Conectar
Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the healthcare field are crucial in meeting the healthcare needs of a progressively diverse society. In fact, a diverse healthcare workforce enables culturally sensitive care, promotes health equity and enhances the understanding of various needs and patients’ viewpoints, potentially resulting in more effective patient treatment and improved patient outcomes. Despite this, information on the effectiveness of policies or programmes promoting EDI in health institutions is scarce. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the effects and outcomes of EDI programmes in healthcare institutions.
We will conduct Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of studies on EDI programmes and describe their effects and outcomes in healthcare institutions. We will search PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases. Selected studies will include randomised control trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cross-sectional studies published either in English or French. Quality appraisal of studies and a narrative synthesis of extracted data will be conducted as well as a meta-analysis if possible. The quality of evidence in this review will be assessed by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
We anticipate that this systematic review will reveal information on the effect of EDI programmes and their outcomes in healthcare institutions. We expect this information will provide insights that will lead to improvements in designing EDI policies and programmes in healthcare institutions.
No ethical clearance is required for this study as no primary data will be collected. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication. In addition to this, the results of the study will also be disseminated through conference presentations to inform the research and clinical practice.
This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; registration number CRD42024502781.
To estimate all-cause mortality in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and determine whether antibiotic duration beyond 8 days is associated with reduction in all-cause mortality in patients admitted with VAP in the intensive care unit.
A prospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with VAP based on the National Healthcare Safety Network definition and clinical criteria.
Single tertiary care hospital in Southern India.
100 consecutive adult patients diagnosed with VAP were followed up for 28 days postdiagnosis or until discharge.
The incidence of mortality at 28 days postdiagnosis was measured. Tests for association and predictors of mortality were determined using 2 test and multivariate Cox regression analysis. Secondary outcomes included baseline clinical parameters such as age, underlying comorbidities as well as measuring total length of stay, number of ventilator-free days and antibiotic-free days.
The overall case fatality rate due to VAP was 46%. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality rates between those receiving shorter antibiotic duration (5–8 days) and those on longer therapy. Among those who survived until day 9, the observed risk difference was 15.1% between both groups, with an HR of 1.057 (95% CI 0.26 to 4.28). In 70.4% of isolates, non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli were identified, of which the most common pathogen isolated was Acinetobacter baumannii (62%).
In this hospital-based cohort study, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that prolonging antibiotic duration beyond 8 days in patients with VAP improves survival.
Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) is a research programme that seeks to develop and evaluate a comprehensive exercise-based rehabilitation intervention designed for people with multimorbidity, the presence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs). This paper describes the protocol for a randomised trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PERFORM intervention, study design and processes.
A multicentre, parallel two-group randomised trial with individual 2:1 allocation to the PERFORM exercise-based intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The primary outcome of this feasibility trial will be to assess whether prespecified progression criteria (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence) are met to progress to the full randomised trial. The trial will be conducted across three UK sites and 60 people with MLTCs, defined as two or more LTCs, with at least one having evidence of the beneficial effect of exercise. The PERFORM intervention comprises an 8-week (twice a week for 6 weeks and once a week for 2 weeks) supervised rehabilitation programme of personalised exercise training and self-management education delivered by trained healthcare professionals followed by two maintenance sessions. Trial participants will be recruited over a 4.5-month period, and outcomes assessed at baseline (prerandomisation) and 3 months postrandomisation and include health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, symptom burden, frailty, exercise capacity, physical activity, sleep, cognition and serious adverse events. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention delivery and feasibility of trial processes. An economic evaluation will assess the feasibility of data collection and estimate the costs of the PERFORM intervention.
The trial has been given favourable opinion by the West Midlands, Edgbaston Research Ethics Service (Ref: 23/WM/0057). Participants will be asked to give full, written consent to take part by trained researchers. Findings will be disseminated via journals, presentations and targeted communications to clinicians, commissioners, service users and patients and the public.
2.0 (16 May 2023).
Sub-Saharan Africa continues to experience a syndemic of HIV and non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Vertical (stand-alone) HIV programming has provided high-quality care in the region, with almost 80% of people living with HIV in regular care and 90% virally suppressed. While integrated health education and concurrent management of HIV, hypertension and diabetes are being scaled up in clinics, innovative, more efficient and cost-effective interventions that include decentralisation into the community are required to respond to the increased burden of comorbid HIV/NCD disease.
This protocol describes procedures for a process evaluation running concurrently with a pragmatic cluster-randomised trial (INTE-COMM) in Tanzania and Uganda that will compare community-based integrated care (HIV, diabetes and hypertension) with standard facility-based integrated care. The INTE-COMM intervention will manage multiple conditions (HIV, hypertension and diabetes) in the community via health monitoring and adherence/lifestyle advice (medicine, diet and exercise) provided by community nurses and trained lay workers, as well as the devolvement of NCD drug dispensing to the community level. Based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, the process evaluation will use qualitative methods to investigate sociostructural factors shaping care delivery and outcomes in up to 10 standard care facilities and/or intervention community sites with linked healthcare facilities. Multistakeholder interviews (patients, community health workers and volunteers, healthcare providers, policymakers, clinical researchers and international and non-governmental organisations), focus group discussions (community leaders and members) and non-participant observations (community meetings and drug dispensing) will explore implementation from diverse perspectives at three timepoints in the trial implementation. Iterative sampling and analysis, moving between data collection points and data analysis to test emerging theories, will continue until saturation is reached. This process of analytic reflexivity and triangulation across methods and sources will provide findings to explain the main trial findings and offer clear directions for future efforts to sustain and scale up community-integrated care for HIV, diabetes and hypertension.
The protocol has been approved by the University College of London (UK), the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Ethics Committee (UK), the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology and the Uganda Virus Research Institute Research and Ethics Committee (Uganda) and the Medical Research Coordinating Committee of the National Institute for Medical Research (Tanzania). The University College of London is the trial sponsor. Dissemination of findings will be done through journal publications and stakeholder meetings (with study participants, healthcare providers, policymakers and other stakeholders), local and international conferences, policy briefs, peer-reviewed journal articles and publications.
This scoping review maps the extant literature on students’ and graduates’ mental health experiences throughout their university-to-work transitions. The current review investigates the methodological features of the studies, the main findings, and the theories that the studies draw on to conceptualise mental health and transitions.
This project used a scoping review methodology created and developed by Peters and colleagues and the Joanna Briggs Institute. The review searched academic databases and screened existing studies that met predetermined inclusion criteria.
Seven academic databases and Google Scholar were searched with sets of search terms.
The included studies examined participants who were final-year university students or those who had graduated from university within a 3-year period. Studies published in English since 2000 and from any country were included. The review included studies examining the negative dimensions of mental health. The review excluded studies focusing on medical students and graduates.
Basic information about the studies and their findings on mental health and university-to-work transitions was retrieved. The findings are presented in tables and in a qualitative thematic summary.
The scoping review included 12 studies. Mental health was often not explicitly defined and it’s theoretical foundations were not clearly articulated. The review identified factors, including a lack of social support and economic precarity, as sources of adverse mental health. Other protective factors in these studies—variables that guard against mental health problems—were identified, such as career preparedness and having a good job.
Despite the methodological focus on the negative aspects of mental health, people’s mental health experiences during university-to-work transitions are not uniformly negative. Clear conceptualisations of mental health in future studies will aid in developing resources to improve well-being.
This scoping review adhered to a protocol previously published in this journal and that is registered on the Open Science Framework website (https://osf.io/gw86x).
Public health interventions are designed to improve specific health-related outcomes; however, they may also produce negative side effects, such as substitution use, psychological or social harms. Knowledge about the unintended effects of school-based smoking preventive interventions is sparse. Hence, this study examined these potential unintended effects of the smoking-reducing intervention, Focus, among students in the vocational education and training setting.
Cluster randomised controlled trial stratified by school type with 5 months follow-up.
Across Denmark, eight schools were randomised to the intervention group (n=844 students, response proportion 76%) and six schools to the control group (n=815 students, response proportion 75%). This study focused solely on students who smoked at baseline (N=491).
The intervention was developed systematically based on theory and a thoroughly mixed-methods needs assessment. Intervention components included a comprehensive school tobacco policy (smoke-free school hours) supported by a 3-day course for school staff and launched by an edutainment session for students; class-based lessons and a quit-and-win competition; and individual telephone smoking cessation support.
Alternative tobacco and nicotine products (regular use of smokeless tobacco, hookah and e-cigarettes), regular cannabis use, boredom and loneliness at school, stress and perceived stigmatisation among smokers.
We found no statistically significant unintended effects of the intervention. Nonetheless, insignificant findings indicated that students in the intervention group were less likely to be bored during school hours (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.10) and experience stress (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.10), but more likely to report feeling stigmatised compared with the control group (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.40).
Overall, findings suggested no unintended effects of the Focus trial with respect to substitution use, psychological, nor group or social harms. Future research is encouraged to report potential harmful outcomes of smoking preventive interventions, and interventions should be aware of the possible stigmatisation of smokers.
Compared with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients have more comorbidities and extensive coronary artery disease. Contemporary comparative data on the long-term prognosis of stable post-myocardial infarction subtypes are needed.
Long-Term rIsk, clinical manaGement and healthcare Resource utilisation of stable coronary artery dISease (TIGRIS) was a multinational, observational and longitudinal cohort study.
Patients were enrolled from 350 centres, with >95% coming from cardiology practices across 24 countries, from 19 June 2013 to 31 March 2017.
This study enrolled 8277 stable patients 1–3 years after myocardial infarction with ≥1 additional risk factor.
Over a 2 year follow-up, cardiovascular events and deaths and self-reported health using the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire score were recorded. Relative risk of clinical events and health resource utilisation in STEMI and NSTEMI patients were compared using multivariable Poisson regression models, adjusting for prognostically relevant patient factors.
Of 7752 patients with known myocardial infarction type, 46% had NSTEMI; NSTEMI patients were older with more comorbidities than STEMI patients. NSTEMI patients had significantly poorer self-reported health and lower prevalence of dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge and at enrolment 1–3 years later. NSTEMI patients had a higher incidence of combined myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death (5.6% vs 3.9%, p
Post-NSTEMI chronic coronary syndrome patients had a less favourable risk factor profile, poorer self-reported health and more adverse cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up than individuals post STEMI. Efforts are needed to recognise the risks of stable patients after NSTEMI and optimise secondary prevention and care.
Aspirin could be offered for colorectal cancer prevention for the UK general population. To ensure the views of the general population are considered in future guidance, we explored public perceptions of aspirin for preventive therapy.
We conducted an online survey to investigate aspirin use, and awareness of aspirin for cancer prevention among the UK general population. We conducted semistructured interviews with a subsample of survey respondents to explore participants’ acceptability towards aspirin for cancer preventive therapy. We analysed the interview data using reflexive thematic analysis and mapped the themes onto the Theoretical Domains Framework, and the Necessity and Concerns Framework.
Online survey and remote interviews.
We recruited 400 UK respondents aged 50–70 years through a market research company to the survey. We purposefully sampled, recruited and interviewed 20 survey respondents.
In the survey, 19.0% (76/400) of respondents were aware that aspirin can be used to prevent cancer. Among those who had previously taken aspirin, 1.9% (4/216) had taken it for cancer prevention. The interviews generated three themes: (1) perceived necessity of aspirin; (2) concerns about side effects; and (3) preferred information sources. Participants with a personal or family history of cancer were more likely to perceive aspirin as necessary for cancer prevention. Concerns about taking aspirin at higher doses and its side effects, such as gastrointestinal bleeding, were common. Many described wanting guidance and advice on aspirin to be communicated from sources perceived as trustworthy, such as healthcare professionals.
Among the general population, those with a personal or family history of cancer may be more receptive towards taking aspirin for preventive therapy. Future policies and campaigns recommending aspirin may be of particular interest to these groups. Multiple considerations about the benefits and risks of aspirin highlight the need to support informed decisions on the medication.
Catecholamine vasopressors such as norepinephrine are the standard drugs used to maintain mean arterial pressure during liver transplantation. At high doses, catecholamines may impair organ perfusion. Angiotensin II is a peptide vasoconstrictor that may improve renal perfusion pressure and glomerular filtration rate, a haemodynamic profile that could reduce acute kidney injury. Angiotensin II is approved for vasodilatory shock but has not been rigorously evaluated for treatment of hypotension during liver transplantation. The objective is to assess the efficacy of angiotensin II as a second-line vasopressor infusion during liver transplantation. This trial will establish the efficacy of angiotensin II in decreasing the dose of norepinephrine to maintain adequate blood pressure. Completion of this study will allow design of a follow-up, multicentre trial powered to detect a reduction of organ injury in liver transplantation.
This is a double-blind, randomised clinical trial. Eligible subjects are adults with a Model for End-Stage Liver Disease Sodium Score ≥25 undergoing deceased donor liver transplantation. Subjects are randomised 1:1 to receive angiotensin II or saline placebo as the second-line vasopressor infusion. The study drug infusion is initiated on reaching a norepinephrine dose of 0.05 µg kg-1 min-1 and titrated per protocol. The primary outcome is the dose of norepinephrine required to maintain a mean arterial pressure ≥65 mm Hg. Secondary outcomes include vasopressin or epinephrine requirement and duration of hypotension. Safety outcomes include incidence of thromboembolism within 48 hours of the end of surgery and severe hypertension. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed for all randomised subjects receiving the study drug. The total dose of norepinephrine will be compared between the two arms by a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U test.
The trial protocol was approved by the local Institutional Review Board (#20–30948). Results will be posted on ClinicalTrials.gov and published in a peer-reviewed journal.
In Australia, only 22% of male and 8% of female adolescents meet the muscle-strengthening physical activity guidelines, and few school-based interventions support participation in resistance training (RT). After promising findings from our effectiveness trial, we conducted a state-wide dissemination of the ‘Resistance Training for Teens’ (RT4T) intervention from 2015 to 2020. Despite high estimated reach, we found considerable variability in programme delivery and teachers reported numerous barriers to implementation. Supporting schools when they first adopt evidence-based programmes may strengthen programme fidelity, sustainability, and by extension, programme impact. However, the most effective implementation support model for RT4T is unclear.
To compare the effects of three implementation support models on the reach (primary outcome), dose delivered, fidelity, sustainability, impact and cost of RT4T.
We will conduct a hybrid type III implementation–effectiveness trial involving grade 9 and 10 (aged 14–16 years) students from 90 secondary schools in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Schools will be recruited across one cohort in 2023, stratified by school type, socioeconomic status and location, and randomised in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive one of the following levels of implementation support: (1) ‘low’ (training and resources), (2) ‘moderate’ (training and resources+external support) or ‘high’ (training and resources+external support+equipment). Training includes a teacher workshop related to RT4T programme content (theory and practical sessions) and the related resources. Additional support will be provided by trained project officers from five local health districts. Equipment will consist of a pack of semiportable RT equipment (ie, weighted bars, dumbbells, resistance bands and inverted pull up bar stands) valued at ~$A1000 per school. Study outcomes will be assessed at baseline (T0), 6 months (T1) and 18 months (T2). A range of quantitative (teacher logs, observations and teacher surveys) and qualitative (semistructured interviews with teachers) methods will be used to assess primary (reach) and secondary outcomes (dose delivered, fidelity, sustainability, impact and cost of RT4T). Quantitative analyses will use logistic mixed models for dichotomous outcomes, and ordinal or linear mixed effects regression models for continuous outcomes, with alpha levels set at p
Ethics approval has been obtained from the University of Newcastle (H-2021-0418), the NSW Department of Education (SERAP:2022215), Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00052) and the Catholic Schools Office. The design, conduct and reporting will adhere to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement, the Standards for Reporting Implementation Studies statement and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. Findings will be published in open access peer-reviewed journals, key stakeholders will be provided with a detailed report. We will support ongoing dissemination of RT4T in Australian schools via professional learning for teachers.
ACTRN12622000861752.
FreshRSS 