness and response, rapid contact tracing and isolation or cohorting of patients and staff, strict hand hygiene and other infection prevention and control measures, dedicated or single-use equipment, appropriate disinfection, and effective communication concerning patient transfers and discharge.

UNASSIGNED: The mental health of children/young people is a growing concern internationally. Numerous reports and reviews have consistently described United Kingdom children\'s mental health services as fragmented, variable, inaccessible and lacking an evidence base. Little is known about the effectiveness of, and implementation complexities associated with, service models for children/young people experiencing \'common\' mental health problems like anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and self-harm.
UNASSIGNED: To develop a model for high-quality service design for children/young people experiencing common mental health problems by identifying available services, barriers and enablers to access, and the effectiveness, cost effectiveness and acceptability of such services.
UNASSIGNED: Evidence syntheses with primary research, using a sequential, mixed-methods design. Inter-related scoping and integrative reviews were conducted alongside a map of relevant services across England and Wales, followed by a collective case study of English and Welsh services.
UNASSIGNED: Global (systematic reviews); England and Wales (service map; case study).
UNASSIGNED: Literature reviews: relevant bibliographic databases and grey literature. Service map: online survey and offline desk research. Case study: 108 participants (41 children/young people, 26 parents, 41 staff) across nine case study sites.
UNASSIGNED: A single literature search informed both reviews. The service map was obtained from an online survey and internet searches. Case study sites were sampled from the service map; because of coronavirus disease 2019, case study data were collected remotely. \'Young co-researchers\' assisted with case study data collection. The integrative review and case study data were synthesised using the \'weaving\' approach of \'integration through narrative\'.
UNASSIGNED: A service model typology was derived from the scoping review. The integrative review found effectiveness evidence for collaborative care, outreach approaches, brief intervention services and the \'availability, responsiveness and continuity\' framework. There was cost-effectiveness evidence only for collaborative care. No service model appeared to be more acceptable than others. The service map identified 154 English and Welsh services. Three themes emerged from the case study data: \'pathways to support\'; \'service engagement\'; and \'learning and understanding\'. The integrative review and case study data were synthesised into a coproduced model of high-quality service provision for children/young people experiencing common mental health problems.
UNASSIGNED: Defining \'service model\' was a challenge. Some service initiatives were too new to have filtered through into the literature or service map. Coronavirus disease 2019 brought about a surge in remote/digital services which were under-represented in the literature. A dearth of relevant studies meant few cost-effectiveness conclusions could be drawn.
UNASSIGNED: There was no strong evidence to suggest any existing service model was better than another. Instead, we developed a coproduced, evidence-based model that incorporates the fundamental components necessary for high-quality children\'s mental health services and which has utility for policy, practice and research.
UNASSIGNED: Future work should focus on: the potential of our model to assist in designing, delivering and auditing children\'s mental health services; reasons for non-engagement in services; the cost effectiveness of different approaches in children\'s mental health; the advantages/disadvantages of digital/remote platforms in delivering services; understanding how and what the statutory sector might learn from the non-statutory sector regarding choice, personalisation and flexibility.
UNASSIGNED: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018106219.
UNASSIGNED: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: 17/09/08) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 13. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
In this research study, we explored services for children and young people with ‘common’ mental health problems like depression, anxiety and self-harm. We aimed to find out what services exist, how children/young people and families find out about and access these services, what the services actually do, whether they are helpful and whether they offer value for money. We looked at the international literature (reports and research papers) to identify different approaches to providing support, and to find out whether certain approaches worked better than others and whether children/young people and families preferred some approaches over others. The literature provided very little information about the value for money of services. We also carried out a survey and used the internet to identify 154 relevant services in England and Wales. To explore services in more detail, and hear directly from those using them, we planned to visit 9 of the 154 services to interview children/young people, parents and staff. Unfortunately, coronavirus disease 2019 stopped us directly visiting the nine services and so we conducted phone and video interviews instead. We still managed to speak to, and hear the experiences of, more than 100 people (including children/young people and parents). We combined information from the literature with information from the interviews to create an evidence-based ‘model’ of what services should look like. This model considers some basic things like how quickly children/young people could access a service, what information was available, the importance of confidentiality and whether staff make the service fit with the child/young person’s needs and interests. It also considers whether the service helps children/young people learn skills to manage their mental health and whether staff at a service work well together. We hope our model will help existing and new services improve what they offer to children/young people and families.

BACKGROUND: The disproportionate effect of COVID-19 on long term care facility (LTCF) residents has highlighted the need for clear, consistent guidance on the management of pandemics in such settings. As research exploring the experiences of LTCFs during the pandemic and the implications of mass hospital discharge, restricting staff movement, and limiting visitation from relatives are emerging, an in-depth review of policies, guidance and recommendations issued during this time could facilitate wider understanding in this area.
OBJECTIVE: To identify policies, guidance, and recommendations related to LTCF staff and residents, in England issued by the government during the COVID-19 pandemic, developing a timeline of key events and synthesizing the policy aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes.
METHODS: A scoping review of publicly available policy documents, guidance, and recommendations related to COVID-19 in LTCFs in England, identified using systematic searches of UK government websites. The main aims, recommendations, implementation and intended outcomes reported in included documents were extracted. Data was analysed using thematic synthesis following a three-stage approach: coding the text, grouping codes into descriptive themes, and development of analytical themes.
RESULTS: Thirty-three key policy documents were included in the review. Six areas of recommendations were identified: infection prevention and control, hospital discharge, testing and vaccination, staffing, visitation and continuing routine care. Seven areas of implementation were identified: funding, collaborative working, monitoring and data collection, reducing workload, decision making and leadership, training and technology, and communication.
CONCLUSIONS: LTCFs remain complex settings, and it is imperative that lessons are learned from the experiences during COVID-19 to ensure that future pandemics are managed appropriately. This review has synthesized the policies issued during this time, however, the extent to which such guidance was communicated to LTCFs, and subsequently implemented, in addition to being effective, requires further research. In particular, understanding the secondary effects of such policies and how they can be introduced within the existing challenges inherent to adult social care, need addressing.

A large increase in hospital-onset and intensive-care-unit-onset Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia rates in English acute trusts was observed between 2020 and 2021, coinciding with reported increases in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases and associated hospitalizations. Many of these S. aureus bacteraemia cases were defined as co-/secondary infections to COVID-19. Over the same period, increases in the percentage of ventilator-associated pneumonia-related bacteraemia were also found. The COVID-19 pandemic appears to have contributed to the increase in hospital-onset S. aureus bacteraemia in England; further studies are needed to better understand the impacts on patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and assess the effectiveness of national antibiotic optimization interventions in primary and secondary care in England (2013-2022).
METHODS: A systematic scoping review was conducted. Literature databases (Embase and Medline) were used to identify interventions and evaluations. Reports included the UK AMR Strategy (2013-2018), National Action Plan (2019-2024) and English Surveillance Programme for Antimicrobial Utilisation and Resistance (ESPAUR) reports (2014-2022). The design, focus and quality of evaluations and the interventions\' effectiveness were extracted.
RESULTS: Four hundred and seventy-seven peer-reviewed studies and 13 reports were screened. One hundred and three studies were included for review, identifying 109 interventions in eight categories: policy and commissioning (n = 9); classifications (n = 1); guidance and toolkits (n = 22); monitoring and feedback (n = 17); professional engagement and training (n = 19); prescriber tools (n = 12); public awareness (n = 17); workforce and governance (n = 12).Most interventions lack high-quality effectiveness evidence. Evaluations mainly focused on clinical, microbiological or antibiotic use outcomes, or intervention implementation, often assessing how interventions were perceived to affect behaviour. Only 16 interventions had studies that quantified effects on prescribing, of which six reported reductions. The largest reduction was reported with structural-level interventions and attributed to a policy and commissioning intervention (primary care financial incentives). Behavioural interventions (guidance and toolkits) reported the greatest impact in hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: Many interventions have targeted antibiotic use, each pulling different levers across the health system simultaneously. On the basis of these studies, structural-level interventions may have the greatest impact. Collectively, the combination of interventions may explain England\'s decline in prescribing but direct evidence of causality is unavailable.

BACKGROUND: Harm arising from National Health Service (NHS) healthcare results in significant human cost for the patient, those who care for them, and the medical staff involved. Furthermore, patient harm results in substantial financial costs to the public purse. Improving how NHS providers in England respond to patient harm could reduce the number of claims for clinical negligence brought against NHS. Doing so will ensure those affected receive the justice they deserve and protect the public purse. Law and policy are key to supporting providers of NHS healthcare to respond to patient harm but are not necessarily understood and therefore can be challenging to apply to practice. Research exploring how law and policy supports this understanding is limited. The purpose of this scoping review is to address this knowledge gap and improve understanding by critically evaluating how law and policy supports providers of NHS healthcare in England to respond to patient harm.
METHODS: The review will use the methodological framework proposed by Arskey and O\'Malley, Levac et al and the Joanna Briggs Institute. Search strategies will be developed using selected key words and index terms. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Westlaw and reference lists of relevant publications will be searched to identify relevant grey literature. Two reviewers will independently assess the extracted data against the eligibility criteria. All studies identified will be charted and the results presented as a narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Bone conduction hearing implants are a well-established method of hearing rehabilitation in children and adults. This study aimed to review any changes in provision in England.
METHODS: The total number of bone conduction hearing implantations performed was analysed from 2012 to 2021 utilising Hospital Episode Statistics data for England.
RESULTS: The total number of procedures has increased by 58 per cent. One-stage bone conduction hearing implantations in adults accounts for the largest proportion of this increase (93 per cent of the total). The number performed in children has remained stable and accounts for 73 per cent (n = 433) of all two-stage procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: The data show that bone conduction hearing implant surgery is becoming increasingly popular, particularly in adults. This has correlated with the increase in availability, national recommendations and choice of devices.

OBJECTIVE: Given the complex nature of integrated care systems (ICSs), the geographical spread and the large number of organisations involved in partnership delivery, the importance of leadership cannot be overstated. This paper aims to present novel findings from a rapid realist review of ICS leadership in England. The overall review question was: how does leadership in ICSs work, for whom and in what circumstances?
METHODS: Development of initial programme theories and associated context-mechanism-outcome configurations (CMOCs) were supported by the theory-gleaning activities of a review of ICS strategies and guidance documents, a scoping review of the literature and interviews with key informants. A refined programme theory was then developed by testing these CMOCs against empirical data published in academic literature. Following screening and testing, six CMOCs were extracted from 18 documents. The study design, conduct and reporting were informed by the Realist And Metanarrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) training materials (Wong et al., 2013).
RESULTS: The review informed four programme theories explaining that leadership in ICSs works when ICS leaders hold themselves and others to account for improving population health, a sense of purpose is fostered through a clear vision, partners across the system are engaged in problem ownership and relationships are built at all levels of the system.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite being a rigorous and comprehensive investigation, stakeholder input was limited to one ICS, potentially restricting insights from varied geographical contexts. In addition, the recent establishment of ICSs meant limited literature availability, with few empirical studies conducted. Although this emphasises the importance and originality of the research, this scarcity posed challenges in extracting and applying certain programme theory elements, particularly context.
CONCLUSIONS: This review will be of relevance to academics and health-care leaders within ICSs in England, offering critical insights into ICS leadership, integrating diverse evidence to develop new evidence-based recommendations, filling a gap in the current literature and informing leadership practice and health-care systems.

Integrated care refers to person-centered and coordinated, health and social care, and community services. Integrated care systems are partnerships of organizations that deliver health and care services which were placed on a statutory footing in England, April 2022. Due to the need for fast, accessible, and relevant evidence, a rapid review was conducted according to World Health Organization methods to determine barriers and enablers of integrated care across the United Kingdom, 2018-2022. Nine databases were searched for review articles reporting evaluation of integrated care interventions involving medical (clinical and diagnostic) and nonmedical (public health services and community-based or social care/person-centred care) approaches, quality checked with the Critical Appraisal Skills Program qualitative checklist. OpenGrey and hand searches were used to identify grey literature, quality checked with the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Objectivity, Date, and Significance checklist. Thirty-four reviews and 21 grey literature reports fitted inclusion criteria of adult physical/mental health outcomes/multiple morbidities. Thematic analysis revealed six themes (collaborative approach; costs; evidence and evaluation; integration of care; professional roles; service user factors) with 20 subthemes including key barriers (cost effectiveness; effectiveness of integrated care; evaluation methods; focus of evidence; future research; impact of integration) and enablers (accessing care; collaboration and partnership; concept of integration; inter-professional relationships; person-centered ethos). Findings indicated a paucity of robust research to evaluate such interventions and lack of standardized methodology to assess cost effectiveness, although there is growing interest in co-production that has engendered information sharing and reduced duplication, and inter-professional collaborations that have bridged task-related gaps and overlaps. The importance of identifying elements of integrated care associated with successful outcomes and determining sustainability of interventions meeting joined-up care and preventive population health objectives was highlighted.

Background: The drive to expedite patient access for diseases with high unmet treatment needs has come with an increasing use of single-arm trials (SATs), especially in oncology. However, the lack of control arms in such trials creates challenges to assess and demonstrate comparative efficacy. External control (EC) arms can be used to bridge this gap, with various types of sources available to obtain relevant data. Objective: To examine the source of ECs in single-arm oncology health technology assessment (HTA) submissions to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) and how this selection was justified by manufacturers and assessed by the respective HTA body. Methods: Single-arm oncology HTA submission reports published by NICE (England) and PBAC (Australia) from January 2011 to August 2021 were reviewed, with data qualitatively synthesized to identify themes. Results: Forty-eight oncology submissions using EC arms between 2011 and 2021 were identified, with most submissions encompassing blood and bone marrow cancers (52%). In HTA submissions to NICE and PBAC, the EC arm was typically constructed from a combination of data sources, with the company\'s justification in data source selection infrequently provided (PBAC [2 out of 19]; NICE [6 out of 29]), although this lack of justification was not heavily criticized by either HTA body. Conclusion: Although HTA bodies such as NICE and PBAC encourage that EC source justification should be provided in submissions, this review found that this is not typically implemented in practice. Guidance is needed to establish best practices as to how EC selection should be documented in HTA submissions.