TY - JOUR T1 - EXPLORING HIGH MORTALITY RATES AMONG PEOPLE WITH MULTIPLE AND COMPLEX NEEDS: A QUALITATIVE STUDY USING PEER RESEARCH METHODS JF - medRxiv DO - 10.1101/2020.11.23.20235416 SP - 2020.11.23.20235416 AU - Rachel Perry AU - Emma A. Adams AU - Jill Harland AU - Angela Broadbridge AU - Emma L. Giles AU - Grant J. McGeechan AU - Amy O’Donnell AU - Sheena E. Ramsay Y1 - 2020/01/01 UR - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/24/2020.11.23.20235416.abstract N2 - Objective To explore the reasons underlying high mortality rates among people with multiple and complex needs and potential preventive opportunities.Design Qualitative study using peer researchSetting North East of EnglandParticipants Three focus group discussions were held involving: 1) people with lived experience of MCN (n=5); 2) frontline staff from health, social care, and voluntary organisations that support MCN groups (n=7); and 3) managers and commissioners of these organisations (n=9).Results Findings from this study provide valuable insights from people with lived experience and staff on the complexity underpinning high mortality rates for individuals experiencing multiple and complex needs. Mental ill-health and substance misuse (often co-occurring dual diagnosis) were highlighted as significant factors underlying premature mortality among multiple and complex needs groups. Potential triggers to identify people at-risk included critical life events (e.g. bereavement, relationship breakdown) and transitions (e.g. release from prison, completion of drug treatment). Early prevention, particularly supporting young people experiencing adverse childhood experiences was also highlighted as a priority.Conclusion High mortality in MCN groups may be reduced by addressing dual diagnosis, providing more support at critical life events, and investing in early prevention efforts. Future service delivery should take into consideration the intricate nature of multiple and complex needs and improve service access and navigation.Strengths and limitations of this studyThis study employed focus group discussions with individuals with multiple and complex needs and service providers to understand the complexity underpinning high morality rates for individuals experiencing multiple and complex needs.Peer researchers contributed to all stages of this study, including developing the aims, data collection, interpretation, and shaping recommendations.Using peer researchers enhanced our access to participants and improved interpretation of dataThe main limitation is that the study only recruited individuals in one region in the North East of England. Views from individuals with MCN and service providers in other areas of England might have led the results to being more generalisable.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work was funded by a small seed grant from Public Health England as part of the Research Hub Initiative. EAA, ELG, GJM, AOD, and SR, are members of Fuse, the Centre for Translational Research in Public Health (www.fuse.ac.uk). Fuse is a UK Clinical Research Collaboration (UKCRC) Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. Funding for Fuse from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, National Institute of Health Research, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, Health and Social Care Research and Development Office, Northern Ireland, National Institute for Social Care and Health Research (Welsh Assembly Government) and the Wellcome Trust, under the auspices of the UKCRC, is gratefully acknowledged. EAA is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Public Health Research (SPHR) Pre-doctoral Fellowship, Grant Reference Number PD-SPH-2015. SR and AOD are members of the National Institute for HealthResearch (NIHR) Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) North East & North Cumbria Inequality Theme. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR, Department of Health and Social Care, Public Health England, or any of the other funding or organizational bodies.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethical approval for the study was obtained from Newcastle University Ethics Committee (reference 11064/2018). A participant information sheet was made available to all participants and informed consent was gained prior to data collection.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDue to the sensitivity of the topic and the numbers of participants, we are not able to share FGD transcripts. Summaries are available from the corresponding author on request. ER -