To determine the spatial-temporal patterns of natural hazards and disasters in the Greater Horn of Africa, including climate and environmentally sensitive diseases, and compare the reporting consistencies across multiple open-access databases.

Cross-sectional retrospective secondary analysis of natural hazard and disaster data.

Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan and Uganda.

Primary data from Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT), and comparative data from ReliefWeb, WHO Disease Outbreak News (WHO-DON), FloodList and Global Unique Disaster Identifier Number (GLIDE).

EM-DAT reported 228 natural hazards and disasters affecting 145.7 million people; highest numbers reported in Uganda (n=48), Kenya (n=46), Somalia (n=38) and Ethiopia (n=35); 175 geophysical, hydrological, meteorological and climatological hazards reported, including 118 floods, 26 droughts, 11 storms and 17 landslides; 46 epidemics reported, primarily bacterial (eg, cholera) or viral (eg, yellow fever, measles) diseases, with 20% preceded by a flood, drought or landslide within the previous 3 months. Reporting consistency and content varied considerably across the five databases.

Natural hazards and disasters affect millions of people. There is an urgent need to improve database connectedness to facilitate better monitoring and mapping, which can inform disease forecasting and decision tools to develop preparedness and intervention strategies.

Taking multiple medicines can be appropriate but has the potential to be problematic. The Implementing Stimulating Innovation in the Management of Polypharmacy and Adherence THrough the Years (iSIMPATHY) project used the 7-Steps person-centred approach for medication reviews, supporting patients and clinicians to define and achieve realistic goals for drug treatment, and helping enable patients to lead healthy and active lives.

To assess the impact of pharmacist-led comprehensive person-centred medication reviews using the 7-Steps methodology.

iSIMPATHY sought to transform the approach to optimisation of medicinces through the delivery of person-centred medication reviews for people taking multiple medicines in primary care, hospital and outpatient clinics. The reviews were conducted by embedding a single approach for polypharmacy management, building on key recommendations from SIMPATHY.

Interventions made were graded, with 82% being classified as clinically significant and 4% potentially preventing major organ failure, adverse drug reactions or incidents of similar clinical importance. The average number of medications reduced from 12 to 11, with 92% of the reviews resulting in more appropriate medication use, thereby decreasing the likelihood of medication-related harm. Inappropriate medicines were stopped, reduced or altered to improve appropriateness. There were significant healthcare resource utilisation benefits as indicated by a positive return on investment for both medication and healthcare costs with a quality-adjusted life year gain of 7.4 per 100 patients.

Pharmacist-led, person-centred medication review using the 7-Steps approach was delivered across jurisdictions and healthcare settings, with positive impacts on the number and appropriateness of medicines, clinical interventions and cost savings outweighing expenditure on the service. The approach is scalable by means of the tools and resources developed over the duration of the project.

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) demands self-management skills, knowledge and confidence to prevent medical complications. Adolescents living with T1D have distinct developmental challenges resulting in a worsening in glycaemic stability, irregular care and an increased risk for complications all while transitioning to adult healthcare. Age-specific online platforms could facilitate transition by fostering self-management education and support. The Support online self-guided training platform has been shown to increase the confidence of adults with T1D in managing their glycaemia. We aim to test the effectiveness of Support-t (ie, adapted for youth), compared with usual care, in improving haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and to understand the context of its implementation.

We will conduct a multisite, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled, parallel group, two-arm, superiority trial, evaluating effectiveness and implementation of Support-t versus usual care in 200 adolescents (14–16 years old) living with T1D. The active arm will have an 18-month access to Support-t, and their healthcare team will be trained on the platform’s content. The control arm will receive usual care. The primary outcome is HbA1c at 18 months. Secondary outcomes include self-efficacy for diabetes self-management, transition readiness, diabetes-specific quality of life, diabetes distress, continuous glucose monitoring metrics, number of severe hypoglycaemic events, diabetic ketoacidosis, T1D-related emergency department visits and hospitalisations as well as engagement and satisfaction. A subgroup of participants in the active arm and of healthcare providers will be interviewed assessing barriers, facilitators, engagement and fidelity of the intervention. Primary analysis will be by intention-to-treat. The difference in mean HbA1c at 18 months (with a 95% CI) will be calculated between both arms. A cost-effectiveness analysis is also planned.

December 8, 2024 version of the protocol was approved by the McGill University Health Centre Research Ethics Board (MP-37-2024-9734). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and patient-partners’ network.

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05910840).

‘Hotspotters’ are patients with complex care needs, defined by problems in multiple life domains and high acute care use. These patients often receive mismatched care, resulting in overuse of care and increased healthcare costs. As reliable data on effective interventions for this population are scarce, the goal of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of proactive, personalised, integrated care for this group.

The Hotspotters Project is planned as a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial in 20 primary care practices in the Netherlands. All practices and participants will begin with standard care during the control period (2–8 months), followed by an intervention (12 months) consisting of a positive health intake with goal setting, multidisciplinary meetings, a personalised care plan and proactive care management. The study will conclude with a follow-up (2–8 months), resulting in a total study duration of 22 months. We plan to include 200 patients with (a) problems on two or more life domains and (b) at least two acute care encounters in the previous year. Possible Hotspotters are identified using an Adjusted Clinical Groups-based algorithm or via a local primary healthcare team.

Questionnaires and routine care data will be used to gather data on cost-effectiveness, which will then be assessed using multilevel analysis, with levels for the individual, cluster and duration of control period. Secondary outcomes will include psychological outcomes on self-regulation (proactive coping, patient activation, self-efficacy and intention), experience of care (satisfaction, perceived autonomy support and qualitative data from focus groups) and quality of life, qualitative analysis of the Positive Health approach, implementation outcomes and process evaluation including integration of care.

The Ethics Committee of Leiden University Medical Centre granted approval (METC-LDD, P21.123). Results will be shared through peer-reviewed publication and (inter)national conference presentations.

NCT05878054.