Abstract
Introduction Relational continuity of care (RCC) refers to the sustained therapeutic relationship between a patient and a clinician, which fosters trust, enhances communication, and facilitates the accumulation of knowledge about the patient. RCC is associated with enhanced patient outcomes, reduced hospital admissions, lower mortality rates, decreased healthcare costs, and improved patient experience. Despite these benefits, reorganisations within the NHS and workforce challenges have led to an increased reliance on multidisciplinary and part-time working, resulting in fragmented care and a decline in RCC. Our study aims to explore who needs RCC, under what circumstances, to what extent, and why, with the goal of informing optimal implementation strategies.
Methods and Analysis We will conduct a realist review to develop an evidence-based programme theory explaining the mechanisms underlying RCC, the populations that benefit most, the contextual factors influencing RCC, and effective care models. Following Pawson’s five iterative stages, we will: (1) locate existing theories, (2) search for relevant evidence, (3) select appropriate articles, (4) extract and organise data, and (5) synthesise findings to draw conclusions. A stakeholder advisory group, comprising policymakers, healthcare professionals, public contributors, and patients, will be engaged throughout the process. We will adhere to Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES) quality standards for realist reviews to ensure methodological rigour.
Dissemination and ethics Our findings will inform practical, evidence-based recommendations for optimising RCC within general practice. Outputs will include peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, plain English summaries, social media infographics, a short video, and end-of-study events. Collaborations with stakeholders and public involvement will ensure both accessibility and impact. Ethical review is not required for this evidence synthesis.
Competing Interest Statement
VTB, KM, SP, ST and GW are practising NHS General Practitioners.
Clinical Protocols
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8K5XH
Funding Statement
This project is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) (NIHR165200).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I 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).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This is a study protocol and there is no data available yet.