Critically Appraising A Health And Social Care Policy Assignment Sample

1. Introduction OfCritically Appraising A Health And Social Care Policy.

Critically Appraising A Health And Social Care PolicyWhile Creating Health Approaches To Tackle Social Inequalities In Health

Health inequalities are considered different in terms of addressing health status and the distributions of the overall health resources in different population groups and that creates social conditions impacting population on the basis of their birthplace, lifestyle, working and age (Eneanya et al. 2022). It also includes the special population group receiving less care approach in regards to their needs and appropriate or some optimal care process which results in poorer health outcomes. The following essay is aiming at addressing policy initiatives in the UK in case of pointing out health issues and target population on the basis of epidemiological information and demographic data. This is followed by discussing requirements of relevant workforce help inequalities and relevant interventions.

Feeling overwhelmed with your assignments? Take a breather and let New Assignment Help ease your burden! Our professional team provides unmatched assignment writing services in the UK, guaranteeing academic success. Explore our free assignment samples for inspiration and guidance.

2. Overview of the policy initiative including the health issue and target population

The identified target population for the following context refers to the local community level in terms of managing health inequalities and implying policies.

As a healthy population is considered one of the nation's most popular aspects, it also has its own right and creates value for the society (Lee et al. 2022). The policy regarding long term improvement in life expectancy and mortality in the UK is considered and is falling behind in comparison with high income countries. After the pandemic situation, the life expectancy of males and females are 78.6% and 82.6% which have lowered by 1.3 years for male and 1 year for female population (Health.org.uk, 2023). This is followed by issues at the practice level that creates inequalities in the social and healthcare.

While addressing the NHS performance and waiting time, it can be stated that the worst performance against waiting time targets is falling behind and highest proportions of population are waiting for more than four hours for emergency department sins 2004 and a high proportion of population is waiting more than 18 weeks for non-essential treatment process since 2008 (Health.org.uk, 2023). This is also followed by the target of treating the cancer patient within 62 days of urgent referral has not been met for the past 5 years and some of them are experiencing more delay for those appointments (Lode et al. 2022). These impacts increasing in health, low management of long-term health conditions and sport treatment of a population that lacks workforce investment towards building and equipment alongside the establishment of the social care sector in the UK.

On the other hand, while addressing health and social care funding, the country has more than half of historical average growth rate of healthcare spending in the form of 14% in comparison with the EU14 care package which was below 6% (Health.org.uk, 2023). In the case of the UK, the strategic planning regarding the funding settlement by the NHS is up to 2023-2024 and has an average increase of 3.3% per year (Health.org.uk, 2023). However, it still lacks maintenance and workplace shortage and budget investment such as training, public health issues and long term fundings.

Apart from this, in terms of addressing health and social care workforce, the NHS is facing a workforce shortage of approximately 100000 staff and 122000 shortage of social care workers alongside the absence of zero contract on the working hours (Eneanya et al. 2022). The overall shortage could grow up to 200000 by the year of 2023 and 2024 (Health.org.uk, 2023). Besides, the number of trained nursing staff is also limited as the NHS heavily relies on international recruitment and insufficient bonus to meet the cost of living for the healthcare staff (Den Broeder et al. 2022).

Besides, inequalities in the case of life expectancy also refers to the behavioural risks of health such as smoking, drinking and insufficient diet, accessing and being able to afford healthcare services, wider socioeconomic determining factors such as sex, ethnicity, disability and social exclusion (Lode et al. 2022). These also increased the gap in life expectancy and exacerbated inequalities.

In addition, while addressing the implementation of policies at the local level, it can be stated that policy under Haringey borough council is implied in terms of improving local population health in the name of "health in all policies". It aligns with obesity control of the local population and creating a health enhancing environment (Chakraborty and Paul, 2023). This policy also includes the amendments of “Health and Social Care Act 2012 alongside Social Value Act 2012” which are impactful to consider the financial, social, environmental and cultural wellbeing (Garcia, 2022). However, the country is facing issues while aligning policies with community involvement in terms of mitigating issues of health inequalities. This is followed by issues with implementing reliable changes in the community to meet the health requirements in the local population alongside lack of awareness. It also includes lack of long-term investment and limited evaluation in terms of assessing the complexity and reliability of the healthcare policies. Policies such as preventing harm and improving outcome-based alcohol strategy is implied under the guidance of Blackburn with Darwen Borough council (Kelly, 2022). It has been adopted by the country with the aim of improving the volunteer network, local community championship alongside awareness raising opportunities for reducing the impact of non-communicable factors. However, it is also facing issues with the emergency department of the healthcare system while accessing essential service and prolonged delay while receiving treatment in the UK (Kelly, 2022).

Apart from these, in the case of addressing the social determinants of health in the UK, it can be stated that social factors such as income, employment and housing are considered important that have significant conditions to affect the population's living situation (Knox et al. 2022). These are capable of impacting health and health inequalities by influencing local and regional and national levels of policies. In the case of the UK, a wide range of national strategy has been encouraged by the NHS while addressing financial and social factors. This includes maintaining GP contacts, funds of social prescribing link workers alongside shedding light on the social requirements (Hussain et al. 2022). Integrated care systems are part of the strategic plan by the local agencies in terms of improving health conditions and prioritising policies for strengthening the future. Here, policies include NHS five year forward view (2014) and NHS long term plan, Guidance for COVID recovery and the health and care bill 202-2023 are few examples in terms of using collaboration and partnership for improving the issues of health of local population. (Health.org.uk, 2023). These are also accountable in terms of managing economic and social development by taking help from local government and other health agencies. These are applied in the society in the form of meeting patient's social care, improving social conditions of the local community-based care approach alongside aligning local resources for a high-quality care system (Hussain et al. 2022).

3. The perceived needs of the relevant workforce, health inequalities and social determinants of health in relation to health issue and target population

While addressing the primary requirements for an improved workforce, it can be addressed that there are four significant ways that are adversely impacting health in the society. These are extreme adverse conditions of work and adverse psychosocial conditions at work and poor payment and temporary working opportunities and job insecurities. Approximately 1.2 million people in Great Britain have severe health issues due to their previous job placement and experience (Lopez et al. 2022). Among these, the prevalence of musculoskeletal disease and work-related stress in the form of anxiety disorders, depression are common in the UK. The physical hazard in the working environment has cost 133 fatal injuries with the rate of 0.44 death per 100000 workers (Inglehart et al. 2022). The rate of musculoskeletal disorders in the working environment refers to 42% or 526000 cases and 17000 cases of work-related hearing issues (Health.org.uk, 2023). On the other hand, chemical hazards at the working environment have caused approximately 5000 people injured in work related skin disease due to the unavailability of safety precautions for the workers in the area of North England in comparison with the other areas of the country (Inglehart et al. 2022). While addressing the prevalence of long working hours, approximately 20% of the workers have expressed their views on increasing anxiousness, depression and bad nerve issues (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2023a). In addition, shift work has also caused issues in local communities that are part of the health inequalities. This includes giving birth to low-birth-weight babies and approximately 17.3% of the affected population from the local area (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2023a).

In addition, it can be notably mentioned that good placement in the form of adequate pay, proper protection from physical hazard and the presence of job security and good working life balance are considered significant steps that help in decreasing health inequalities (Lopez et al. 2022). This is followed by the presence of potential work progression, taking part in the company's decision-making process and potential skilled employment have positive health impact in comparison with adverse health impact. This is followed by addressing local populations and health inequality on the basis of job payment such as lower skill and lower paid work. This is proportionally concentrated in the area of north England while other parts of the country are exacerbated with an improved quality of payment (Grosicki et al. 2022). On the other hand, in terms of addressing better job opportunities for the local population the local partnership is capable of improving quality work and learning from emerging strategies with the aim of promoting quality jobs with employers and that helps in improving the quality of existing skilled jobs. In addition, the role of local authority is considered to be significant in terms of creating different jobs by using a wide range of partnership and initiative (Dubey et al. 2022). These are local enterprise partnership and employment service providers and collaboration with third sector organisations in terms of creating devi of strategic plan with the aim of reducing health inequalities. It also includes the involvement of local partners in terms of encouraging job opportunities for the workers by providing the average living wage, promoting opportunities and protecting from adverse working environments (Dubey et al. 2022).

On the other hand, while addressing job quality and health impact it can be stated that the nature of work has an adverse impact on increasing health inequalities and concentrated on the disadvantage’s social groups (Grosicki et al. 2022). The review policies including Marmot reviews have the objectives to tackle social inequalities and create fair employment and good work for all. This also consists of managing health standards of living and creation of developing and healthy and sustainable places for the local communities (McKenna, 2023). While the first one expresses the payment options alongside ensuring a healthy standard in terms of removing social inequalities, the latter is accountable to address skill-based policies and maintaining regional equalities for the community.

On the other hand, promotion of health protective work is based on the creation of a strategic plan in order to avoid poor health outcomes and unrealistic damages of the community people (Marmot et al. 2022). This includes encouraging the expansion of good job opportunities within industries and highlighting social gradients in terms of expecting better health outcomes for the less skilled population. This is followed by improving employment contracts and productivity and skills of the worker and creating local job initiatives in terms of addressing health inequalities (Thomson and Vrinten, 2022). This is followed by strengthening individual skills and capacity alongside improvement of communication patterns and living and working conditions in terms of promoting healthy macro policies while reducing the adverse impact of health inequalities.

4. The concept of health creation and critique the relevant intervention

The concept of health creation is considered a process by which individuals and communities are capable of gaining a sense of purpose and hope mastery and controlling lives and the immediate environment in order to enhance health and wellbeing (Brazier et al. 2022). Interventions including community-based activities are capable of bridging the gap between hill services and the voluntary sector with the aim of creating healthy community. Medicalised approaches in regards to health care have direct impact in terms of improving community Health while embracing connection and challenging health inequalities (Cumpston et al. 2022). This is followed by practical guidance in terms of demonstrating a low cost and preventive measurements to assess an improved result and enabling communities to be resilient in terms of confronting major health inequalities. It also includes conjugated associations from local healthcare and public healthcare, local authorities, the voluntary sector and students and researchers of the particular areas with the aim of improving health equalities (Routledge, 2023). On the other hand, intervention based on co-creation and prototyping is considered other health literacy focused activities while managing community level participation to reduce health inequalities. This refers to the development of an interactive practice and bridges the gap between health literacy among the caregivers (Brazier et al. 2022). This is followed by using co-creation materials and prototyping with the associations of local stakeholders and increasing individuals or the local community population engagement and participation for improving health equalities. As co-creation is considered an interactive intervention, it is considered a sensible approach to recognise community participation and managing the requirement of the population by developing a requirement given intervention that improves the overall sustainability of the process and reach towards the larger audience (Pollock et al. 2022).

Both of the identified interventions are based on the distributive policies in terms of addressing the need of a specific segment of the society, that is local community people. This factor is followed by including assistance from all public sector and welfare programs and plays a crucial role in terms of improving educational program food habits and employability and communication (Daoud et al. 2022). In addition, distributions of income wealth alongside greater investment in the employability sector for deprived communities and regulations of policies are considered significant steps in terms of limiting the adverse impact of health inequalities. Here, the implementation of asset-based approach in health is significant as it emphasises on the resources of an individual and the community (Pollock et al. 2022). This is followed by using this approach in terms of enabling individuals in the local community to express their views and experiences and health related issues while improving the overall community health approach. This model is considered to be impactful in the social context as it also improves the communication between the local community and authority with the aim of taking proper precautions to reduce health inequalities (Pearce et al. 2022).

In this context, the implementation of the theory of change is considered a significant step that helps in explaining the role of intervention alongside its activities to lead the specific development change in the society (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. 2023a). This theory is considered an explicit process that helps in documenting the program intervention and its supposed way of working alongside benefits and conditions in terms of achieving desired outcome. While showing the implementation of theory of change in the case of co-creation intervention process for the UK, it can be stated that it has shown promise and the requirement guiding to improve the overall effectiveness towards reducing health inequalities in the form of academics and shareholders perspectives (Pearce et al. 2022). This is followed by collaborative development towards different health behaviours in the form of changed working habits, lifestyle and employability in the community, the force stages of this intervention ensuring high commitment and engagement for the identified population. These stages include planning, conducting and evaluating and reporting to the local authorities in case of public health intervention to provide a framework and governance while guiding the reduction of health inequality process towards healthy lifestyle (Zou et al. 2022). Besides, the use of community-based intervention is considered effective while engaging community members and delivering a particular effective model while involving members from the local community. It also presents the spirit of empathy and his motivation while changing employability for the community members and accessing their assistants in the form of local volunteers while improving health equalities in the society (Correia et al. 2022). In this case, the implementation of the salutogenic model helps in emphasising the factors of well-being alongside focusing on the creation and maintenance of good health while reducing rest factors. This is effective in the case of reducing health inequalities in the community by promoting effects of the local authorities towards improvement of wellbeing and ongoing positive health and support towards local communities.

Has the approach been effective in tackling the health issue and the health inequalities?

Apart from that, growing acknowledgement towards the typology of policies alongside intervention helps with tackling health inequalities on the basis of underline program theory and accessing desired outcome (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2023b). This is followed by identifying the straightening aspect of an individual by using person-based strategies and understanding the deficiency on the basis of individuals knowledge beliefs and self-esteem practical competencies in life skill or in employability. While this approach shades light on the individuals’ personal characteristics the solution towards reducing health inequalities realise on the health information campaign life skill group and want to one counselling among community members (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2023a). The underlying purpose of this intervention relies on the education of individuals in the local community while improving the hazardous aspect and gaining better access towards facilities and services that are effective for improving health outcomes. This is followed by recommending strengthening community participation by building social cohesion and mutual support alongside engaging community members (Bambra, 2022). This also helps horizontally and vertically by allowing community dynamics to work on the basis of prioritising health and building up proper infrastructure to meet the community's needs. This also includes recommendations on the basis of improving living and working conditions with the aim of observing health inequalities at the community level and understanding the greater exposure of a health damaging environment. This also includes identifying the power access of the community in terms of supplies education and healthcare alongside sanitation and contaminated food supplies and safer workplace that impact on reducing health inequalities (Correia et al. 2022).

5. Conclusion

In terms of concluding the following essay, it can be stated that the essay has successfully discussed the concept of health inequalities alongside health creation for the UK. This is followed by discussing the overview of policy initiative on the basis of health inequalities in the UK and identifying health issues for the target populations of local community level. This also includes discussing the role of resources, health, education and occupations that result in improving health outcomes and different intervention processes in terms of maintaining relevance towards what force. It also includes addressing the concept of health creation and criticising existing intervention in the form of asset based and community engagement for reducing health inequalities.

References

• Bambra, C., 2022. Levelling up: Global examples of reducing health inequalities. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 50(7), pp.908-913.
• Brazier, J., Peasgood, T., Mukuria, C., Marten, O., Kreimeier, S., Luo, N., Mulhern, B., Pickard, A.S., Augustovski, F., Greiner, W. and Engel, L., 2022. The EQ Health and Wellbeing: overview of the development of a measure of health and wellbeing and key results. Value in Health.
• Chakraborty, D. and Paul, J., 2023. Healthcare apps’ purchase intention: A consumption values perspective. Technovation, 120, p.102481.
• Correia, S., Luck, S. and Verner, E., 2022. Pandemics depress the economy, public health interventions do not: Evidence from the 1918 flu. The Journal of Economic History, 82(4), pp.917-957.
• Cumpston, M.S., McKenzie, J.E., Welch, V.A. and Brennan, S.E., 2022. Strengthening systematic reviews in public health: guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Journal of Public Health, 44(4), pp.e588-e592.
• Daoud, A., Herlitz, A. and Subramanian, S.V., 2022. IMF fairness: Calibrating the policies of the International Monetary Fund based on distributive justice. World Development, 157, p.105924.
• Den Broeder, L., South, J., Rothoff, A., Bagnall, A.M., Azarhoosh, F., Van Der Linden, G., Bharadwa, M. and Wagemakers, A., 2022. Community engagement in deprived neighbourhoods during the COVID-19 crisis: perspectives for more resilient and healthier communities. Health promotion international, 37(2), p.daab098.
• Eneanya, N.D., Boulware, L.E., Tsai, J., Bruce, M.A., Ford, C.L., Harris, C., Morales, L.S., Ryan, M.J., Reese, P.P., Thorpe Jr, R.J. and Morse, M., 2022. Health inequities and the inappropriate use of race in nephrology. Nature Reviews Nephrology, 18(2), pp.84-94.
• Garcia, R., 2022. Social determinants of health. A Population Health Approach to Health Disparities for Nurses: Care of Vulnerable Populations.
• Grosicki, G.J., Bunsawat, K., Jeong, S. and Robinson, A.T., 2022. Racial and ethnic disparities in cardiometabolic disease and COVID-19 outcomes in white, Black/African American, and latinx populations: Social determinants of health. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases.
• Health.org.uk. 2023., “Top line facts on the big issues in health and social care” Available at: https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/newsletter-features/top-line-facts-on-the-big-issues-in-health-and-social-care [Accessed on 24th April 2023]
• Hussain, B., Latif, A., Timmons, S., Nkhoma, K. and Nellums, L.B., 2022. Overcoming COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among ethnic minorities: A systematic review of UK studies. Vaccine.
• Inglehart, M.R., Albino, J., Feine, J.S. and Okunseri, C., 2022. Sociodemographic changes and oral health inequities: dental workforce considerations. JDR Clinical & Translational Research, 7(1_suppl), pp.5S-15S.
• Javed, Z., Haisum Maqsood, M., Yahya, T., Amin, Z., Acquah, I., Valero-Elizondo, J., Andrieni, J., Dubey, P., Jackson, R.K., Daffin, M.A. and Cainzos-Achirica, M., 2022. Race, racism, and cardiovascular health: applying a social determinants of health framework to racial/ethnic disparities in cardiovascular disease. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 15(1), p.e007917.
• Kelly, G., 2022. Blackburn with Darwen Oral Health Improvement Partnership Strategy.
• Knox, S., Hannon, M., Stewart, F. and Ford, R., 2022. The (in) justices of smart local energy systems: A systematic review, integrated framework, and future research agenda. Energy Research & Social Science, 83, p.102333.
• Lee, C., Kuhn, I., McGrath, M., Remes, O., Cowan, A., Duncan, F., Baskin, C., Oliver, E.J., Osborn, D.P., Dykxhoorn, J. and Kaner, E., 2022. A systematic scoping review of community?based interventions for the prevention of mental ill?health and the promotion of mental health in older adults in the UK. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(1), pp.27-57.
• Lode, M.L., Te Boveldt, G., Coosemans, T. and Camargo, L.R., 2022. A transition perspective on Energy Communities: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 163, p.112479.
• Lopez, K.N., Baker?Smith, C., Flores, G., Gurvitz, M., Karamlou, T., Nunez Gallegos, F., Pasquali, S., Patel, A., Peterson, J.K., Salemi, J.L. and Yancy, C., 2022. Addressing social determinants of health and mitigating health disparities across the lifespan in congenital heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Journal of the American Heart Association, 11(8), p.e025358.
• Marmot, M., Alexander, M., Allen, J. and Munro, A., 2022. The Business of Health Equity: The Marmot Review for Industry.
• McKenna, C., 2023. Michael Marmot: the health of nations. BJPsych Bulletin, 47(1), pp.56-59.
• Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. 2023a., “What kinds of policies to reduce health inequalities in the UK do researchers support?” Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4340326/ [Accessed on 24th April 2023]
• Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. 2023b., “A typology of actions to tackle social inequalities in health” Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2465710/ [Accessed on 24th April 2023]
• Pearce, T., Maple, M., McKay, K., Shakeshaft, A. and Wayland, S., 2022. Co-creation of new knowledge: Good fortune or good management?. Research Involvement and Engagement, 8(1), p.65.
• Pollock, D., Alexander, L., Munn, Z., Peters, M.D., Khalil, H., Godfrey, C.M., McInerney, P., Synnot, A. and Tricco, A.C., 2022. Moving from consultation to co-creation with knowledge users in scoping reviews: guidance from the JBI Scoping Review Methodology Group. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 20(4), pp.969-979.
• Routledge. 2023., “Creating Community Health Interventions for Sustainable Healthcare” Available at: https://www.routledge.com/Creating-Community-Health-Interventions-for-Sustainable-Healthcare/Lennane/p/book/9781032140971 [Accessed on 24th April 2023]
• Thomson, R. and Vrinten, C., 2022. UK Public Health Science 2022: a call for abstracts. The Lancet, 399(10331), pp.1210-1211.
• Zou, Z., Fairley, C.K., Shen, M., Scott, N., Xu, X., Li, Z., Li, R., Zhuang, G. and Zhang, L., 2022. Critical timing and extent of public health interventions International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 115, pp.154-165.