Community health workers are essential to front-line health outreach throughout low-income and middle-income countries, including programming for early childhood immunisation. Understanding how community health workers are engaged for successful early childhood vaccination among countries who showed success in immunisation coverage would support evidence-based policy guidance across contexts.

We employed a multiple case study design using qualitative research methods.

We conducted research in Nepal, Senegal and Zambia.

We conducted 207 interviews and 71 focus group discussions with 678 participants at the national, regional, district, health facility and community levels of the health systems of Nepal, Senegal and Zambia, from October 2019 to April 2021. We used thematic analysis to investigate contributing factors of community health worker programming that supported early childhood immunisation within each country and across contexts.

Implementation of vaccination programming relied principally on the (1) organisation, (2) motivation and (3) trust of community health workers. Organisation was accomplished by expanding cadres of community health workers to carry out their roles and responsibilities related to vaccination. Motivation was supported by intrinsic and extrinsic incentives. Trust was expressed by communities due to community health worker respect and value placed on their work.

Improvements in immunisation coverage was facilitated by community health worker organisation, motivation and trust. With the continued projection of health worker shortages, especially in low-income countries, community health workers bridged the equity gap in access to vaccination services by enabling wider reach to underserved populations. Although improvements in vaccination programming were seen in all three countries—including government commitment to addressing human resource deficits, training and remuneration; workload, inconsistency in compensation, training duration and scope, and supervision remain major challenges to immunisation programming. Health decision-makers should consider organisation, motivation and trust of community health workers to improve the implementation of immunisation programming.

Co-creation approaches, such as co-design and co-production, aspire to power-sharing and collaboration between service providers and service users, recognising the specific insights each group can provide to improve health and other public services. However, an intentional focus on equity-based approaches grounded in lived experience and epistemic justice is required considering entrenched structural inequities between service-users and service-providers in public and institutional spaces where co-creation happens.

This paper presents a Charter of tenets and principles to foster a new era of ‘Equity-based Co-Creation’ (EqCC).

The Charter is based on themes heard during an International Forum held in August 2022 in Ontario, Canada, where 48 lived experience experts and researchers were purposively invited to deliberate challenges and opportunities in advancing equity in the co-creation field.

The Charter’s seven tenets—honouring worldviews, acknowledging ongoing and historical harms, operationalising inclusivity, establishing safer and brave spaces, valuing lived experiences, ‘being with’ and fostering trust, and cultivating an EqCC heartset/mindset—aim to promote intentional inclusion of participants with intersecting social positions and differing historic oppressions. This means honouring and foregrounding lived experiences of service users and communities experiencing ongoing structural oppression and socio-political alienation—Black, Indigenous and people of colour; disabled, Mad and Deaf communities, women, 2S/LGBTQIA+ communities, people perceived to be mentally ill and other minoritised groups—to address epistemic injustice in co-creation methodologies and practice, thereby providing opportunities to begin to dismantle intersecting systems of oppression and structural violence.

Each Charter tenet speaks to a multilayered, multidimensional process that is foundational to shifting paradigms about redesigning our health and social systems and changing our relational practices. Readers are encouraged to share their reactions to the Charter, their experiences implementing it in their own work, and to participate in a growing international EqCC community of practice.

Premature onset of type 2 diabetes and excess mortality are critical issues internationally, particularly in Indigenous populations. There is an urgent need for developmentally appropriate and culturally safe models of care. We describe the methods for the codesign, implementation and evaluation of enhanced models of care with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth living with type 2 diabetes across Northern Australia.

Our mixed-methods approach is informed by the principles of codesign. Across eight sites in four regions, the project brings together the lived experience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people (aged 10–25) with type 2 diabetes, their families and communities, and health professionals providing diabetes care through a structured yet flexible codesign process. Participants will help identify and collaborate in the development of a range of multifaceted improvements to current models of care. These may include addressing needs identified in our formative work such as the development of screening and management guidelines, referral pathways, peer support networks, diabetes information resources and training for health professionals in youth type 2 diabetes management. The codesign process will adopt a range of methods including qualitative interviews, focus group discussions, art-based methods and healthcare systems assessments. A developmental evaluation approach will be used to create and refine the components and principles of enhanced models of care. We anticipate that this codesign study will produce new theoretical insights and practice frameworks, resources and approaches for age-appropriate, culturally safe models of care.

The study design was developed in collaboration with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous researchers, health professionals and health service managers and has received ethical approval across all sites. A range of outputs will be produced to disseminate findings to participants, other stakeholders and the scholarly community using creative and traditional formats.

Many rural communities bear a disproportionate share of drug-related harms. Innovative harm reduction service models, such as vending machines or kiosks, can expand access to services that reduce drug-related harms. However, few kiosks operate in the USA, and their implementation, impact and cost-effectiveness have not been adequately evaluated in rural settings. This paper describes the Kentucky Outreach Service Kiosk (KyOSK) Study protocol to test the effectiveness, implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a community-tailored, harm reduction kiosk in reducing HIV, hepatitis C and overdose risk in rural Appalachia.

KyOSK is a community-level, controlled quasi-experimental, non-randomised trial. KyOSK involves two cohorts of people who use drugs, one in an intervention county (n=425) and one in a control county (n=325). People who are 18 years or older, are community-dwelling residents in the target counties and have used drugs to get high in the past 6 months are eligible. The trial compares the effectiveness of a fixed-site, staffed syringe service programme (standard of care) with the standard of care supplemented with a kiosk. The kiosk will contain various harm reduction supplies accessible to participants upon valid code entry, allowing dispensing data to be linked to participant survey data. The kiosk will include a call-back feature that allows participants to select needed services and receive linkage-to-care services from a peer recovery coach. The cohorts complete follow-up surveys every 6 months for 36 months (three preceding kiosk implementation and four post-implementation). The study will test the effectiveness of the kiosk on reducing risk behaviours associated with overdose, HIV and hepatitis C, as well as implementation outcomes and cost-effectiveness.

The University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approved the protocol. Results will be disseminated in academic conferences and peer-reviewed journals, online and print media, and community meetings.

NCT05657106.

Tuberculosis (TB) is a leading infectious cause of death globally. It is the most common opportunistic infection in people living with HIV, and the most common cause of their morbidity and mortality. Following TB treatment, surviving individuals may be at risk for post-TB lung disease. The TB Sentinel Research Network (TB-SRN) provides a platform for coordinated observational TB research within the International epidemiology Databases to Evaluate AIDS (IeDEA) consortium.

This prospective, observational cohort study will assess treatment and post-treatment outcomes of pulmonary TB (microbiologically confirmed or clinically diagnosed) among 2600 people aged ≥15 years, with and without HIV coinfection, consecutively enrolled at 16 sites in 11 countries, across 6 of IeDEA’s global regions. Data regarding clinical and sociodemographic factors, mental health, health-related quality of life, pulmonary function, and laboratory and radiographic findings will be collected using standardised questionnaires and data collection tools, beginning from the initiation of TB treatment and through 12 months after the end of treatment. Data will be aggregated for proposed analyses.

Ethics approval was obtained at all implementing study sites, including the Vanderbilt University Medical Center Human Research Protections Programme. Participants will provide informed consent; for minors, this includes both adolescent assent and the consent of their parent or primary caregiver. Protections for vulnerable groups are included, in alignment with local standards and considerations at sites. Procedures for requesting use and analysis of TB-SRN data are publicly available. Findings from TB-SRN analyses will be shared with national TB programmes to inform TB programming and policy, and disseminated at regional and global conferences and other venues.

The goals of this rapid realist review were to ask: (a) what are the key mechanisms that drive successful interventions for long COVID in long-term care (LTC) and (b) what are the critical contexts that determine whether the mechanisms produce the intended outcomes?

Rapid realist review.

Medline, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science for peer-reviewed literature and Google for grey literature were searched up to 23 February 2023.

We included sources focused on interventions, persons in LTC, long COVID or post-acute phase at least 4 weeks following initial COVID-19 infection and ones that had a connection with source materials.

Three independent reviewers searched, screened and coded studies. Two independent moderators resolved conflicts. A data extraction tool organised relevant data into context-mechanism-outcome configurations using realist methodology. Twenty-one sources provided 51 intervention data excerpts used to develop our programme theory. Synthesised findings were presented to a reference group and expert panel for confirmatory purposes.

Fifteen peer-reviewed articles and six grey literature sources were eligible for inclusion. Eleven context-mechanism-outcome configurations identify those contextual factors and underlying mechanisms associated with desired outcomes, such as clinical care processes and policies that ensure timely access to requisite resources for quality care delivery, and resident-centred assessments and care planning to address resident preferences and needs. The underlying mechanisms associated with enhanced outcomes for LTC long COVID survivors were: awareness, accountability, vigilance and empathetic listening.

Although the LTC sector struggles with organisational capacity issues, they should be aware that comprehensively assessing and monitoring COVID-19 survivors and providing timely interventions to those with long COVID is imperative. This is due to the greater care needs of residents with long COVID, and coordinated efficient care is required to optimise their quality of life.

To assess the feasibility of conducting a pragmatic, multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an informal caregiver training programme to support the recovery of people following hip fracture surgery.

Two-arm, multicentre, pragmatic, open, feasibility RCT with embedded qualitative study.

National Health Service (NHS) providers in five English hospitals.

Community-dwelling adults, aged 60 years and over, who undergo hip fracture surgery and their informal caregivers.

Usual care: usual NHS care. Experimental: usual NHS care plus a caregiver–patient dyad training programme (HIP HELPER). This programme comprised three, 1 hour, one-to-one training sessions for a patient and caregiver, delivered by a nurse, physiotherapist or occupational therapist in the hospital setting predischarge. After discharge, patients and caregivers were supported through three telephone coaching sessions.

Central randomisation was computer generated (1:1), stratified by hospital and level of patient cognitive impairment. There was no blinding.

Data collected at baseline and 4 months post randomisation included: screening logs, intervention logs, fidelity checklists, acceptability data and clinical outcomes. Interviews were conducted with a subset of participants and health professionals.

102 participants were enrolled (51 patients; 51 caregivers). Thirty-nine per cent (515/1311) of patients screened were eligible. Eleven per cent (56/515) of eligible patients consented to be randomised. Forty-eight per cent (12/25) of the intervention group reached compliance to their allocated intervention. There was no evidence of treatment contamination. Qualitative data demonstrated the trial and HIP HELPER programme was acceptable.

The HIP HELPER programme was acceptable to patient–caregiver dyads and health professionals. The COVID-19 pandemic impacting on site’s ability to deliver the research. Modifications are necessary to the design for a viable definitive RCT.

ISRCTN13270387.

The confidence of young people diagnosed with psychosis is often low. Positive self-beliefs may be few and negative self-beliefs many. A sense of defeat and failure is common. Young people often withdraw from many aspects of everyday life. Psychological well-being is lowered. Psychological techniques can improve self-confidence, but a shortage of therapists means that very few patients ever receive such help. Virtual reality (VR) offers a potential route out of this impasse. By including a virtual coach, treatment can be automated. As such, delivery of effective therapy is no longer reliant on the availability of therapists. With young people with lived experience, we have developed a staff-assisted automated VR therapy to improve positive self-beliefs (Phoenix). The treatment is based on established cognitive behavioural therapy and positive psychology techniques. A case series indicates that this approach may lead to large improvements in positive self-beliefs and psychological well-being. We now aim to conduct the first randomised controlled evaluation of Phoenix VR.

80 patients with psychosis, aged between 16 and 30 years old and with low levels of positive self-beliefs, will be recruited from National Health Service (NHS) secondary care services. They will be randomised (1:1) to the Phoenix VR self-confidence therapy added to treatment as usual or treatment as usual. Assessments will be conducted at 0, 6 (post-treatment) and 12 weeks by a researcher blind to allocation. The primary outcome is positive self-beliefs at 6 weeks rated with the Oxford Positive Self Scale. The secondary outcomes are psychiatric symptoms, activity levels and quality of life. All main analyses will be intention to treat.

The trial has received ethical approval from the NHS Health Research Authority (22/LO/0273). A key output will be a high-quality VR treatment for patients to improve self-confidence and psychological well-being.

ISRCTN10250113.

Despite evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of hand hygiene in reducing the transmission of infectious diseases, there are gaps in global normative guidance around hand hygiene in community settings. The goal of this review is to systematically retrieve and synthesise available evidence on hand hygiene in community settings across four areas: (1) effective hand hygiene; (2) minimum requirements; (3) behaviour change and (4) government measures.

This protocol entails a two-phased approach to identify relevant studies for multiple related systematic reviews. Phase 1 involves a broad search to capture all studies on hand hygiene in community settings. Databases, trial registries, expert consultations and hand searches of reference lists will be used to ensure an exhaustive search. A comprehensive, electronic search strategy will be used to identify studies indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, PAIS Index, WHO IRIS, UN Digital Library and World Bank eLibrary published in English from January 1980 to March 2023. The outcome of phase 1 will be a reduced sample of studies from which further screening, specific to research questions across the four key areas can be performed. Two reviewers will independently assess each study for inclusion and disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Quantitative and qualitative data will be extracted following best practices. We will assess all studies using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. All effect measures pertaining to review outcomes will be reported and a narrative synthesis of all studies will be presented including ‘data-driven’ descriptive themes and ‘theory-driven’ analytical themes as applicable.

This systematic review is exempt from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. The findings of the reviews will be disseminated in related peer-reviewed journals.

CRD42023429145.

Care home residents have experienced significant morbidity, mortality and disruption following outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2. Regular SARS-CoV-2 testing of care home staff was introduced to reduce transmission of infection, but it is unclear whether this remains beneficial. This trial aims to investigate whether use of regular asymptomatic staff testing, alongside funding to reimburse sick pay for those who test positive and meet costs of employing agency staff, is a feasible and effective strategy to reduce COVID-19 impact in care homes.

The VIVALDI-Clinical Trial is a multicentre, open-label, cluster randomised controlled, phase III/IV superiority trial in up to 280 residential and/or nursing homes in England providing care to adults aged >65 years. All regular and agency staff will be enrolled, excepting those who opt out. Homes will be randomised to the intervention arm (twice weekly asymptomatic staff testing for SARS-CoV-2) or the control arm (current national testing guidance). Staff who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 will self-isolate and receive sick pay. Care providers will be reimbursed for costs associated with employing temporary staff to backfill for absence arising directly from the trial.

The trial will be delivered by a multidisciplinary research team through a series of five work packages.

The primary outcome is the incidence of COVID-19-related hospital admissions in residents. Secondary outcomes include the number and duration of outbreaks and home closures. Health economic and modelling analyses will investigate the cost-effectiveness and cost consequences of the testing intervention. A process evaluation using qualitative interviews will be conducted to understand intervention roll out and identify areas for optimisation to inform future intervention scale-up, should the testing approach prove effective and cost-effective. Stakeholder engagement will be undertaken to enable the sector to plan for results and their implications and to coproduce recommendations on the use of testing for policy-makers.

The study has been approved by the London—Bromley Research Ethics Committee (reference number 22/LO/0846) and the Health Research Authority (22/CAG/0165). The results of the trial will be disseminated regardless of the direction of effect. The publication of the results will comply with a trial-specific publication policy and will include submission to open access journals. A lay summary of the results will also be produced to disseminate the results to participants.

ISRCTN13296529.