Conectar
To describe interventions to mitigate weight bias among practicing healthcare providers and examine their effectiveness.
An integrative review.
The framework of Whittemore and Knafl (2005) was utilised to identify and synthesise studies of weight bias interventions. Covidence reference management software facilitated screening using predetermined eligibility criteria that is, published in peer-reviewed journals, reported in English, and described outcomes for weight bias mitigation interventions among healthcare providers with a professional practice licence. We evaluated study quality using Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Tools for qualitative and quantitative studies.
Five databases were searched (CINAHL, Embase, EBSCOhost, APA PsycINFO, and Scopus) in July 2024.
Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Four themes emerged: (1) active learning lessens weight bias more than passive learning, (2) multicomponent approaches yield better outcomes, (3) healthcare providers are willing to change their practices, and (4) explicit attitudes and beliefs are more amenable to change than implicit ones. Four sub-themes within theme one included the use of in-person workgroups; films, computer-based, and podcast delivery; written modules; and physical characteristic modifications, such as the use of an adiposity empathy suit. Intervention designs using a theory-based, active learning approach with repeated sessions were most successful at decreasing negative weight-biased attitudes and beliefs.
Interventions that effectively reduce weight bias among practicing healthcare providers vary, yet evidence suggests that weight bias mitigation is achievable. These interventions offer strategies to improve patient-centred care among patients living with obesity.
Healthcare providers often display weight bias. This review synthesises information on effective interventions for reducing bias, which may limit the subsequent negative patient outcomes associated with it.
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was the structure used for this paper.
There were no patient or public contributions.
To explore intensive care nurses' perceptions of their work environments at the unit and organisational levels according to the American Association of Critical Care Nurses standards, their impact on care quality, national differences, and demographic associations.
Cross-sectional study using a survey design.
Study conducted between January 2021 and April 2022, using a convenience sample of intensive care unit nurses across Cyprus, Spain, Croatia, and Poland, Romania. The Critical Elements of a Healthy Work Environment Scale (CEHWES) developed by the American Association of Critical Care Nurses and cross-culturally adapted by the authors was used, which included four sections, including sociodemographic data and a total of 50 questions. The core section of the tool comprised 16 questions using Likert-type response (1—strongly disagree—4 strongly agree). Perception of fulfilment of healthy work environment standards was calculated using the aforementioned Likert-type scale.
A total of 1183 nurses participated reporting moderate perception of fulfilment of the standards, with mean scores ranging from 2.6 to 2.8. Skilled communication and effective decision making were the highest rated. 56% (n = 662) reported awareness of some standards and while 25.8% (n = 305) reported full or significant implementation in their unit. Significant differences related to the perception of all standards were observed across countries. Implementation of the standards was significantly associated with higher quality of care having better perception when standards were fully implemented.
This study shows moderate perception of healthy work environment standards among intensive care nurses. Country differences highlight the need for more awareness, training, and further implementation of the standards, which is linked to better care quality.
Work environment still need to improve and needs to be prioritised by organisations, considering local and national particularities. Having a measuring tool available in multiple languages facilitates comparisons and getting a global picture.
The questionnaire used is validated in different languages, allowing results to be compared with other countries. Novel data from countries that were poorly investigated is now available. More evidence points out the need to prioritise work environment for maintaining quality in patient care.
The study has been reported following the STROBE checklist.
This study did not include patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, or reporting.
In Arizona, chronic diseases, mental health conditions, haemorrhage and infections remain significant causes of severe maternal morbidity (SMM). Community health worker (CHW) interventions address social determinants of health and enhance healthcare access, which is particularly important for improving maternal health among high-risk Medicaid beneficiaries.
The Arizona Health Start Programme (HSP), a home-visiting intervention, uses CHWs to improve maternal and child health outcomes through health education, referral support and advocacy services for at-risk pregnant and postpartum women with children up to age 2 years. Over 80% of HSP participants are insured by Medicaid. The goal of this evaluation is to determine if, among Arizona Medicaid beneficiaries, participation in HSP improves (1) the risk of experiencing SMM, (2) the care management of pregnant women diagnosed with chronic conditions (eg, diabetes, hypertension) and (3) the care management of pregnant women diagnosed with depression, compared with pregnant women who did not participate in HSP. To test our hypothesis, we employ a quasi-experimental design using retrospective data and propensity score matching to establish comparison groups using Arizona Medicaid claims and enrolment records spanning the study period (2008–2019).
No primary data will be collected. This work is supported through an inter-agency contract from Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS); approved by the ADHS Human Subjects Review Board, Project #17–00010, determined as non-human subjects research. Evaluation of the proposed outcomes will be completed by June 2027, and findings will be disseminated to HSP directors, managers and CHWs, as well as through academic journals and conferences.
To assess the pooled prevalence of self-reported sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and their associated factors among adults in South and Southeast Asia, using the Demographic and Health Survey data collected between 2015 and 2023.
A community-based cross-sectional study design was conducted using a multistage cluster sampling approach. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression analysis was employed to identify predictors of self-reported sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Model selection was guided by Akaike’s information criterion, and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CIs were estimated to determine statistically significant associations.
South and Southeast Asia.
This analysis included a weighted sample of 791 019 adults aged 15–49 who reported ever having had sexual intercourse. The majority of the participants were female (n=6 87 880; 87%), and most were from Southeast Asia (n=7 00 539; 89%).
The pooled prevalence of self-reported STIs among adults in South and Southeast Asia was 12.94% (95% CI 7.73% to 18.14%). At the individual level, higher odds of reporting STIs were associated with being female (AOR 1.84; 95% CI1.68 to 2.02), having middle (AOR 1.11; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.19) or high wealth status (AOR 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.24]), being employed (AOR 1.14; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.22), having multiple sexual partners (AOR 2.79; 95% CI 2.22 to 3.52) and having undergone HIV testing (AOR 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.20). Conversely, lower odds of self-reported STIs were observed among individuals aged 35–39 years (AOR 0.78; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.92), 40–44 years (AOR 0.68; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and 45–49 years (AOR 0.61; 95% CI 0.52 to 0.73); those who had ever been in a union (AOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83); individuals with higher education (AOR 0.84; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93); and those with comprehensive HIV knowledge (AOR 0.82; 95% CI 0.77 to 0.87). At the community level, high illiteracy rates (AOR 1.25; 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35) and high media non-exposure (AOR 1.11; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.20) were positively associated with STIs, while rural residence (AOR 0.81; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.89) and living in Southeast Asia (AOR: 0.47; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.53) were linked to lower odds of self-reported STIs.
A substantial prevalence of self-reported STIs was observed among adults in South and Southeast Asia. Both individual- and community-level factors influence STI risk. The individual-level determinants include socio-demographic characteristics, sexual behaviours, HIV-related knowledge and testing history, while community-level factors reflect disparities in geographic location, educational attainment and media exposure.
Despite the continued burden of opioid overdose in communities in the USA, effective treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD), such as medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD), remain underused. Motivational interviewing techniques and linkage to MOUD via digital health are innovative practices developed to overcome persistent barriers to accessing MOUD treatment. These practices are merged in a comprehensive digital health platform, RecoveryPad (developed by the Center for Progressive Recovery). Our study, ‘Using System Dynamics Modeling to Foster Real-time Connections to Care’ (NIH Award #: 1R61DA057675-01), is a pilot to assess the feasibility and behaviour change potential of RecoveryPad for our target audience of people experiencing OUD.
This study will recruit 40 participants in Connecticut and New York through online platforms, such as social media and digital advertising, and direct access via quick-response (QR) codes distributed by local community partners. Eligibility assessment and enrolment will be conducted virtually. Individuals reporting symptoms indicating moderate to severe OUD who are at least 18 years of age are eligible for the study, excluding those who are currently receiving MOUD, pregnant or incarcerated. Enrolled participants will interact with an automated chatbot, live recovery coaches and, if desired, be referred to a telehealth MOUD provider via the RecoveryPad platform. Participants will have access to the platform for 30 days and will be asked to complete brief surveys to assess MOUD engagement and secondary outcomes at 30 and 90 days. Additionally, system dynamics (SD) models will be developed at the individual level to simulate participant interactions with RecoveryPad, and at the community level to improve understanding of the systems affecting OUD and MOUD access.
This project received approval from the Yale University Human Investigation Committee in 2024 (HIC # 2000034414). All participants will complete an electronic consent form with detailed study information and release of information to obtain data related to MOUD appointment attendance. Findings and conclusions from this pilot will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication, advisory board meetings and meetings with community partners.
Insomnia is a common complaint among patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) maintained on buprenorphine (BUP). However, people with OUD have historically been excluded from insomnia clinical trials, leaving clinicians without evidence-based treatment options for this patient population. Lemborexant, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved dual orexin receptor antagonist for the treatment of insomnia, was recently shown to be safe and tolerable among a sample of patients with insomnia who were maintained on BUP. We hypothesise that pharmacologically antagonising the orexin system with lemborexant may improve insomnia symptoms in individuals with OUD and also enhance BUP treatment benefits by improving performance in neurofunctional domains identified in the National Institute on Drug Abuse Phenotyping Assessment Battery.
Participants with insomnia and OUD who have been stabilised on BUP for at least 4 weeks will be randomly assigned to receive either lemborexant (n=50) or placebo (n=50) for 8 weeks. Participants will complete assessments at baseline, during the 8-week intervention, postintervention and at a 2-week follow-up. Primary outcomes are insomnia severity and impulsivity. Secondary measures include objective sleep metrics (total sleep time, sleep efficiency, sleep onset latency and wake after sleep onset) and performance in the neurofunctional domains of negative emotionality and metacognition.
The study was approved by the Virginia Commonwealth University Institutional Review Board in April 2025 (protocol number HM20031777). Data collection began in May 2025 and is expected to be completed by May 2029. The trial is conducted under FDA IND no. 154797 (FGM). The dissemination plan for the trial includes presentations at local and national conferences, submission of primary and secondary outcome manuscripts for publication in peer-reviewed journals and circulation of findings to popular media outlets, as available. Results will also be shared with interested participants and clinical collaborators upon completion of the trial.
FreshRSS 